2026-04-01 3 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Wednesday, 1 April 2026

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

STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS 1 STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS Mason, Sir Anthony Frank, AC, KBE, GBM, KC 1 Reference to Federation Chamber 2 09:07 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I move: That further statements in relation to the passing of Sir Anthony Mason AC KBE GBM KC be permitted in the Federation Chamber. Question agreed to. MOTIONS 2 MOTIONS New South Wales: Roads 2 09:08 Mr GEE 261393 Calare I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member from Calare moving the following motion—That this House: (1) notes that: (a) all the major parties have let the residents and communities of Central Western New South Wales down with broken promises, empty announcements and funding cuts with respect to the Bells Line of Road and Great Western Highway; (b) the people of the Central West see expressways and tunnels being built all over Sydney, the north coast and south coast, yet are told to make do with a bridge built by a convict chain gang in 1832 as their main access road in and out of Sydney; and (c) the indefinite closure of the Great Western Highway demonstrates that the people of the Central West are being short-changed and ripped off when it comes to the funding of a decent access road to Sydney; and (2) calls on: (a) the Australian and New South Wales governments to introduce a support package for businesses in the Central West being devastated by the indefinite closure of the Great Western Highway; and (b) the Australian Government to commit significant and substantial funding in the upcoming budget for improved road access between the Central West and Sydney Today is April Fools' Day, and the current state of the Great Western Highway is an appalling joke. The people of the Central West are done playing the fool for governments that have been neglecting our region for decades. Our region isn't facing just one disaster and emergency. We are being choked by a dual failure of infrastructure and essential fuel supply. I speak of the indefinite closure of the Great Western Highway because a bridge built by a convict chain gang in 1832 has, unsurprisingly, failed. You cannot make this up. The urgency of this matter was clearly brought home only two days ago when a single-vehicle crash on Chifley Road proved how precarious our situation is. When one vehicle can shut down the only remaining route between the Central West and Sydney, the system hasn't just failed; it has collapsed. There was no access in and out of the Central West at all. We now have an extra 12,000 vehicles a day being forced onto a detour that was never designed for this volume. Our local roads are being pounded into the dust. Little Hartley, which used to be a bustling tourism and trade corridor, is now a ghost town. I've stood on the ground with local business owners—people like Margaret and Alan Jackson from Maple Springs Nursery. They've had their income cut to one-tenth of what it was. Shannon Kus, a father of six and owner of Erin's Quality Outdoor Power Centre, has a 20-minute commute which has blown out to 70 minutes. His customer numbers are at zero and he has warned that, without government assistance, his business—his family's livelihood—will fold. Ian Fitzgerald operates ICF Haulage, running trucks from Hartley to Sydney multiple times a day. He employs 14 permanent staff members. This is what he has told me: To send our trucks around through Lithgow, Chifley Road and the Darling Causeway adds around two hours per trip. Add to this the current fuel price, and we are going broke. We will be laying off staff within the next week or so unless we can get some sort of support. For transport operators, including Ian and others like Ken Muldoon from Mully's Transport, it's twice the cost for twice the time for half the profit. That's what they have told me. The pain is being felt across many sectors, from hospitality and tourism providers to retail and transport. For the Central West, Easter and the autumn period is peak season for tourism. You don't get these months back. Once a small business closes its doors, it often stays closed. But what really gets us, what really infuriates us, is that we see billions being poured into gold-plated tunnels under Sydney and world-class expressways to the north and south coasts. Yet our region is treated as an afterthought. We've just seen $2 billion dropped on the expressway to the new Sydney airport. We see announcements about high-speed rail to the Hunter, which will cost about $93 billion. But all we get out west is cheap words and small change and a patched-up convict bridge built in 1832. It is disgusting. The people of our region are disgusted. Words cannot convey the depth of anger and disgust that our residents feel over this issue. We produce the food that feeds the cities and we do the mining that underpins the economy. If our farmers can't sow because of fuel shortages and our businesses can't move goods because of a crumbling antique bridge then the whole nation will suffer. We need direct financial relief—emergency assistance for those businesses smashed by the highway closure. This is not a handout. It's a survival kit for a crisis that government neglect has created. We are done with the white papers and the planning studies. We need a genuine commitment in the upcoming budget for a long-term solution that doesn't depend on convict engineering from 1832. This must be designated a national infrastructure priority as a matter of urgency. You cannot fix a major artery with a bandaid. You need a permanent high-speed connection to Sydney. The most terrifying word for our business owners right now is 'indefinite'. They need certainty—not forever roadworks. They need real financial support, and they need it now. I'm calling on the government to stop treating the people of the Central West like second-class citizens and deliver on these two demands. One, we need an immediate business support package that will provide direct financial relief for the local families and business owners who are being smashed by this highway closure. Governments created this disaster and they now have to step in and clean it up and fix it. Two, we need the federal government to commit significant and substantial funding in the upcoming budget for improved access between the Central West and Sydney. Surely it's not too much to ask. The government know what the issues are. They really do. When the Prime Minister was the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, in 2010 he put out a press release which said that a corridor for sections—including 'a tunnel as part of a bypass of the township of Mount Victoria and Victoria Pass'—'will be preserved so work on them could proceed when additional funding becomes available'. Here's the release. That's what he said. He was talking about a tunnel in 2010 and saying that a corridor had been preserved for one. Plans and announcements have been going on for decades. The National Party turned the first sod on the Bells Line of Road expressway in 2007. It never happened. Then we had the tunnel, which the Perrottet government refused to commit any funding for and which, in June 2022, they effectively mothballed and walked away from because they said it wasn't a priority. Where was the National Party then? The tunnel was then totally killed off by the Minns government. And then you had the current federal government making off with $2 billion in federal funding that had been committed to the highway. It was an epic funding snatch and grab, so there is plenty of blame to go around. In question time last week, the Prime Minister said: The truth is that all governments, state and federal, probably should have done something about this … He's right. The Prime Minister is right—they should have. But, with state and federal government failures having caused this, those governments now need to proactively get in there and help with a support package and a longer term solution. I'm sorry, but you cannot keep kicking this can down the road any longer, because the road can't handle it anymore. It's time for the government to actually have our backs and invest in a 21st-century solution we all deserve. We've had a gutful of the empty words and the empty promises. Action is needed, and I call on this government to step up and lead. 09:17 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy In the last wet season, as usual, North Queensland lost people due to flooding on the highways—six people. At the Gairloch and Seymour River areas, just north of Ingham, the national highway was cut—I emphasise 'national highway'. Nearly half a million people live north of Ingham, in Australia. The greater Cairns region, the greater Innisfail region and greater Mareeba-Atherton region are big population centres by any standard in Australia, and they're cut off every year by rivers. No-one's doing anything about it. They are also cut off by the Herbert River. I am well aware as an historian that, very tragically, the Aboriginal story for that area—including the town of Ingham, a town of about 20,000 people just north of Townsville—which is Quinkan area, is: 'Don't go there. There's water from mountain to mountain.' At some stage, the whole of the coastal plain went 30 foot underwater. If you have simultaneous floods in the upper and lower Herbert, goodbye, Ingham. The death toll that's mooted would be about 300 or 400 people. Nothing's been done about the Gairloch or Seymour River areas. There's nothing being done about the Herbert River diversion, which Dr Bradfield spoke about back in the 1920s. The Bridle Track tunnel, to some degree, caused those six deaths in the last flooding. We can't get off the coastal plain. We're trapped, because the Great Dividing Range is there and there's about 30 kilometres before you hit the sea, and at Cairns the Great Dividing Range hits the sea. So we're trapped in that area every year. Heaven only knows they know about it, because not only I but numerous other people have screamed about it. Doomadgee is cut off every year for about three months, and I can't help but think—'they're blackfellas; don't worry about them.' I don't have any other explanation as to why Doomadgee gets cut off every single year for three months. I don't know any other town in Australia that fits into that category. There probably are some that do, but I'm not aware of them. Also if you put a higher level—I make this point to the Parliament of Australia. If we're going to build a bridge, don't build a bridge. In South-East Queensland, they build bridged dams. So they build a dam and they have a roadway across the top of the dam. It serves a double purpose, and, if you like, halves the cost of the dam and halves the cost of the bridge. A magnificent example of that is Georgetown, which is inland. The gulf country is completely cut off every year by the fourth-biggest river system in Australia, the Gilbert River, and it's an ideal site for a bridged dam—almost right where the road is now. But little, tiny Georgetown would grow to a town of 25,000 people. That's what happened in Griffith when irrigation went in. That's what happened in Mareeba when irrigation went in, and that's what happened to numerous other towns I could quote. So wouldn't it be wonderful if this government put a city out there in the middle of nowhere and developed the beautiful opportunities for tourism? The current failure to have that bridge is costing the Australian people about $15 million a year in lost tourism. When the Einasleigh bridge went in, the figure was $20 million a year, and this'll be just about the same as the Einasleigh River Bridge. The wonderful governments of the old Country Party built the Australian beef roads scheme. Now it's no use—a mate of mine and I bought 500,000 acres for $25,000. Why? Because you couldn't get in or out of the place. There's no road. If you put a road in, now it's producing $6 million a year— (Time expired) 09:22 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That the debate be adjourned. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the debate be adjourned.  

The House divided. [09:27]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

81 AYES Abdo, B. J. Albanese, A. N. Ambihaipahar, A. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Briskey, J. L. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Campbell, J. P. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Comer, E. L. Conroy, P. M. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. France, A. A. Freelander, M. R. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. P. Gregg, M. J. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Kearney, G. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, C. F. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Swanson, M. J. Teesdale, J. A. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Urquhart, A. E. (Teller) Watts, T. G. White, R. P. Wilson, J. H. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 16 NOES Boele, N. Chaney, K. E. Gee, A. R. (Teller) Katter, R. C. Kennedy, S. P. McCormack, M. F. O'Brien, L. S. Pasin, A. Penfold, A. L. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, R. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Debate adjourned.

BILLS 5 BILLS Treasury Laws Amendment (Supporting Choice in Superannuation and Other Measures) Bill 2025, Commonwealth Entities Legislation Amendment Bill 2026, National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People Bill 2026, National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026, Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-2026, Treasury Laws Amendment (Doubling Penalties for ACCC Enforcement) Bill 2026 5

Treasury Laws Amendment (Supporting Choice in Superannuation and Other Measures) Bill 2025

Commonwealth Entities Legislation Amendment Bill 2026

National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People Bill 2026

National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026

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

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-2026

Treasury Laws Amendment (Doubling Penalties for ACCC Enforcement) Bill 2026

Assent 5 Copyright Amendment Bill 2026, Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Amendment (Strategic Reserve) Bill 2026, Treasury Laws Amendment (Fuel Excise Relief) Bill 2026 5

Copyright Amendment Bill 2026

Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Amendment (Strategic Reserve) Bill 2026

Treasury Laws Amendment (Fuel Excise Relief) Bill 2026

Returned from Senate 5 Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026, Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026 5

Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026

Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026

Reference to Federation Chamber 5 09:35 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I declare that, unless otherwise ordered, the Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026 and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026 stand referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for the second reading of each bill. BUSINESS 5 BUSINESS Consideration of Legislation 5 09:35 Ms PENFOLD 248895 Lyne I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the following from occurring immediately: (1) the Member for Lyne presenting a Bill for an Act to establish a commission of inquiry into the behaviour, practices and performance of the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder, and for related purposes; (2) debate on the second reading of the bill proceeding immediately for a period of no longer than one hour; and (3) any questions required to complete passage of the bill then being put without delay. As the Nationals member for Lyne, I rise to speak not just about this bill but about what is at stake for the people, towns, farms, businesses and communities of the Murray-Darling Basin. As one of the inaugural independent directors of the Riverine Plains Farming Systems Group, which operates across southern New South Wales and north-eastern Victoria, the issue of water rights and access is critical. As a farming extension and research development body, for most of its projects there needed to be water in the right place at the right time to ensure that projects could proceed, be tested, be verified and be turned into practical advice for growers and farmers. Across the Murrumbidgee, the Riverina and the basin, water policy is not theoretical. It's not abstract. It's about the health of catchments, town water security and flood preparedness. It's about the viability of our growers, producers and farmers—whether they're in dairy, beef, horticulture, mixed farming or cropping—who rely on predictable water rules and practical on-ground management. It is the difference between a town and a community growing or slowly fading away. Right now, people in those communities are asking a very simple question: who is standing up for them when it comes to water? This bill, the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder Commission of Inquiry Bill 2026, goes directly to that question. It establishes a commission of inquiry into the behaviour, practices and performance of the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder, the CEWH. It will examine the management, use and outcomes of Commonwealth environmental water holdings, whether they are delivering real ecological outcomes and, critically, what impact those decisions are having on agricultural productivity, regional economies and basin communities. Let me be very clear: this is scrutiny that is long overdue. Under this Albanese Labor government, water policy has become increasingly opaque, increasingly centralised and increasingly disconnected from the people who live and work on the land. Labor likes to talk about 'environmental water' as if that label alone gives it a social licence. But communities in the basin know better. They know that behind that label are decisions—real decisions—that affect river flows, irrigation allocations, land values and ultimately livelihoods. The CEWH is not some passive observer. It's one of the largest water holders in the country. It decides when water is delivered, where it goes, whether it is traded and whether it is carried over. Those decisions shape markets, they shape river systems and they shape communities. So why is it that, under this government, scrutiny of those decisions has become harder, not easier? Why is it that communities are too often told what has happened after the fact, instead of being properly consulted before decisions are made? And why is it that farmers and regional businesses are expected to comply with strict rules, metering and reporting, yet, when it comes to the Commonwealth, transparency is treated as optional? Let me say this again: irrigators are required to account for every drop of water without fail, yet the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder is not. That is a double standard this bill seeks to address. What we are hearing loud and clear from basin communities is that trust is breaking down. Stakeholders are asking basic practical questions: What watering action is proposed? What does success look like? What risks are being taken? What impacts will there be on private land, infrastructure and local communities? Too often, they are simply not being told. Instead, they're getting bureaucratic language, delayed reporting and decisions that seem to prioritise Canberra over communities. This matters because environmental watering done poorly has real consequences. It can cause bank slumping. It can put pressure on private crossings and pumps. It can waterlog productive land. It can damage private infrastructure. It can put pressure on local roads and councils. None of that is an argument against environmental outcomes; it's an argument against bad policy and poor implementation. And that is exactly what communities across the Murray-Darling Basin are reacting to right now. This bill comes at a time when some of the basin community and those in the electorate of Farrer are facing a by-election. Let me be clear, this by-election is a referendum on the Albanese Labor government's approach to regional Australia, and nowhere is that clearer than in water policy. What people in Farrer are seeing is a government that keeps shifting the goalposts, a government that keeps expanding Commonwealth control over water and a government that talks about balance but delivers policies that hollow out irrigation communities and undermine confidence in the future. Businesses cannot plan; farmers cannot invest; families cannot make long-term decisions. Why? Because they do not trust that the rules will stay the same, and trust once lost is very hard to rebuild. That is why this bill is so important, because it does not just add another review; it establishes a targeted, agile and urgent independent commission of inquiry with real powers. It can compile documents. It can test evidence. It can hear directly from communities and experts. And it will report to this parliament, not just to the government of the day. That is a core difference from a royal commission. The commission will examine the size and composition of the CEWH's holdings; how watering priorities are set; how decisions are implemented in practice; whether environmental outcomes are actually being achieved; the impacts on third parties, on farmers, irrigators, councils and communities; and the CEWH's trading behaviour and governance and accountability arrangements. These are not academic questions. They go to the heart of whether the Basin Plan is being implemented in a way that is fair, transparent and effective. Water uses comply with complex rules, metering and reporting because the community expects integrity in water management. That expectation must apply equally to the Commonwealth. When the Commonwealth holds and moves water, it should be subject to clear reporting, independent audit and strong scrutiny. It is also important that the commission is credible with commissioners that have the right mix of expertise and lived understanding of basin communities and river operations. It also means terms of reference that get to the heart of the issue and processes that give stakeholders confidence they will be heard. The government will say that there are already reviews underway—and, yes, there is a review fatigue in basin communities; communities are tired of being consulted without being heard—but this bill is different. It's not another broad bureaucratic exercise; it's a focused inquiry into one of the most powerful actors in the water system, the Commonwealth itself. If the government is confident in its approach, it should welcome that scrutiny. Scrutiny is not a threat; scrutiny is a safeguard. It's a safeguard for the farmers who rely on predictable water rules. It's a safeguard for the towns that depend on agriculture. And it's a safeguard for the environment itself, because good environmental outcomes depend on good governance. The explanatory memorandum says that this bill has no financial impact. But let's be honest: the real cost has already been paid. It's been paid for by communities that have seen water taken out of production without clear outcomes. It's been paid for by businesses that cannot plan for the future. And it's been paid for by families who are wondering whether their towns have a future at all. That is what is at stake, and that is why, in the context of the Farrer by-election, this issue resonates so strongly. People are not asking for special treatment. They are asking for fairness. They are asking for transparency. They are asking for a government that understands that water policy is not just about environmental targets, it's about people. This bill is about restoring that balance. For those reasons, I commend the bill to the House. The SPEAKER 53517 Is the motion seconded? 09:45 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker The motion is seconded. In seconding the motion, I take this opportunity to thank the member for Lyne for bringing this matter to the place and congratulate her for the outstanding contribution she just made. I want to take you back. It's 2012 and I had been asked to be the Liberal candidate in the seat of Barker. That included the communities of the Riverland. As a young person living in Mount Gambier on a family farm I'd spent my fair share of time moving irrigation pipes. In fact, for as long as I can remember I was moving those pipes, or, indeed, from the point at which I could lift one, so I understood the importance of irrigation to farming entities. To be fair, I wasn't someone who'd spent a lot of time in the Riverland, but I was keen to correct that. I remember one day I was in the Riverland driving along and I saw a strange sight near the bank of a river adjacent to a farm. It was an elderly man digging a trench from the river to a point. It piqued my curiosity. I stopped. I walked down and asked to speak to the man. He was a man in his 80s and he was digging a ditch from the river to a red gum. He said, 'Son, I'm digging this in the shadows of the millennium drought to make sure this tree survives.' In that moment I knew the people of the Riverland, farmers in those communities, care deeply about the environment. This was an elderly man who, quite frankly, should not have been digging at all, let alone that ditch. That is why the people of my electorate are so incredibly disappointed when they see that the sacrifices they make to ensure water has transferred from productive use to environmental benefit is not being treated with the same respect or all the requirements that have to be occasioned onto irrigators themselves. The people of the Riverland want the CEWH to succeed. They want environmental outcomes, because otherwise that elderly gentleman would never have been there at the end of a long shovel. That's why this motion is so important. That's why this commission is important. We have to give the two million Australians who live within the basin confidence that the water held by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder is being put to the best environmental use, that the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder is meeting the same sort of transparency and governance that irrigators themselves have to face. It's not enough, as the member for Lyne said, to say, 'This is environmental water, so of course that's good.' It's only providing a social good if it provides the environmental outcome. Too often my constituents, and I expect others who live and work and represent areas in the basin would have heard this as well, ring me to say: 'Tony, what are they doing? They're irrigating in the middle of summer, in the middle of the day. It's a complete waste.' That's why this commission is so important, so we can hold decision-makers to account. This is a significant capital asset that is held on trust for every Australian. Whether you live in the basin or not, you're a shareholder in that capital held by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder. That asset, in a continent as dry as ours, is just so valuable. It was Mark Twain who said, 'Whisky's for drinking, but water's for fighting over.' In that context, this water, this precious environmental water, needs to be managed appropriately. That's why this commission is so important. We need to ensure that people living and working in the basin have the confidence that that shareholding, that capital asset that's held on trust for every single Australian including everyone in this building, is being managed appropriately. It's only with that kind of transparency, that kind of accountability, that we will deliver that trust. And, by the way, without that trust, the work of the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder will fail because it will lose political will. 09:50 Mr BURKE DYW Watson Those who have spoken in the debate are people who know the basin well, and so some of what I go through now is for the benefit of members generally. I don't want this to be seen by those who have had much of their livelihood or some or all of their livelihood within the basin as me explaining it to them, but I think there are some facts about water that, for the benefit of the House and the operation of the plan, are helpful for me to lay out. I do this in that context. In the first instance—and I'm always troubled by the acronym CHEW because the letters aren't in that order, but anyway. It's the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder which was established under the Water Act. The office is actually a creation of the Howard government. The concept when the Water Act was brought in and the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder was established, in the face of an acknowledgement from the Howard government and supported by our side in opposition, was that the river system had been overallocated to death. The concerns that were put by the member for Barker, in terms of people living within the basin wanting the system to be healthy, are something that has been acknowledge and acknowledged really strongly. There is a regular characteristic within the basin that people will generally acknowledge overallocation for the water entitlements that are given to their north, effectively. In areas like the Riverland—I spent time in the Riverland when I was putting the basin plan together—there was a view back then, which I presume is still the view but I haven't ground-truthed it recently, that people were concerned that there was overallocation in catchments further north and higher up in the system. That certainly was the view back then. I remember the view by the member for Groom back at the time before he went off to his current minerals job— An honourable member interjecting— Mr BURKE DYW Yes, yes, yes. He used to say, 'The water falls on my land first, so I get it.' That was his perspective. But, state by state, the river system runs across the country, and what we had was, when it was viewed state by state, that the allocations were being done in a way that did not allow for the health of the system. The perspective that was put forward by the Water Act was to be able to say, 'We need one of the irrigators within the system to effectively be someone who's job is to irrigate for the environment.' That's what the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder is—an acknowledgement that the system will never go back to being a fully natural system. The Murray itself has locks and dams the whole way through. The system will never flow as a completely natural system, but to be able to ensure its health we need one of the irrigators to be someone who is charged to be irrigating for the purposes of the environment, and that's what the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder is there to establish. In terms of different forms of compliance and different forms of oversight that are there, there's significant parliamentary oversight which already occurs with respect to the Murray Darling Basin Authority. The Inspector General of Water Compliance is a really important role. It's a role which, for some of what is being here, I think is well-positioned to do a whole lot of the work that has been suggested in speeches so far. The Inspector General of Water Compliance is a position that I think those opposite should have some confidence in. It was originally proposed by the member for Maranoa when he was the minister for water. It was then implemented by Keith Pitt, first with the interim position in 2019 and then with the official position in 2020. The position itself is held by someone who I would have thought would have the confidence of those opposite. It's Troy Grant, who was a former National Party deputy premier for New South Wales. There are different forms of compliance there. I think, in fairness, there is a view from some of those opposite that, notwithstanding that there was support for the plan at the time that I put it in, the bipartisan support for the Murray-Darling Basin Plan simply isn't there anymore. I think that's a reality. Mr Littleproud 265585 You changed the plan. Mr BURKE DYW I acknowledge the interjection that's coming from the former leader of the National Party. Let me just say that part of the plan—and a fairly critical part of the plan—was that the water to be recovered would be recovered. It was pretty fundamental that the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder would be a holder of water. In terms of the delivery of the plan, there are two sections on being able to acquire additional water. For the bit that's referred to as the bridging-the-gap target, we're now at 99 per cent. With respect to the additional 450-gigalitre target, when we came to office, of those 450 gigalitres, 24 gigalitres had been obtained. We've got that now to 225 gigalitres that have been obtained. In fairness to those opposite, I put the former deputy prime minister who's in the chamber now in a different situation to others, because he did in fact vote against that 450 being included. He voted with the Greens to do so. He did cross the floor and took a position. He is consistent now with the position he took then, which is not consistent with the position he had in the middle. But at least on where he started and where he's ended up he is consistent. The reality is that the work that is done by the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder, which will always be complex but is effectively the pathway of making sure that that water is used for the environment, is essential for the health of the basin. Yes, jobs are essential and communities are essential. There are no jobs and there are no communities on a dead river. We need to make sure that the health of the system is retained. People understand the role of the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder. Anyone in those regions knows very well that any environmental watering event, the same as any flooding event, operates differently each time. It always operates differently each time. That's the nature of large volumes of water. Even though they are a very substantial holder of water within the basin in terms of irrigation licences, it is also the case that the work that needs to be done changes every year. The work that needs to be done will be different. You can conduct the same operation, whether it's to break up water with pulsating releases during a blackwater event or whether it's an overbank flow, and all of those events will operate differently on each occasion. The challenge, though, is to always ask: in the alternative, where would we be? In the alternative, we saw exactly what was happening. When the river system hits those critical moments, when the river system cracks, when the river system dries out because of overallocation without the proper use of environmental water, it's not just the environment that loses; it's the communities and the irrigators that lose. You end up with a system that cannot function. If we were not in a circumstance where overallocation had occurred then we would not require the reform at all. But the reality is we had a river system which had been overallocated to death, and we had nine years where, effectively, acquiring additional water was brought to a halt. We now have a circumstance where additional oversight mechanisms were brought in during the course of the previous government. We supported those being introduced, we support them continuing and we also have support for the person who is in that role, who, as I say, is a former deputy premier of New South Wales, who held that role as a member of the National Party. Murray-Darling reform will always be hard. It will always require maximum layers of consultation with the community. It will always involve making sure that you have adaptive management. That is part of how this is dealt with. But, essentially, those who now look back and want to imagine that the reform did not happen would be taking us backwards in a really substantial way. 10:00 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa Can I just respond to the Leader of the House. As the former shadow water minister— The SPEAKER 53517 The time for the debate has now expired. Mr Littleproud 265585 Let's extend it, Burkey. Let's move to extend. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Maranoa will resume his seat. The question is that the motion be agreed to.  

The House divided. [10:05]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

41 AYES Aldred, M. R. (Teller) Batt, D. J. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boele, N. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chaffey, J. L. Chester, D. J. Conaghan, P. J. Gee, A. R. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Joyce, B. T. G. Kennedy, S. P. Landry, M. L. (Teller) Littleproud, D. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pasin, A. Penfold, A. L. Pike, H. J. Rebello, L. S. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Small, B. J. Steggall, Z. Taylor, A. J. Tehan, D. T. Venning, T. H. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. 88 NOES Abdo, B. J. Albanese, A. N. Ambihaipahar, A. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Bowen, C. E. Briskey, J. L. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Campbell, J. P. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Comer, E. L. Conroy, P. M. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. France, A. A. Freelander, M. R. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. P. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Kearney, G. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Swanson, M. J. Teesdale, J. A. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Urquhart, A. E. (Teller) Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. White, R. P. Wilson, J. H. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

BILLS 10 BILLS Public and Educational Lending Rights (Better Income for Authors) Bill 2026 10

Public and Educational Lending Rights (Better Income for Authors) Bill 2026

First Reading 10 Second Reading 10 10:13 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Public and Educational Lending Rights (Better Income for Authors) Bill 2026 is an important step forward in recognising and supporting Australian creators and publishers. It brings together the Public Lending Right and Educational Lending Right schemes into a single, contemporary legislative framework, replacing the Public Lending Right Act 1985 and ensuring these vital programs remain fit for purpose. Public and educational lending rights exist for a simple and enduring reason: to ensure that Australian creators and publishers are fairly paid when their books are made freely available through public and educational libraries. These schemes acknowledge that access to books should not come at the expense of those who create them, and they play a crucial role in sustaining Australia's writing and publishing sector. While not everybody who writes a book seeks to be a full-time author, it is still telling that the average income in 2021-22 for an Australian writer was reportedly $16,100. While this legislation won't turn that around, it is one of the concrete things that government can do to help. An author's creativity is their property. It should not be stolen by those that wish to use it for other purposes. When it is read through a library loan or an educational setting, the author should be paid. The origins of this principle are worth recalling. In 1974, Prime Minister Gough Whitlam approved the Public Lending Right scheme with a clear vision of fairness—one that recognised the value of authors' work and the importance of supporting Australian voices. More than 50 years later, that vision remains just as relevant. In the 2024-25 financial year alone, more than 17,000 payments were made to eligible Australian creators and publishers through the scheme, totalling $28 million. For many creators—authors, illustrators, translators, and editors—these payments are not supplementary; they are a reliable and meaningful source of income. Lending rights payments help make it possible for Australian stories to continue to be written, published, and shared. This bill also reflects the way Australians now read and borrow books. Through our national cultural policy, Revive, the government has invested in modernising lending rights to include digital formats. E-books and audiobooks are now a normal part of library collections, and it is only right that creators are recognised and compensated for their use in these formats as well. The Public and Educational Lending Rights (Better Income for Authors) Bill 2026 secures these reforms in legislation and provides a clear, modern framework for the future. It ensures that our lending rights schemes continue to support Australian creators, adapt to changing technologies, and strengthen our cultural life. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Public and Educational Lending Rights (Better Income for Authors) Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions Bill 2026 11

Public and Educational Lending Rights (Better Income for Authors) Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions Bill 2026

First Reading 11 Second Reading 11 10:18 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Public and Educational Lending Rights (Better Income for Authors) Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions Bill 2026 repeals the Public Lending Right Act 1985 and supports the transition to the new unified lending rights framework. It ensures related legislation continues to operate smoothly and consistently following the passage of the primary bill. The bill also provides continuity by confirming that the existing committee will continue to oversee the Public Lending Right scheme and will extend its role to the Educational Lending Right scheme, supporting transparent administration and ongoing advice to government. Importantly, these amendments provide certainty and continuity for existing and future claimants as the schemes transition to the new legislative framework. Together, these measures strengthen support for Australian creators and ensure the lending rights system remains clear, stable and fit for purpose. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. BUSINESS 12 BUSINESS Rearrangement 12 BILLS 12 BILLS Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill 2026 12

Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill 2026

First Reading 12 Second Reading 12 10:20 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Secrecy provisions play a vital role in protecting the integrity and security of Commonwealth information. They safeguard sensitive national security and law enforcement material, protect personal and commercial information that is entrusted to government, and ensure that government can operate effectively in the public interest. These protections are fundamental to maintaining public trust in our institutions. But secrecy must always be justified. Transparency is central to the open and accountable government necessary to support public confidence and informed democratic debate. When secrecy provisions are too complex or too broad, they risk jeopardising legitimate information-sharing and undermining the very trust they are meant to protect. The Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill will ensure that our secrecy laws protect what truly requires protection, while avoiding unnecessary barriers to public transparency. Multiple reviews have found that Australia's secrecy framework has evolved into a complex patchwork of provisions—while some are essential, others are outdated and broader than necessary. This bill makes comprehensive reforms to our secrecy framework in response to these findings. Key among these is the repeal or removal of criminal liability from more than 300 secrecy provisions across the statute book, where it is no longer necessary. This represents a reduction of more than a third of Commonwealth secrecy provisions attracting criminal sanction. Amendments in the bill will also implement other outstanding recommendations of the 2023 Review of Secrecy Provisions, conducted by my department, as well as the majority of recommendations agreed or agreed in principle by the government in its response to the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor's review of secrecy offences at part 5.6 of the Criminal Code. These amendments will ensure that secrecy provisions are appropriately confined, proportionate and consistent with the rule of law. The bill also builds upon the reforms to secrecy laws introduced in the Royal Commissions Legislation Amendment (Protections for Providing Information) Act 2026. These are significant and meaningful improvements to Australia's secrecy laws. The government has undertaken extensive work, since the secrecy reviews were released, to ensure secrecy provisions are justifiable and proportionate. The 2023 Review of Secrecy Provisions identified 168 provisions that no longer required criminal liability. But we have invested further time to get these reforms right. This has required extensive consultation across government, with more than 13 departments and agencies providing their input. This has been a complex but a necessary task, as a number of these secrecy provisions are found across the statute book and in often unassuming places. I thank all the departments and agencies for their contribution to this critical work. Because of this work, the bill will remove criminal liability from almost double the number of provisions identified by the 2023 review. Removing criminal liability from these provisions would be achieved through a combination of repeals and amendments to specific legislation, as well as the repeal of section 122.4 of the Criminal Code. The repeal of section 122.4, which criminalises breaches of non-disclosure duties across the statute book, will ensure that the vast majority of non-disclosure duties are instead subject to more proportionate civil and administrative sanctions. This would ensure criminal liability only applies where strictly necessary to protect sensitive information. The bill will also introduce a new targeted secrecy offence in the Criminal Code. Where a new secrecy offence is introduced, it is critical that it addresses unauthorised disclosures that have a genuine need for criminal consequence. The government considered whether it was necessary for a broader general secrecy offence that criminalised disclosures prejudicial to the working of government, as recommended by the 2023 secrecy review. But we have heard the views of stakeholders, who told us that such a broad offence was not warranted. And we agree. Instead, the bill seeks to address specific gaps in the secrecy framework that were identified when a former PwC partner allegedly shared confidential Commonwealth information. This type of conduct is clearly unacceptable. People who are entrusted with sensitive government information should be met with criminal sanction if they intentionally and improperly use that information for their own benefit or to the detriment of the Commonwealth or others. The bill will address this type of conduct by introducing a targeted secrecy offence. This offence would apply where a Commonwealth officer or other person connected to the Commonwealth improperly communicates or uses Commonwealth information to obtain benefit or cause a detriment. An important part of these amendments is the protection of press freedoms which is integral to the functioning of an effective democracy. The bill will also legislate a new requirement that the Attorney-General consent to the prosecution of a journalist for any secrecy offence. This will operate as an additional safeguard for press freedom, requiring proper scrutiny of a prosecution before it proceeds and complementing the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions requirement that the prosecution be in the public interest. The government undertook significant analysis of secrecy offences to consider whether a public interest journalism defence could be applied to additional offences, beyond those in the Criminal Code. The majority of Commonwealth secrecy offences are targeted at government employees or those working with government, and therefore the conduct of journalists is not captured. A defence is therefore not necessary in these circumstances. For those offences that could apply to journalists, there was a clear necessity for protecting the information subject to each relevant offence. This information includes national security and law enforcement information, highly sensitive commercial and personal information or information that is already subject to tailored mechanisms for disclosures in the public interest. Rather, the bill is focused on reducing the number and complexity of secrecy provisions and ensuring that the secrecy offences in the Criminal Code are appropriately calibrated to balance confidentiality and transparency. Finally, the bill would make amendments to implement recommendations agreed or agreed in principle in the government response to the INSLM secrecy review. These amendments would ensure the secrecy offences in the Criminal Code are proportionate and consistent with rule-of-law principles. Significant amendments will be made to the secrecy offences that apply to non-officials, including journalists. These amendments ensure that non-officials are subject to a higher threshold for criminal culpability than Commonwealth officials. They include increasing thresholds to trigger criminal liability and nearly halving the penalty of imprisonment to ensure these offences are proportionate. Offences applying to Commonwealth officials will also be amended. These amendments will establish a single material threshold of harm for disclosures that cause harm to Australia's interests and clarify key definitions. They will also ensure that an official is only subject to an aggravated offence where their conduct could cause a higher level of harm or their personal circumstances increase their culpability. The bill delivers on the government's commitment to comprehensive and considered secrecy reform. Good government means safeguarding what must remain confidential while enabling the public to scrutinise and hold institutions to account. The task before us is not to choose between secrecy and transparency, but to balance them wisely. The bill delivers this balance. I commend the bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Sunsetting Provision) Bill 2026 13

Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Sunsetting Provision) Bill 2026

First Reading 13 Second Reading 14 10:29 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Sunsetting Provision) Bill extends the sunset date of section 122.4 of the Criminal Code until 29 December 2026. Section 122.4 makes it an offence for a Commonwealth officer, or a person engaged to perform work for a Commonwealth entity, to communicate information in breach of a duty arising elsewhere under the law of the Commonwealth. The Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill will make a range of amendments to the secrecy framework that would support the repeal of section 122.4. However, until parliament has considered these reforms, it is important that section 122.4 continues to apply to the communication of sensitive or confidential information by officials, in breach of their statutory duties. The limited extension provided by this bill will ensure the parliament has sufficient time to consider the broader reforms to the Commonwealth secrecy framework proposed by the Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill, before section 122.4 sunsets. Conclusion The bill reflects the government's commitment to ensuring Australia's secrecy laws are clear and fit for purpose, while providing parliament time to comprehensively consider important secrecy reforms. I commend the bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026 14

Defence Force Discipline Amendment (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill 2026

First Reading 14 Second Reading 14 10:32 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I am pleased to present the Defence Force Discipline (RCDVS Implementation and Related Measures No. 1) Bill. This bill represents one of the most significant reforms to Australia's military discipline framework in decades, delivering on key recommendations from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. The Albanese government accepted the overwhelming majority of the royal commission's 122 recommendations: agreeing or agreeing in principle to 104 recommendations. We've been working at pace to implement these—by the end of 2025, 32 recommendations, over a quarter, were implemented. The royal commission dedicated a whole volume to sexual violence, unacceptable behaviour and military justice. The legislation before us today takes a significant step towards implementing recommendations in that space. The bill also responds directly to concerns about fairness, transparency, mental health treatment, timeliness and complexity within the Defence Force Discipline Act (the DFDA). The reforms contained in the bill are comprehensive and, collectively, modernise the system so that it protects people, strengthens discipline, and aligns with contemporary Australian community expectations. This bill represents one of many reform packages aimed at implementing measures that respond to the royal commission's recommendations. In particular, the bill directly implements recommendations 18, 20, 23 and 63, and gives effect to recommendation 34—these relate to strengthening workplace protections during sexual misconduct investigations, the sentencing and recording of convictions for perpetrators of military sexual violence and court-martial governance. The royal commission also noted that involvement in the military justice system, whether as a victim or an accused, can itself be a risk factor for suicide. It highlighted the pressing need for improved workplace protections, modern sentencing practices, reporting and recording of serious offences in a manner consistent with civilian jurisdictions, and for a modern approach to the management of mental impairment in disciplinary proceedings. This bill does all of this. The bill contains six schedules. Schedule 1 has five parts that directly implement royal commission recommendations 18, 20, 23 and 63. Schedule 1 provides a power to suspend a Defence Force member where a Defence member is under investigation for a civil or overseas offence. Currently, a member under Defence Force Discipline Act investigation may be suspended, but a member under civilian investigation for potentially more serious conduct may continue to work until charged. This bill fixes that gap by allowing suspension once any formal investigation commences; the suspension ceases when the investigation ends unless a charge is laid, preserving procedural fairness. This implements royal commission recommendation 18 to enhance safeguards to ensure that victims are not required to work with perpetrators while investigations are underway. Schedule 1 also strengthens sentencing procedures by recognising that rank disparity is an aggravating feature of offending, regardless of whether the victim is of higher or lower rank. This change reinforces the requirement for service tribunals to consider the impact on victims where the service offence involves conduct that constitutes a serious violent or sexual offence, and a service impact statement must be sought to allow the service tribunal to consider the effect on discipline, cohesion and command. These reforms implement royal commission recommendation 20 and give effect to aspects of recommendation 34 by bringing sentencing practices closer to contemporary civilian standards. Schedule 1 also improves transparency by requiring that superior tribunal convictions be disclosed to the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, ensuring that serious service offences that are analogous to civilian criminal offences are recorded on criminal records. A limited non-disclosure order mechanism protects individuals in exceptional cases where disclosure would be unjust or harmful. This supports the broader implementation of royal commission recommendation 23 by ensuring that relevant sexual and violence related service convictions are captured in national police records in a manner consistent with civilian jurisdictions. Schedule 1 also removes stigmatising language from the Defence Force Discipline Act, replacing the outdated and pejorative term 'malingering' with a neutral description that better reflects modern understanding of injury and illness, consistent with royal commission recommendation 63. Finally, schedule 1 seeks to clearly distinguish between violent and non-violent forms of ill-treatment within certain service offences to further support royal commission recommendation 23(b). Schedule 2 of the bill seeks to modernise and streamline superior tribunal procedures to align with contemporary civilian criminal practice while retaining the flexibility and efficiency required for military operations. It gives effect to the royal commission's recommendation 34, which required the priority review of provisions related to court martial panels not being required to give reasons for punishments imposed by introducing the requirement for any conviction and sentencing decision by superior tribunals or reviews to be accompanied by reasons. The legally complex task of sentencing would become the responsibility of a judge advocate rather than a lay panel, aligning superior tribunal practices with civilian criminal justice practices. Changes to streamline the procedures of the superior tribunal system, integrated with the other measures in this bill, support the adoption of modern best practices related to sentencing. A power to adopt such matters through regulation allows the system to keep pace with justice reforms in civilian jurisdictions. These measures aim to increase fairness by ensuring that complex, sensitive or serious matters proceed in the most appropriate forum, with the most appropriate procedures and practices applying. Schedule 3 is one of the most transformative parts of the bill. It contains two parts that overhaul how the Defence Force Discipline Act deals with accused persons suffering from mental impairment. Part 1 introduces new powers permitting a tribunal to adjourn proceedings where continuing would be detrimental to the accused or contrary to the interests of discipline. It also allows, in limited circumstances, the dismissal of a charge where the accused suffers from a mental impairment and prosecution would not meaningfully serve the maintenance of discipline. These changes reform the rigid and outdated 'unsoundness of mind' framework and acknowledge the urgent concerns identified by the royal commission regarding trauma and mental health in the Defence context. Part 2 establishes a Defence mental health tribunal framework. When a person is unfit to plead or is acquitted because of mental impairment, the tribunal may order treatment, care or detention, as appropriate. Orders must be reviewed at least every six months and cannot exceed three years (or ten years for serious violent or sexual offences). They only take effect once confirmed by a reviewing authority, ensuring strong oversight. This modernises military practice in line with civilian mental health jurisprudence and provides a clinically informed alternative to the outdated custodial provisions currently in the Defence Force Discipline Act. Schedule 4 replaces the existing mid-tier discipline system with a new system of summary contraventions, to allow for more streamlined and efficient military discipline outcomes. Summary contraventions deal with contested minor misconduct, and misconduct too serious for an infringement notice but not warranting prosecution as a service offence. They are administrative, not criminal, and use the civil standard of proof. A central pillar of this framework is to allow Defence to manage misconduct in a proportionate, efficient way while reducing unnecessary escalation into the service offence system. The effect of streamlining this mid-tier discipline system will be to reduce the time that individuals spend exposed to the military justice system, thereby reducing potential mental harm and enhancing the disciplinary effect of the system. Schedule 5 contains sixteen parts, each delivering a discrete fairness, efficiency or modernisation measure that seeks to strengthen the Defence Force Discipline Act framework. Broadly, these include modernising drug offence thresholds to align with other Commonwealth legislation, clarifying delegation powers, updating rules of evidence, harmonising judicial officer termination grounds, improving review processes, modernising the powers of investigating officers, enabling removal orders for intimate images, enabling evidence to be provided via video, victim impact statements and providing for the extinguishment of historical homosexual service conviction records that would not be offences today. Each measure enhances system coherence and brings the Defence Force Discipline Act in line with contemporary Australian law and practice. The extinguishment of historical homosexual service convictions is an important measure and a step in writing a historical wrong. This is a long time coming. Nearly 34 years ago, in November 1992, Prime Minister Paul Keating declared homosexual men and women would no longer be banned from serving in the Australian Defence Force. These changes will allow Defence personnel who are convicted of offences purely on the basis of consensual homosexual activity to apply to have this conviction extinguished. The effect of this extinguishment will also be to prevent disclosure of that conviction or information related to it by other people. Family of Defence members, including of deceased veterans, can also apply under this scheme on behalf of their loved ones. These changes are a restorative legal change to help lessen the detriment associated and stigma imposed by former homophobic attitudes and practices reflected in such convictions. We have always been proud of those who serve our nation. With these changes to enable expungement of convictions, now no longer regarded as a crime, those that had to previously hide can have their pride in service accurately reflected in their service record as well. Schedule 5 also allows the Minister for Defence to issue guidelines to the Director of Military Prosecutions. This approach aligns with section 8 of the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1983, which provides a similar power for the Attorney-General to issue directions and guidelines to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. The bill also implements a number of other reform recommendations, including introducing stronger protections over disclosure of sensitive materials during disciplinary investigations. This implements a 2016 Defence Abuse Response Taskforce report recommendation, as well as adopting 19 of the 28 recommendations for reform to the discipline system made in the JAG's 2024 annual report; and measures introduced address recommendations of the Australian Law Reform Commission's report 148 related to reforming justice response to sexual violence, to allow for providing video evidence-in-chief for sexual offence prosecutions. Ultimately, the reforms in this bill strengthen trust in the military justice system, reduce harm, improve transparency, modernise mental-health responses and ensure that the Defence Force Discipline Act reflects the standards expected in today's Australia. This bill represents a careful, comprehensive and essential response to the findings of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. It supports the wellbeing of defence personnel, strengthens the integrity of the discipline system and upholds community expectations of fairness and accountability. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 17

Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026

First Reading 17 Second Reading 17 10:46 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 amends the Australian Consumer Law and implements the government's commitment to protect consumers from unfair trading practices, subscription traps and drip pricing. Australians know exactly what this bill is about because they have lived it. Trying to decide on an online purchase, they suddenly find themselves pressured with a countdown timer or a warning that there are 'only two left in stock', despite the fact that the retailer has plenty available. They subscribe to a gym and manage the payment online, but, when they try to unsubscribe, they are told they have to make a phone call. They spot a bargain online, but when they get to the check-out they discover a compulsory 'service fee' added to their basket. This isn't vigorous competition. It is friction by design. The way Australians buy and subscribe has changed profoundly. Today, people make decisions about goods and services in many different ways: by strolling the aisles of their local stores, by searching online for the best price or by entering subscription arrangements that renew automatically. Some transactions take place entirely in person, while others occur entirely online, but the experience of choosing and managing services now spans a wide range of channels. These changes have given Australians more choice and convenience, but they have also created conditions in which certain business practices can pressure, confuse or trap consumers. Australians are hardworking and fair minded. We expect businesses to compete vigorously and to innovate. But we also expect that competition to occur on fair terms. We do not expect to be steered into decisions we didn't intend or worn down by design features that make the right decision harder than it should be. The evidence suggests these aren't isolated irritants. More than half of reported consumer problems now occur from online purchases. One in 10 people say that an online provider has manipulated their choices, while more than a quarter encountered unexpected charges added late in the transaction. In a digital economy, design isn't neutral. Buttons, prompts, defaults, timers and cancellation pathways can all shape behaviour. These are signs of a marketplace in which confusion, pressure and obstruction can become a business model. Over the past four years, through detailed consultation with consumers, businesses, experts, regulators and our state and territory counterparts, a clear message emerged. There are practices that do not meet the threshold for misleading or deceptive conduct, and that may also fall short of the high bar for unconscionable conduct, but which nevertheless distort decision making, cause real harm and impose an economic cost. These gaps in the Australian Consumer Law allow manipulative or unreasonably distortive tactics to slip through, even when the impact on consumers is significant. This bill closes those gaps. It modernises the Australian Consumer Law to reflect the realities of how Australians now buy, compare and subscribe. It ensures consumers are protected not only from outright deception but also from the kinds of subtle, cumulative influences that can undermine genuine choice. This bill does three things. A general prohibition on unfair trading practices First, the bill introduces something Australians might reasonably have assumed already existed: a simple rule that businesses should not engage in unfair trading practices. It sets a straightforward principle: businesses must not manipulate consumers or unreasonably distort the environment in which consumers make, or are likely to make, decisions, in circumstances that cause, or are likely to cause, detriment. This is a principles based test. It captures conduct that does not neatly fall within the existing prohibitions on misleading conduct or unconscionability, but which nonetheless exploits behavioural biases, overwhelms consumers with complexity, or structures choices in a way that leads people towards decisions they would not otherwise make. To provide practical guidance, the bill includes a non-exhaustive, indicative list of examples of practices that may contravene the new prohibition. These include: impeding a consumer's ability to exercise legal rights or seek legal remedies, failing to disclose material information to the consumer, disclosing material information to the consumer in a way that is complex, ineffective, unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous, untimely or overwhelming, and creating an environment (including by using design elements in digital interfaces) that places unreasonable pressure on a consumer or that obstructs the consumer from making or fulfilling their decision. These examples help businesses understand where the line is drawn without restricting ordinary, legitimate commercial behaviour. This prohibition isn't about stopping businesses from promoting their products. It's not about stopping advertising. It's about dealing with conduct that crosses the line from persuasion into manipulation, conduct that harms consumers and undermines fair competition. Stopping drip pricing Second, the bill deals with a practice that almost every Australian has encountered. A consumer sees a price that seems reasonable. But as they progress through the transaction, new fees begin to appear, a booking fee here, a service charge there, often only revealed at the very end of the process. In one example, a concert ticket promoted for $109.90 rose to $117.45 once a compulsory $7.55 service fee was added at the last stage of the process. By then, the consumer has already invested time and attention, and may feel locked into completing the purchase. That is drip pricing. Australians have had a gutful. This bill requires businesses to disclose mandatory transaction-based charges at the same time they display the base price. There should be no last-minute surprises, no artificially low headline prices that rise only after the consumer has invested time and attention, and no reliance on the consumer's reluctance to abandon the purchase after coming so far. The bill does not prohibit transaction fees. It prohibits hiding them. It ensures that businesses doing the right thing are not disadvantaged by competitors who conceal the true cost until the final step. That matters for competition as well as fairness. We know from behavioural economics that people anchor on the first price they see, and once they have invested effort in reaching the final stage of a transaction, they're less inclined to walk away. A business that discloses its full price upfront should not be made to look more expensive than a rival that waits until the final screen to reveal unavoidable charges. Ending subscription traps Third, this bill addresses subscription traps, a growing frustration in modern consumer life. Subscriptions are now a regular part of household budgeting. Subscriptions provide access to news, fitness, entertainment, software and many other services. But too often, subscription arrangements are designed around the assumption that consumers will forget to cancel free trials, won't notice renewals, or will struggle to find the cancellation pathway. Research from the Consumer Policy Research Centre shows the scale of this issue. Three in four Australians have had a negative experience when trying to cancel a subscription. Nearly half have spent more time than intended trying to exit a service. One in three have felt pressured to stay. One in 10 Australians has given up trying to cancel and kept paying for a service they no longer wanted. Some people have been so frustrated by unwanted subscriptions they've chosen to cancel a credit card or a bank account just to get rid of the recurring subscriptions. The estimated consumer detriment from spending on unwanted subscriptions by Australian consumers is $971 million per year. This is a hidden drain on household budgets. This bill addresses these problems directly. Businesses must clearly disclose that a customer is entering a subscription, what it costs, how long it runs, how it renews, and how it can be ended. The information must be provided prominently and in a way that is easy to understand. The bill also establishes a framework for reminder notices, ensuring that consumers receive timely, sensible prompts when a trial period is ending or a renewal is approaching. In addition, cancellation must be straightforward. It must be easy to find. And it must require only the steps that are reasonably necessary. A contract that can be entered in seconds should not take half an afternoon to escape. Many reputable businesses already operate in this simple, fair, transparent manner. This bill ensures that all businesses meet that standard. Broader competition and consumer agenda The bill forms part of a wider agenda to strengthen competition, improve transparency and support consumers across the economy. Our government has legislated the most significant overhaul of Australia's merger laws in 50 years, ensuring that large mergers are properly assessed before proceeding and that anticompetitive acquisitions don't escape scrutiny. We've increased funding for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission by more than $30 million, enabling stronger action against misleading pricing tactics, particularly in supermarkets and other consumer facing markets. We have outlawed unfair contract terms, and for the first time gave the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and Australian Securities and Investments Commission the power to seek penalties against companies that breach those laws. We're strengthening the Unit Pricing Code and cracking down on shrinkflation. Australians will be able to see clearly when a product has gotten smaller, but the price has stayed the same or gone up. Under the former government, the supermarket food and grocery code was merely voluntary, without penalties for wrongdoing. Labor's food and grocery code is mandatory, backed by strong penalties that prevent supermarkets from using their market power to unfairly squeeze farmers and other suppliers. Penalties matter. That's why this government has increased the first limb of the maximum penalties under the Competition and Consumer Act—from $10 million to $50 million in 2022, and last month up to $100 million. Stronger sanctions ensure that breaches of consumer law can't be dismissed as a mere cost of doing business. They ensure that businesses of all sizes face meaningful consequences for conduct that undermines fairness. In the labour market, reforms to non-compete clauses and other restrictive practices will help improve job mobility and productivity. The right to repair is being extended to agricultural machinery, ensuring that farmers have genuine choice in how they service their equipment. Through a revitalised National Competition Policy, supported by a $900 million National Productivity Fund, the government is working with states and territories to remove commercial and industrial planning and zoning barriers that make it hard for new entrants to compete. We're progressing reforms to create a single national market for goods, streamline standards, improve heavy vehicle productivity, and improve occupational licensing so that workers can move more freely across jurisdictions. We're also supporting health and care professionals to work to their full scope of practice. Together, these reforms strengthen competition and dynamism, boost productivity and contribute to a fairer marketplace. Other unfair trading practices This bill focuses on consumer protections. But unfair trading practices don't only affect individuals. Small businesses and franchisees often face the same vulnerabilities when dealing with larger suppliers. The explanatory memorandum notes the government will consult on extending unfair trading protections to small businesses, including those in franchising. That work is underway. We will release a public consultation on the expansion of these reforms shortly and will have legislation in parliament later this year. Working closely with the Assistant Treasurer and Australian Securities and Investments Commission, we will consider whether any alignment of protections within the financial services sector is necessary. Any expansion will be considered carefully, respecting the distinct frameworks providing consumer protections for financial products and advice. In presenting this bill, we reaffirm a basic principle: markets work best when they're fair. When consumers are respected rather than worn down. When design helps people make informed choices rather than steering them into unwanted ones. When transparency is rewarded and hidden fees are not. The reforms in this bill, banning unfair trading practices, cracking down on drip pricing, and cleaning up subscriptions, will give Australians back time, clarity and agency. It will strengthen trust and boost competition. And it will make the Australian marketplace a place where good businesses thrive by doing the right thing. They will also help restore confidence that online markets can work on straightforward terms: when prices are what they seem, when leaving a service is as simple as joining it, and where firms who act fairly are not punished. For example, nine in ten Australians say that they would likely purchase from the same organisation if cancelling its subscription was quick and simple. I want to acknowledge the vital contribution of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, including Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb and Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe, whose enforcement work and market studies have provided important insights into the effects of unfair trading practices. Australia's consumer movement has also been instrumental in consistently bringing consumer experience to the forefront, including Erin Turner and her team at the Consumer Policy Research Centre, Stephanie Tonkin and her team at the Consumer Action Law Centre, former CHOICE CEO Ashley de Silva and his team, Jeannie Paterson and her team at the University of Melbourne's Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Ethics, as well as community legal centres, financial counsellors and many others. I also acknowledge the strong support and partnership of my state and territory consumer affairs minister colleagues and their officials: Anoulack Chanthivong, Nick Staikos, Deb Frecklington, Guy Barnett, Tara Cheyne, Tony Buti, Marie-Clare Boothby and former South Australian minister Andrea Michaels. Reform of this scale is only possible when all governments share a commitment to fairness and transparency. I thank the experts in Office of Parliamentary Counsel and in the Department of Treasury, including Nicole Ryan, Phoebe Butcher, Stacie Lawson, Tessa Cramond, Matthew Osinski, Ira Goyal, Reese O'Sullivan, Megan Peterson, Taylor Fouracre and Angelina Kosev, and my advisers Tori Barker and Meg Thomas, for their work on this bill. Their hard work has helped forge a fairer society and a more dynamic economy. This bill is a principled, proportionate and timely response to real harms identified through genuine consultation, backed by evidence, and aligned with Australians' sense of fairness. It ensures the Australian Consumer Law remains robust and capable of protecting people in a rapidly changing economy. The reforms will not only protect consumers but also support productivity by promoting dynamic and competitive markets. They will help ensure businesses are not incentivised to adopt unfair tactics, and will increase consumers' confidence to engage in markets, particularly when transacting online. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. Debate adjourned. Aviation Consumer Protection Bill 2026 20

Aviation Consumer Protection Bill 2026

First Reading 20 Second Reading 20 11:05 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I move: That this bill now be read a second time. Introduction Aviation is a national connecter. It binds our cities to our regions, our exports to the world, and our families to one another. Because of our vast continent and the distances that we travel, Australians rely on aviation perhaps more than many other people around the globe. That is why it is so critical that the aviation sector builds and maintains the trust of Australian travellers. Until now, consumers have relied on airlines handling escalated complaints themselves through voluntary industry arrangements. This has not worked and consumers have often been left disappointed with the outcomes. While airline performance has generally improved since the COVID-19 pandemic, there is still a need to offer greater protection for Australian travellers, including fair and appropriate treatment by airlines and airports when things go wrong. Events i n t he Middle East The events over the last month have also shown how times of global crisis can impact us domestically. The conflict in the Middle East has led to flight and fuel disruptions, and broader uncertainty for travellers here and abroad. We have seen passengers who are unsure of what to do next, and what recourse is available to them if their flights are cancelled or delayed. Our airlines have been working under really difficult circumstances and the government is incredibly grateful for the work that they have done to ensure Australians in the Middle East have been able to fly home safely. But this current international crisis reminds us how important it is for Australian travellers to have increased protections when they fly and a clear understanding of what they are entitled to. That is why the Australian government is bringing forward the Aviation Consumer Protection Bill package today, delivering on our commitment to hold the aviation industry accountable for delivering better outcomes for consumers. This bill, the Aviation Consumer Protection Bill 2026, which is being introduced together with the Aviation Consumer Protection Levy Bill, the Aviation Consumer Protection Levy (Collection) Bill, and the Aviation Consumer Protection (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill—which I'll move shortly—represent the most significant reform any government has ever introduced for aviation consumer protection in this country. Reforms have been developed in close consultation with the public, with industry, and with experts to ensure that we are delivering meaningful protections for passengers, while maintaining a competitive and sustainable aviation sector. While the levy bills enable the government to recover costs of operating the regulatory function through industry levies, we are mindful of the current burden on industry due to the conflict in the Middle East and will make appropriate decisions in that regard. The white paper In 2024, the government released the Aviation white paper: towards 2050, a series of 56 policies setting the direction for the aviation industry to give passengers a better deal and enhance competition, while ensuring the industry maintains Australia's strong safety record—a record of which we are very proud. The white paper acknowledged that the industry-led Airline Customer Advocate (ACA) had not delivered an effective complaint resolution service, and that it was now necessary for the government to establish a more effective body. This assessment has been supported by feedback from consumers, consumer advocacy groups and consumer and fair-trading regulators, who have told us that in recent years the domestic airline industry has demonstrated poor customer service, decreasing service quality, and that the ACA is ineffective at resolving disputes. An independent review into airline and airport complaint handling processes advised the government that airlines and airports have work to do to lift their complaint handling standards, and that existing consumer pathways to escalate complaints are unclear, confusing and vary in their effectiveness. Data from the government's Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics shows that issues with on-time performance are substantial. In December last year, on average, over a quarter of domestic flights reported were delayed on arrival and were delayed on departure. While airline performance, including on-time performance, has improved since the COVID-19 pandemic, there is still a broader need to better protect aviation consumers. Research from the Behavioural Economics Team of the Australian Government shows that more than one in two Australian adults travelled by air between August 2024 and August 2025, and that one in two of those travellers experienced a flight disruption. Only a third of those travellers were satisfied with how these disruptions were handled. Australians with disabilities, medical conditions or injuries—who accounted for one in four air passengers—report even lower levels of satisfaction. A more coherent aviation consumer protection framework will be capable of both assisting consumers to resolve disputes and encourage improved service standards across the aviation sector. The bill This bill establishes the Aviation Consumer Protection framework which will comprise: an impartial aviation consumer ombudsperson that will provide a fair, accessible and independent external dispute resolution service that can assist with resolving individual customer complaints in relation to the supply of airline and airport services, and the Aviation Consumer Protections Charter that will set out the minimum standards that aviation consumers can expect from airlines and airports, which will be enforced by a regulator, the Aviation Consumer Protection Authority, or the ACPA. An independent company, limited by guarantee, will operate the Aviation Consumer Ombudsperson scheme. This company, the ACO company, will be governed by a board of directors with equal representation from industry, consumers and an independent chair. Regulated entities—airlines and airports—will be required to become members of the company. One of the central functions of the ACO will be operating an aviation specific external dispute resolution service for consumer complaints about airlines and airports. If an airline or airport operator has acted inconsistently with the charter and a consumer is not satisfied with the handling of their complaint, they will be able to seek assistance from the ACO. The ACO will have several ways to help resolve the complaint such as through an investigation, compelling the provision of information, recommending a particular course of action, and/or facilitating a dispute resolution process. The ombudsperson will be empowered to make a determination to require an airline or airport operator to resolve a consumer complaint in a particular way. The regulator will be established in the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts. It will enforce the charter and be empowered to investigate systemic issues facing consumers in the aviation sector. The regulator will also carry out enforcement activities related to the charter and the framework, including pursuing enforcement of Aviation Consumer Ombudsperson determinations on behalf of the ombudsperson through judicial processes if necessary. The charter will create obligations for airlines and airports towards consumers in the event of a flight disruption, delay or cancellation. The charter will also contain minimum standards in relation to booking information and assistance, communicating with consumers and complaint handling. To support greater public transparency and accountability, the Aviation Consumer Protection Bill will also facilitate the reporting and publication of reasons for flight delays, cancellations and disruptions to the department and consumers respectively. This will assist the regulator and the ombudsperson to determine whether or not a disruption, delay or cancellation was within or outside of the relevant entity's control. Both the ombudsperson and the regulator will also have an advocacy role, ensuring consumer concerns are heard and actioned by conducting inquiries, advising government and promoting best practice. The ombudsperson and the regulator will provide consumer-focused education and best-practice advice to consumers, the aviation industry, and the government on complaints handling. The regulator will lead advocacy in relation to any systemic consumer-facing issues identified in the sector, regulatory improvement that is required, and public reporting. The Aircraft Noise Ombudsperson, responsible for independent reviews of Airservices Australia's and Defence's management of aircraft noise-related activities, will also transition into the department. They will continue their current work, independent of Airservices Australia and Defence. This is about ensuring the public has confidence in the aircraft noise ombudsperson's findings and its recommendations. This bill will improve outcomes for consumers and ensure the aviation sector is accountable for the services they offer and is focussed on aviation consumers. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Aviation Consumer Protection Levy Bill 2026 22

Aviation Consumer Protection Levy Bill 2026

First Reading 22 Second Reading 23 11:15 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Aviation Consumer Protection Levy Bill forms a key part of a package of bills to hold the aviation industry accountable for delivering better outcomes for consumers and to deliver on our commitment to improve aviation consumer protection. The levy bill allows the minister to set levy amounts to impose and collect moneys by enabling regulations to be made that will cost recover the administrative expenses associated with administration of the Aviation Consumer Protection Bill by the Aviation Consumer Protection Authority. The annual levy is based on the estimated costs of the regulatory functions of the regulator. The Australian government intends the annual general levy to offset the cost of administering the aviation consumer protections contained in the ACP Bill, while ensuring the levy is applied equitably. The minister will be required to consider whether the levy payable by the regulated entity is a fair proportion of the total annual funds raised via the levy. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Aviation Consumer Protection Levy (Collection) Bill 2026 23

Aviation Consumer Protection Levy (Collection) Bill 2026

First Reading 23 Second Reading 23 11:17 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Aviation Consumer Protection Levy (Collection) Bill provides for the collection of levies to cost recover administration costs associated with the Aviation Consumer Protection Bill. The cost recovery charges are intended to recover the costs of activities carried out by the Aviation Consumer Protection Authority (ACPA), which the ACP Bill establishes as a regulatory function within the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications, Sport and the Arts (the department). The collection bill outlines the process for the collection of these charges, ensuring that the levies imposed on regulated entities are effectively managed and distributed. It establishes the procedures for collecting and administering the cost recovery charges, in line with the framework set by the levy bill. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Aviation Consumer Protection (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026 23

Aviation Consumer Protection (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026

First Reading 23 Second Reading 23 11:19 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Aviation Consumer Protection (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill provides clarity that a breach by an airline of a standard in the Aviation Consumer Protections Charter will not result in the cancellation of a licence under the Air Navigation Act 1920. The consequential bill also ensures a smooth transition from the current non-legislated Aircraft Noise Ombudsperson (ANO) in Airservices Australia to the new independent, statutory ANO arrangements. I commend this bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026 24

Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026

Second Reading 24 11:21 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning Today I rise to speak on the Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026. Up front, the coalition position is this: the coalition recognises that counterfeit imports are a serious and growing problem frequently linked to organised crime. They undermine legitimate Aussie businesses, distort markets and can expose consumers to unsafe or substandard products. That's why the government's proposal to strengthen enforcement in this area is not unreasonable. Those importing counterfeit goods should be held to account, not just get a slap on the wrist. Giving the Australian Border Force additional enforcement tools has some logic to it. However, there are important questions around how this should be achieved which the government has not yet answered. For these reasons, we won't oppose this bill, but we will ensure it is better examined by referring it to a Senate inquiry. What does this bill do? In short, the bill is designed to strengthen Australia's response to the importation of counterfeit goods. The bill introduces a new strict liability offence, ensuring importers face possible financial penalties in addition to the seizure of their goods. It also brings that offence within the Customs Infringement Notice Scheme. At the moment, the primary enforcement for counterfeit imports is the seizure or forfeit of goods, and there is limited ability to impose penalties on importers. It means that many importers face no real consequence beyond losing goods. Some treat it as simply the cost of doing business. This bill seeks to address that gap, enabling the Australian Border Force, the ABF, to issue infringements as a faster and more flexible enforcement tool. The coalition does have key concerns with the bill. Our concerns are legitimate because, while this proposal is not unreasonable, we think the bill should be examined further. The first concern is the use of a strict liability offence. The bill relies on a strict liability offence, and that means there is no need to prove intent or knowledge; only that the goods were imported and bore a false trademark. That's a significant step in our laws. Strict liability can be appropriate in some regulatory settings, but it also carries risks. It can capture inadvertent or low-level conduct, and it may affect small businesses or individuals who are not deliberately acting unlawfully but are caught up in the crime itself unwittingly. So this raises legitimate questions about proportionality and fairness. The second concern is that there is a lack of a clear trigger for the bill itself. Another issue is the absence of any obvious trigger for this legislation. To the best of the coalition's knowledge and understanding, there has been no major public incident. There's been no clear enforcement failure identified on the public record, and there's no new data or report that explains why this reform is being brought forward now. Now, that doesn't mean that the reform is wrong, but it does mean that we should ask the question: what is the reason that this bill is being introduced and why now? Why today does it need to be passed? The third concern that we have is the limited recent consultation. It should be noted that there was a formal consultation process in 2020 on these kinds of measures, but there has been little stakeholder engagement since. In fact, the key stakeholders that the coalition contacted were not even aware of its existence, and that's concerning. For a reform that introduces a new offence and new penalty powers, we would have expected clear—and wider and greater—consultation with the community. So, what's our intent today? Our intent is to refer the bill to a Senate inquiry. The coalition is taking a measured and responsible approach to this process. At face value, the provision of additional enforcement to address counterfeit imports appears reasonable. It's a reasonable approach, so we're not opposing the bill in this House. We recognise that the policy intent has merit. But we are also not prepared to wave the bill through without more scrutiny. This has been a bit of a habit of the last six months or so. We want to have more scrutiny of this bill, and that is why we're recommending that the bill be referred to a Senate inquiry on the papers. This will allow us to hear directly from affected stakeholders, including small-business groups, retailers, brand owners and legal experts. It will allow us to test whether the strict liability approach is appropriate. It will allow us to examine how the new offence will operate in practice and it will allow us to ensure there are no unintended consequences, which is a very important function of the Senate as a house of review. Importantly, this response does not delay the bill indefinitely, but it ensures proper scrutiny before its final passage. To sum up, the coalition supports action against counterfeit goods. We support stronger enforcement where appropriate, but we want to get the law right. This bill raises a number of questions. It introduces significant new powers and has not yet been subject to adequate scrutiny. Therefore, from our point of view, a Senate inquiry is reasonable, measured and definitely in the Australian public interest. We will not oppose this bill in the House, but we will ensure it is examined before it becomes law. We'll also allow relevant stakeholders to be given the opportunity to examine the legislation and have their say in a public setting—a very important part of our democratic process in Australia. That's the responsible approach. That's the response the coalition will take. Thank you for your time. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026 25

Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026

Second Reading 25 11:28 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page The coalition is not opposing this bill—the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026—in this chamber, but in the Senate we are looking to refer it to the economics committee for further scrutiny. The bill contains a range of technical tax measures. Many of the measures are sensible and many of them are non-controversial. The most significant part of this bill is the exclusion of tobacco and gambling activities from the research and development, or R&D, tax incentives. When we look at this measure, we're not necessarily opposed to it but we do want closer scrutiny. Where we're going with this is that there are two issues we need to look at here. One is that the government—for the first time, really—is now starting to have a subjective opinion on which business or sectors should be able to apply for this R&D incentive. We're happy to have that debate, but, obviously, once you open this door, you open the door to the government, if it doesn't like a certain sector—for whatever subjective reasons—saying that they can't apply for this incentive. We want that to be further investigated. With the specific one of gambling, we also want some further investigation about what is going to be termed, or what is going to be recognised as, a gambling activity. There are definitions around that. There is the discussion about whether some kids games, in the way that they might give prizes to a winner or what have you, be looked at. There are very important questions here that we think need to be answered. I would also make a point about the tobacco one. We're happy to look at whether the tobacco industry should be able to get this R&D incentive, but we need to make the point here that the tobacco industry itself is in complete disarray at the moment. We've lost billions of dollars in tax revenue. In 2022, when the government came to office, projected tobacco excise for 2025-26 was $13.3 billion, and the estimated collections now are down to $7.3 billion and are going to be $6 billion in 2025-26. So there's a lot going on in that industry. Illicit tobacco is now being made, and illicit cigarettes are far cheaper than they've been in recent history, and they're showing up in wastewater data. We think that this industry needs to be looked at a bit more widely. Organised crime is moving into that industry, having a big say controlling that industry—along with vaping, which brings a whole lot of other questions. We question whether some of that is the reason the government is looking at this and at the R&D incentive. There are lots of questions around tobacco that need to be answered, but we would just make that point. Earlier I mentioned the video game sector and whether some kids games could be captured, in these changes, as a form of gambling. There are games like the Untitled Goose Game, by House House; Fruit Ninja; and Hollow Knight, which all give rewards for certain things and certain processes when you play. Mr Pike 300120 Do you play those ones? Mr HOGAN 218019 No, I don't play those ones, but thank you for highlighting that. We will seek to refer this bill to Senate Economics Legislation Committee, and we want to understand the full implications of the bill. Obviously some of the stakeholders will get involved in that inquiry and have a look at some of the questions we have about this. In conclusion, we're not opposing the bill. Some of the measures are very sensible and practical, but this bill is not just technical. I think there are some really important points that I'll summarise again. I think the most important point here is the government is, for the first time, inserting itself into an area and saying some industries shouldn't be able to get this incentive, for subjective reasons. We need to question that. If the government of the day suddenly thinks that gambling shouldn't be able to apply for a certain tax incentive, we need to look at how it's going to how to determine what gambling is or gambling isn't—or if it's saying that tobacco shouldn't be able to get these R&D incentives. We just want to know what the logic is, what the rationale is and how these decisions are going to be made, because this opens the door for the government of the day to start to impose these rules on a whole lot of other industries that may be unforeseen. To reiterate the gambling one, what some people term as gambling others wouldn't, and we want some clarity around that, which is why we are going to refer this to a Senate committee. Debate adjourned. PARLIAMENTARY RETIRING ALLOWANCES TRUST 26 PARLIAMENTARY RETIRING ALLOWANCES TRUST Appointment 26 11:33 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke by leave—I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Act 1948, Mr Violi be discharged as a trustee serving on the Parliamentary Retiring Allowances Trust, and that Mr Caldwell be appointed a trustee to serve on the Trust. Question agreed to. COMMITTEES 26 COMMITTEES Electoral Matters Joint Committee 26 Membership 26 11:34 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 299498 The Speaker has received advice from the Chief Government Whip nominating a member to be a participating member of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. 11:34 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke by leave—I move: That Mr Burnell be appointed a participating member of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters for the purpose of the committee's inquiry into the 2025 federal election. Question agreed to. Public Works Joint Committee 26 Report 26 11:35 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's Report 2/2026: Referral made in September 2025. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr ZAPPIA HWB by leave—Again, on behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's second report for 2026 and the fourth for the 48th Parliament. This report considers the following proposed work: Department of Defence Blamey Barracks Kapooka redevelopment project, Kapooka, New South Wales. The proposed works have a total estimated cost of $889.2 million. In considering these proposed works, the committee received submissions and held a private briefing, a public hearing and an in-camera hearing with the Department of Defence, as well as conducting a site inspection at Blamey Barracks in Wagga Wagga. After giving due consideration to the evidence that the committee received, the committee is recommending that it is expedient for the proposed work to proceed. The committee recognises the crucial role that the barracks play in the basic training of Army recruits and that having modern, fit-for-purpose facilities for the recruits to live, train and work in is vital for the workforce planning of Defence as outlined in the 2024 National Defence Strategy. On the site inspection of the barracks, the committee was able to see firsthand the relatively dilapidated state of some of the current facilities, which reinforced the committee's confidence that the redevelopment is required. As a final remark, I note that, in the course of the inquiry, the committee received correspondence from a local resident highlighting concerns around PFAS contamination of the area surrounding the barracks and claiming that there had been inadequate consultation from Defence on this issue. While I recognise that the PFAS contamination management and remediation plan for Blamey Barracks will occur in conjunction with the wider Riverina redevelopment project and is not directly related to the current proposed works, I would strongly encourage Defence to proactively engage with residents of the area on this very issue. I thank my committee colleagues and the committee secretariat for their participation and assistance in the Blamey Barracks inquiry. I commend the report to the House. Treaties Joint Committee 26 Report 26 11:37 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, I present the committee's report entitled Report 232: Papua New Guinea-Australia Mutual Defence Treaty (the Pukpuk Treaty). Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Ms CHESTERS 249710 by leave—I rise today to make a statement on the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties regarding the Papua New Guinea-Australia Mutual Defence Treaty, also known as the Pukpuk Treaty. The Pukpuk Treaty marks a significant achievement in Australia's relationship with Papua New Guinea. The treaty binds our two countries together in a formal alliance, tying us closer together and enabling greater diplomatic and defence collaboration. This new alliance is our first for over 70 years and only our third overall, after New Zealand and the United States of America. PNG is one of Australia's most important partners and closest neighbours, and we are proud to call them our ally. The treaty establishes obligations to consult on security related developments and provide mutual assistance in the event of an armed attack and creates a framework for conducting joint defence cooperation activities. The Pukpuk Treaty builds on Australia's and PNG's existing defence engagement and develops a clear framework to enable more joint activities, such as combined training and personnel exchanges. It enables a two-way exchange, with Papua New Guinea's defence personnel attending Australian training institutions, and provides Australia with an opportunity to gain specialist expertise in areas such as jungle warfare. It also enables both countries to contribute expertise and capacity and ensure we grow stronger together. The treaty is well aligned with Australia's strategic focus on building stronger relationships in the Pacific and strengthening regional stability, sovereign capability and prosperity. During the inquiry process, the committee found that the treaty supports Australia's objectives of regional security in the Pacific and opens up new avenues for dialogue and cooperation. By ratifying this agreement, Australia will demonstrate its continued reliability and trustworthiness as a partner of choice in the Pacific. The treaty, further, is important to Australia's national interests by contributing towards a more stable regional security environment and providing a stable, sovereign, prosperous Pacific. The committee would like to thank the Department of Defence and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for their engagement throughout this inquiry. I'd also like to thank my fellow committee members for their contributions and the secretariat for compiling this report in quick time. The committee supports the Pukpuk Treaty and recommends that binding treaty action be taken. On behalf of the committee, I recommend this report to the House. BILLS 27 BILLS National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026 27

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026

Second Reading 27 11:42 Mr PIKE 300120 Bowman In continuation from my remarks that were cut short last night, the coalition will be supporting this bill, but the member for Lindsay has put forward an amendment to outline some of the concerns that we have around the stewardship of the NDIS. It is one of the great reforms that we've had in recent years, and there are so many within the communities represented in this place who benefit greatly from the NDIS. Unfortunately, we have had rather large growth in the scheme, to the point where it is on an unsustainable footing. We've now got annual scheme expenses growth sitting at 10.3 per cent. This legislation, which seeks to tighten up the system—lift up the hood and tinker with its engine—is welcome, but the coalition feels that more needs to be done in order to safeguard the scheme, make sure that it is helping those that it is designed to assist and make sure that the fraud and rorting that we have seen within the scheme is stamped out for good. Of course, we have to maintain vigilance. It's not set and forget when it comes to the National Disability Insurance Scheme. There will have to be reforms as we move along with the scheme's growth. It is reaching that point of maturity now. It's into its 13th year. It's a bit like a 13-year-old teenager. It's reaching that point in its life where it's deciding where it's going to go—whether it's going to be a bit of a free-for-all, Wild West sort of scenario where we see a lot of rorting or whether it's going to become some sort of bureaucratic maze that's soulless and tramples those that it's supposed to assist. Of course, we want to try to find that middle way, and I know the government is intending to do that as well. When we've got scheme growth of 10.3 per cent and we've now got a National Cabinet target of five to six per cent, we've got to somehow find our way to getting that growth trajectory down to the target. And five to six per cent is still, by the nature of any government scheme, significant growth. So we want to see some real reform. This is relatively minor legislative tinkering. Unfortunately, an issue that a lot of my colleagues are highlighting with the NDIS is that, while we're seeing initiatives like Thriving Kids—which hopefully will kick off this year; it's been delayed a little bit, and obviously this will be a scheme that ramps up as we head towards 2028. Thriving Kids is an initiative that is seeking to put downward pressure on the growth of the NDIS. We're also seeing increased interest in cracking down on fraud, which is greatly welcome. But what a lot of my colleagues are seeing, and what I'm certainly seeing in relation to about 80 per cent of the casework that comes to my electorate office, is NDIS participants having their plans cut. I'll give you one example. A constituent of mine, who lives only a stone's throw from my house, is unfortunately suffering from early onset dementia. She's in a position where she's in her early 60s and has a husband who's taking incredible care of her. She requires around-the-clock support because of the nature of her condition. She's reached the point where, every night, there are choking hazards and concerns about whether she'll make it through the evening. She requires around-the-clock support. She has a NDIS package which was providing that for her, and without any fanfare she had her plan cut by 43 per cent. That means a lot to her and her husband when it comes to the quality of life that they can enjoy. The safety and her longevity is of great concern, and unfortunately they've now reached the point where she's had to be admitted to a local hospital as a social admission. That shouldn't be where we get to, and we don't want to see a point where a scheme that is designed to assist people like this constituent of mine has to make those sorts of clandestine cuts, if you like. I'm not saying that the government's got a specific policy of cutting care to those that actually need it. But that's ultimately the outcome if we have poor stewardship of the scheme and if we have inconsistent results like the ones we're getting through the NDIS. I have another example relating to biologically identical twin boys in my electorate. Both of them suffer from the same condition. Both of them put in an application for the NDIS and had completely different outcomes, even though it was the same experts providing their recommendations and diagnoses. Their applications were submitted on the exact same day, at the exact same minute, and they had completely different outcomes. We shouldn't have a scheme of this level of maturity, into its 13th year, that is achieving those sorts of inconsistent outcomes. We're now seeing the government focusing on the introduction of the I-CAN tool, which will be—I don't want to misrepresent it—a digitised assessment tool that people are hoping will lead to greater consistency in decisions. That's a good thing, but there's a lot of concern from stakeholders within the NDIS. They are worried about whether a machine will be able to deliver the right outcomes for people and be able to assess the individual needs of people who need support through the NDIS. So the opposition is keeping a close eye on that. What we want to see the government truly focus on is fixing waste, red tape and fraud in the system. Unfortunately, this bill only goes part of the way to achieving that. This bill introduces a range of new civil penalties and inserts definitions for criminal offences, such as serious contravention, significant failure and systemic pattern of conduct to support higher criminal penalties. It strengthens provisions for failure to comply with a banning order to include criminal penalties. It introduces a new regulatory framework for monitoring the provisions of the act and includes powers of entry and inspection, which are welcome. It introduces anti-promotion orders and provides new power to the commissioner to restrict providers from promoting products i.e. holidays, flights and cruises—which we've seen quite a bit of and quite a lot of media coverage of those sorts of promotions, which are not allowed under the scheme—including unfair terms of sale and increases the categories for banning orders. These are all incredibly welcome. The coalition supports them. It also amends the commission's powers to request information from providers and other persons to be shorter than the existing minimum timeframes and introduces the ability for the commission to issue evidentiary certificates for use in civil and criminal proceedings. It introduces a 90-day cooling-off period, and I think this is actually one of the better elements of this bill. Many of our constituents have had the sort of frustration with the NDIS where they might want to exit the scheme, only to work out—after a cooling-off period or when they're a little bit further down from that moment of disappointment—that that wasn't the right decision for them. So a 90-day cooling-off period is a very sensible change. These are all very sensible elements. They're great—but they're not great enough. We need to really get serious about how we are going to get this scheme down to a sustainable footing. We firmly think that fraud needs to be the first target. Second, we should be looking at red-tape reduction as well. I hear stories from participants, from providers, from families and even from external experts such as doctors and paediatricians about the amount of forms that they've got to fill out that are never going to be read. I'd love to get an analysis done of the amount of time wasted across this country by people who are charging, at a great rate per hour, to write forms that are never read and are of limited value, particularly when asking for forms from people who have a degenerative disease or a condition that they're never going to be able to recover from—to have to go to a medical professional and get a certificate to say, as in the instance of the constituent I talked about earlier with early-onset dementia, 'Yes, she still has early-onset dementia. It's not going to get better.' These are the areas of concern that we see. If the government had a proactive approach to tackling red tape within the scheme, you'd be saving a lot more and be able to put a lid on the growth of the NDIS. It would save a lot of time and money for providers, for participants and for the taxpayer. The government has done the right thing in setting up the Fraud Fusion Taskforce. However, they did report to Senate estimates a few weeks ago that they think that up to 10 per cent of NDIS claims are inappropriate, mischievous or outright criminal. That should be setting off alarm bells across the system. This bill will assist in tackling some of that. But when you've got 10 per cent of a $50 billion scheme that is potentially—what were the words—inappropriate, mischievous or outright criminal, the government needs to get very serious about this very quickly. As an opposition, we're going to be encouraging the government to do that. But we will be supporting the bill. I think the amendment from the member for Lindsay is entirely appropriate and sums up where the coalition thinks the government should be heading in this important area of public policy. 11:53 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby The National Disability Insurance Scheme is a vital part of Australia's social support system. It provides Australians with permanent disability with the supports they need in order to live a fulfilling life. The NDIS was something that had been campaigned about for years by people with disability, their carers, families and the sector. It was a Labor government who answered that call, giving people with disability the choice and control they had called for. The Albanese Labor government is committed to maintaining that promise. I regularly speak to constituents who rely on NDIS funding for themselves or a family member. It is a part of our Australian way of life—that we as a community provide support to each other according to need. The NDIS was established by a Labor government in 2013. However, it was the coalition government that oversaw the initial period of the NDIS's implementation. Unfortunately, that led to 10 years of systemic and systematic failures. In 2022, when the Albanese Labor government was elected and inherited the coalition chaos, the NDIS had been growing by 22 per cent year on year. That is simply unsustainable. Since being elected to government, we have sought to make the NDIS better, more reliable and more accessible to its participants and to make it fit for purpose for the long term—effective, safe, ethical and sustainable. The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026 is the result of much consultation with people with disability, peak bodies and other stakeholders, and it will go some way to rectifying those 10 years. Whether it's the exploitation of participants or the mishandling—or worse—of government funds, the NDIS requires new laws to be able to tackle these underlying challenges. The Australian National Audit Office is categorical on this point. The previous, coalition government failed in their duty to ensure the appropriate prevention mechanisms for fraud and noncompliance, and, where there is fraud and noncompliance in this area, we know there is often violence, abuse and neglect. Participants are not benefiting to the full extent of their NDIS packages. The Albanese Labor government made it our immediate objective to protect those with a disability to ensure that the NDIS works for, not against, its participants. We invested more than $550 million in fraud and non-compliance prevention schemes, including the Fraud Fusion Taskforce, which has led to major criminal convictions. Today, more claims are being reviewed every day under this government than were reviewed in an entire year under the previous, coalition government—another example of absolute neglect. With this bill, the Albanese Labor government continues our tradition of insisting that NDIS participants receive the care that they need and that they deserve, and the bill entrenches a stronger penalty framework that will include a new 'aggravated' category of contravention where failures have led to serious injury or even death. Under this category, individuals responsible can be fined up to $3.3 million and corporations up to $16.5 million. The stronger penalty framework will also mean higher criminal penalties for those operating unregistered where it's mandatory and failing to comply with a banning order or for providers that seek to operate under a different trading name or fabricate service agreements and invoices in order to avoid detection. Under these changes, this type of criminal behaviour will not be tolerated. It is not only illegal; it is dangerous and unsafe. Currently, the highest fine for failing to register is up to $400,000. With these changes, failure to register can result in up to two years jail time and fines of up to $16½ million. Currently, those who attempt to skirt a banning order can face a criminal penalty of around $1.6 million. With these changes, those who attempt to skirt a banning order could see up to five years of jail time. Banning orders will also now be expanded to cover consultants and auditors to further protect participant safety and prevent future harm. The Albanese Labor government recognises that, sadly, higher criminal penalties are required in order to deter criminal behaviour in the NDIS system. Under these new laws, criminal operations within the NDIS will not be let off lightly. The bill will also introduce new antipromotion orders to curb false advertisements that go against the basic principles and values of NDIS—false advertising in the way of suggesting that daily goods and services are NDIS funded when they are not, such as suggesting that holidays and entertainment can be claimed under the NDIS when it cannot or suggesting that certain supports can be claimed under the NDIS where the individual's plan might not warrant them. Under these changes, the NDIS commission will be given powers to intervene, and information-gathering powers will be strengthened so they can demand documents and information from providers within shorter timeframes where there is risk of injury, harm or death of a participant. The bill also includes an amendment that will enshrine a participant's right to retract their decision to cancel their plan within a 90-day cooling-off period. The decision to opt out of the NDIS is a serious one and can be difficult to unwind down the track. The change to 90 days of cooling off means the participant has more time to give additional consideration and will avoid causing undue stress to the participant as a result of a decision they may later regret. The bill also includes an amendment that will enshrine a participant's right to determine the manner in which claims are lodged, whether physically or electronically, streamlining the application process, and it includes an amendment that will enshrine a participant's right to know that their plan variation may lead to funding increases or decreases. The NDIS integrity safeguarding bill is not about sidelining or demonising providers or workers. The overwhelming majority of providers do good work and go about their work with integrity. The bill is not about undercutting or restricting the ability of providers to do this good work. Providers are crucial to the NDIS's operations. This bill is about targeting the few who would seek a financial advantage where a fellow Australian is reaching out for a helping hand, targeting those who would brazenly take that hand all the while thinking how they may best gain unscrupulously from the relationship. The way of NDIS is about creating a fair, safe, sustainable system that serves the interests of its participants. The bill does three things. It ensures that fraud and non-compliance are stamped out, and, to this end, ensures the NDIS develops a culture of compliance. It ensures that NDIS lives up to the values of its original charter, and, most importantly, it ensures that participants are protected when all that they and their families and carers are trying to do is navigate their care and live dignified and rewarding lives. I commend the bill to the House. 12:00 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee The Albanese Labor government was elected with the Prime Minister repeating his mantra: 'Nobody held back. Nobody left behind'. Yet here we are, being left behind in regional Australia. Labor's promise is ringing increasingly hollow. Nowhere is Labor's scorched earth approach to regional Australia more evident than in their administration of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, very sadly. There is no doubt the NDIS has been a nationally transformational reform for Australians living with significant and permanent disability. It has enabled greater dignity, independence and choice. But the success of the scheme depends on public confidence in its sustainability, its governance and its integrity. On those measures, this government is falling short. Labor has struggled to improve fiscal sustainability without undermining service quality or participant trust. In regional Australia that failure is being felt most acutely. I regularly hear from constituents across my electorate of Mallee about their experience with the NDIS. More often than not, they are seeking advocacy after being overwhelmed by a system that feels remote, inconsistent and unresponsive and that, frankly, does not work. Participants and families come to me distressed not simply because of funding outcomes but because of how decisions are made and how long they take to be made. Names have been changed to protect privacy, but the experiences are all too real. These changes come at a time when allied health access in regional Australia is already under strain. Labor's changes to travel payments for health professionals have made it harder for providers to service regional clients, and that was before fuel prices surged. Allied health professionals are already withdrawing services they can no longer afford to deliver. Without providers, NDIS plans are meaningless. Access on paper is not access in practice. Regarding the bill at hand, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026, it purports to strengthen integrity and safeguarding, but it avoids the most obvious integrity failures in the system. The government has been unable to clearly quantify the scale of fraud in the NDIS. The bill introduces no direct regulation of the 94 per cent of providers who remain unregistered, and while it moves toward fully electronic claiming, it provides insufficient safeguards for vulnerable participants who face real digital barriers, particularly in regional and remote communities. If electronic systems are expanded, they must come with human oversight, alternative access pathways and clear enforceable rights of appeal. This bill does not provide that assurance. This legislation is titled the Integrity and Safeguarding bill, yet for too many participants, especially in regional Australia, it delivers neither. People with disability are not data points. Their lives cannot be flattened into computer generated budgets and automated decisions. Integrity is not achieved by centralising power and removing accountability. Safeguarding is not achieved by forcing vulnerable people to navigate opaque systems simply to access the supports they need. A sustainable NDIS depends on trust, trust that decisions are fair, transparent and grounded in real understanding of disability and place. This bill fails that test. The coalition supports an NDIS that is compassionate, accountable and sustainable, one that respects professional expertise and puts people before processes. That is not the NDIS being delivered by the Albanese government. 12:04 Ms JARRETT 298574 Brisbane I rise in support of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026. I joined the Labor Party at the age of 15 because I grew up around people whose lives were pretty difficult or who ended up in very difficult situations, including with a disability, through no fault of their own. I saw and lived around people who saw how important it was to look out for each other, especially for those who are vulnerable and especially those who are at risk of being left behind. As a result, I vehemently believe in equality, social justice, care and community. There's a reason I mention this. It's because these values are a part of the Labor government. It's a Labor government that shares these values that has introduced this bill to provide responsible support for vulnerable people—in this case, people with a disability. It's no surprise that the National Disability Insurance Scheme is a proud Labor legacy that was introduced by former prime minister Julia Gillard. It was developed after years of calls for reform to the disability support sector from people with a disability, community organisations and advocates. It was built on the premise that people with a disability all have different goals and support needs and should be able to control and select the support that they require. It was launched back in 2013, quite a while ago now, but was in operation nationally by 2020. An important part of the scheme was guaranteed long-term funding for disability services. That was part of the rationale behind NDIS. It was jointly paid for by the Australian state and territory governments. This scheme provides funding to eligible people with disability so that they can gain more time with family and friends, have greater independence and might be able to access new skills, get a job, volunteer in their community and have improved quality of life. It really just connects anyone with a disability to people in their community. It enables people to live the life they want with dignity and purpose. The NDIS supports over half a million Australians with a disability. This includes David's 18-year-old son, who lives in my electorate. The son has a very complex disability and he works and contributes in our community through employment support. He loves his job and, importantly, it gives him purpose and provides some comfort to his parents, who want him to lead the best life he can as he relies on the NDIS. Australians are rightly proud of the life-changing support of the NDIS to people with disability. But, as we've heard, it is not working the way it should. When Labor came to government in 2022, spending on the NDIS was growing at 22 per cent a year. That's not sustainable. The Audit Office found that the system set-up lacked basic prevention controls for fraud and noncompliance. I want to be clear that the majority of people who work in this sector are good people and they act in the best interests of Rob, another NDIS recipient I know. But we also know that that doesn't happen 100 per cent of the time. So our government acted quickly, investing over $550 million in tackling fraud and noncompliance, including setting up the Fraud Fusion Taskforce and making amendments to the act. Now more claims are reviewed every single day than were reviewed in a year under the previous government. Unfortunately, when we see fraud, too often we also see violence, abuse and neglect, and this is simply unacceptable. This bill is about cleaning up the sector and protecting the people it was meant for, with changes to the penalty framework, banning orders, promotion orders, plan variation protections et cetera. The National Disability Insurance Scheme has had its difficulties, but it must be safe and it must operate with integrity. Those who defraud the NDIS are exploiting not just the hundreds of thousands who rely on the life-changing support that NDIS delivers but their families. We know that, under the previous government, there were just too many players that saw the NDIS not as a disability support service but as a get-rich-quick scheme. That's appalling. It is improving, but more needs to be done. I really do want to thank the disability community for their insights in helping shape the many reforms that are being introduced, but I equally look forward to ongoing discussions with them and with those in my community who use the NDIS every day. We need to continuously look at how to make it better, and through this bill we are putting in place the necessary changes to ensure stability and integrity to the scheme. 12:10 Mr REBELLO 316547 McPherson The coalition will be supporting the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026. We are supporters of the NDIS. It is something that provides support and assistance for some of the most vulnerable people across our communities, and I have spoken to the NDIS quite a number of times in relation to a number of constituents who have made representations to my office. One of the things that we have the opportunity to do, as members of parliament, is attend end-of-year school events. I recently had the opportunity to attend a school event at Varsity College in my electorate. I had a mother come up to me at the end of that ceremony. She wanted to introduce me to her son. Her son was 12 years old at the time, and his name is Levi. Levi has cerebral palsy. His mother had contacted our office to seek assistance on their NDIS matter, as they'd had significant difficulties in obtaining clear information from the NDIS. He hadn't had an updated plan in nearly five years, and he required critical support. After we managed to take on that matter and make a representation to the NDIS, we were able to obtain a favourable outcome for Levi—which was great. But most Australians shouldn't have to go through their federal MP in order to do that. That should be part of how the system works. It's symptomatic of a broader issue with the NDIS. I think just about every person in this chamber would agree that the NDIS—like I said, its intention is really good; we just need to make sure it actually delivers for the people who need it. That is the key thing. The coalition will always support measures which improve the integrity of the NDIS and ensure that there are safeguards in place to protect the participants involved in it, while at the same time prevent the fraud and rorting that, as we know, is rife within the scheme. I do note, however, that the changes in this bill don't actually provide direct regulation or fraud controls for the 94 per cent of NDIS providers who are not registered. We are constantly, as federal members of parliament, receiving reports in our offices about NDIS participants who are seeking quotes for basic services around the home, whether it's for cleaning or for gardening or whatever, and they are quoted prices that are absolutely extraordinary. They are quoted prices that we would never see outside the NDIS. This happens the moment they say that they want to use their NDIS plan to pay for the work. When they do that, the cost of the service doubles, triples, quadruples. That is symptomatic of certain people out there—it's not all providers; I have some fantastic providers in my electorate—who are using the NDIS as nothing more than a cash cow. This is something that government needs to step up on, because, at the end of the day, the NDIS is being used for people who have a genuine need, but there are billions and billions of dollars of taxpayer money that are funding it. We need to make sure, and it is the responsibility of every person in this place to make sure, that when we are using taxpayer money that we are using it in a way that maximises its potential for the benefit of those who need the assistance. That's the main point that I would make. There are many, many examples that I could provide in relation to people who've approached my office, people who have that genuine need that I speak of, who shouldn't need to engage with a federal MP, who should be able to go through the regular process of the NDIS. There is no shortage of bureaucracy in it, there is no shortage of assistance there that should be able to be afforded. There are many examples across my electorate. People are saying, 'We recognise this is a system that was set up for the right reasons, and we just need to make sure that this government is taking very seriously the fraud that we are seeing', and I've spoken about that fraud many times in this place. We need to ensure we have a system of integrity, a system that Australians can be proud of and a system that ultimately delivers for the people who have that genuine need. 12:15 Ms BERRY 23497 Whitlam I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026 as someone who worked alongside people with disability in various roles for over 15 years before I became a member of parliament. I'm therefore particularly passionate about upholding and promoting the rights and interests of people with disability. At the start of my working life, I worked as a human rights lawyer for the Public Interest Advocacy Centre. In that role, I worked alongside people with disability to have their rights upheld through the courts and by promoting systemic law and policy reform. I later became the CEO of the New South Wales Council for Intellectual Disability, where I advocated for people with intellectual disability and their families to be able to get access to better supports and services. The job I had immediately before I became a parliamentarian was CEO of the Disability Trust, which is one of the largest providers of disability services in Australia and has been so for over 50 years. We worked hard to ensure that we supported people to fulfil their dreams and aspirations. So I worked alongside people with disability for many years before the NDIS was introduced and I saw firsthand how sorely it was needed. It's been amazing to watch the difference that the NDIS has made to Australian society. It's a world-leading scheme that reflects the fair-mindedness and decency of the Australian people. Importantly, it provides life-changing support to around 750,000 Australians, so it's vital that we protect the NDIS for the long term by making sure it's sustainable, effective and safe and that it operates with integrity. The vast majority of NDIS providers deliver quality services and do the right thing, but there are, unfortunately, some who do the wrong thing. Our government continues to take action to ensure that all providers who operate under the system do so with integrity. A review by the Australian National Audit Office found that the systems set up by the previous government lacked prevention controls and also did not appropriately account for fraud and non-compliant activity. The Albanese government has acted quickly, determined to address these significant gaps. We are making significant investments to tackle fraud and noncompliance, including setting up the Fraud Fusion Taskforce and passing laws to place the scheme on a sustainable footing. The core purpose of this bill is to strengthen the regulator, the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, and to support both the commission and the National Disability Insurance Agency to do their jobs more effectively. The bill specifically responds to calls for improved and enhanced quality and safety regulation for NDIS participants. The amendments in this bill do the following. We're strengthening penalties to ensure a fit-for-purpose framework that deters people from doing the wrong thing, including from providing and delivering poor-quality and unsafe services and supports. It ensures unsuitable people can be excluded from providing services in the NDIS by expanding the categories of people against whom a banning order can be imposed. The bill restricts a person from engaging in promotional conduct in connection with the NDIS where that conduct undermines the objects or the principles of the NDIS Act. It also strengthens the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission's powers to obtain relevant information from NDIS providers and other persons within appropriate timeframes. It also ensures that we can provide participants who wish to withdraw from the scheme with additional safeguards and additional communication options. The Albanese government is committed to ensuring the National Disability Insurance Scheme provides essential supports for people with permanent and significant disability, both today and into the future. We want the scheme to be fair, consistent and empowering for people with disability. The NDIS must operate with integrity, and this bill upholds the government's commitment to strengthen compliance within the NDIS. It also addresses findings from the disability royal commission and the NDIS review, by strengthening the NDIS commission's powers. Our goal is to build a system in which agencies have the powers to investigate the worst offences and providers are deterred from doing the wrong thing because they know they will face consequences. We know that more needs to be done, and we will continue to work closely with relevant agencies, law enforcement and the disability community. This bill is an extremely important part of that work, and I commend it to the House. 12:20 Ms PENFOLD 248895 Lyne I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2025. The NDIS is one of the most significant social reforms in our nation's history. It represents a solemn promise—that Australians living with disability will be supported with dignity, care and opportunity. But that promise is under pressure, and, unless we act decisively to restore integrity to the scheme, we risk undermining its long-term sustainability. This bill introduces a number of sensible measures. It strengthens penalties for wrongdoing, expands the powers of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, broadens banning orders, introduces antipromotion orders and improves information gathering to detect fraud. These are important steps, but they are not enough, because the reality is this: the NDIS has become a target for exploitation. Across communities like mine, constituents are raising serious issues and concerns. They're seeing providers charging exorbitant fees, billing for services not delivered and aggressively targeting vulnerable participants. One constituent told me of a provider boasting about pocketing thousands of dollars for basic outings, employing unqualified staff, charging the taxpayer heavily and exploiting the system. Another raised concerns that participants are being signed up to services that they rarely use but are still charged for because, in their words, 'Free services will always be abused.' Perhaps most concerning are cases like that of Vanessa from Largs, who described deeply troubling behaviour by a provider: disputed invoices, lack of transparency and even legal action against a vulnerable participant. These are not theoretical or abstract concerns. These are issues that are happening now in my electorate, and this is what Australians are experiencing. And it's compounded by the scale of the problem. The NDIS is projected to cost around $46 billion this year and is growing at approximately 10 per cent annually. The rate of growth is simply not sustainable. Every dollar that is rorted is a dollar taken away from someone who genuinely needs support—a child requiring early intervention, a person with profound disability or a family relying on respite care. Recent findings of the ACCC highlight just how serious these issues are—false advertising, unfair contracts, charging for services not delivered and misleading claims about eligibility. This goes to the heart of integrity in the scheme. We on this side of the House strongly support the NDIS, and I believe it is universally supported. This is not a political issue. This is an issue about how we best serve and support people with disability in this country. We believe in it, we fought for it and we want to see it protected for generations to come. But supporting the NDIS does not mean defending the status quo. It means ensuring the scheme is sustainable, fair and focused on those who need it most. And that is where this bill falls short. It acknowledges the problem, but it does not fully confront it. Where is the comprehensive plan to restore integrity? Where is the decisive action to crack down on systemic rorting? Where is the accountability for the failures that have allowed this to occur? This legislation could have gone further. It could have introduced real-time auditing and data matching, strengthened provider registration requirements, improved transparency around pricing and delivered faster enforcement to shut down dodgy operators. Instead, we have a bill that makes incremental changes in the face of a systemic challenge. If we're serious about protecting the NDIS, we must act with urgency. We must ensure regulators have not just powers but the intent to act. We must ensure that those who exploit the system face swift consequences, and we must restore confidence for participants, for families and for taxpayers. The NDIS cannot become a blank cheque. It must remain a targeted, sustainable system that delivers real outcomes for Australians living with disability. This bill is a step in the right direction, but it is not the leap that is required. The Australian people deserve to have their taxes spent judiciously and meaningfully, and, most importantly, Australians living with disability deserve a system that works for them, not for those who seek to exploit it. 12:25 Mr NG 316052 Menzies I rise to speak on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is one of the most significant social reforms in Australia's history, and it is reform grounded in Australian values of dignity and fairness. We invest in people with disabilities so that they can have the greatest possible degree of independence and participation, not only because it is the just thing to do but because it is the smart thing to do. The significance of the NDIS being called an 'insurance' scheme reflects the fact that anyone, any of us, could acquire a disability. Having worked as a personal injury lawyer, I have seen that, no matter what your position is in life, an accident can have lifelong, catastrophic consequences. In my electorate of Menzies, the NDIS is one of the issues we hear most about. It is not always raised in every conversation, but, for those that rely on it or for families who care for someone who does, it is their No. 1 issue. It shapes their daily lives and their future. Those who use it value it deeply. They recognise it as a vast improvement on what came before. Last year I met with Nakisa and a group of parents and carers who rely on the NDIS to support their children. It was clear how much love and care they put into ensuring their children have the best possible lives. It was also clear that this often put a strain on them, both financial and emotional. The NDIS is central to providing them the support that they need. It provides essential care that allows their children to live with dignity and comfort and to have the chance to go on outings and socialise—things that we often take for granted. These carers valued the NDIS deeply, but alongside that appreciation was another concern about the future. Many spoke about what would happen when they are no longer there to advocate for their children. They want certainty that the system will be safe, that providers will be accountable and that safeguards will be strong enough to protect their children from harm or exploitation. Many also spoke of rorting, and those that did recognised that, unless there was greater integrity in the scheme, it risked losing public support. Two parents provided an example of a tradie who submitted an invoice to do modifications on their home to accommodate the needs of their disabled son. When the tradie heard that the modifications were for the NDIS, they submitted another invoice for a much higher figure. These conversations demonstrated an important point that participants and families are asking for greater integrity in the system, to protect them and their loved ones and ensure that every taxpayer dollar is spent as it should be—improving the lives of people with disabilities. In 2022, when we came to government, the scheme faced unsustainable 22 per cent annual growth and inadequate fraud controls. It was not just financial risk; more importantly, it risked harm to participants and the social licence for the scheme. That's why this government invested $550 million to tackle fraud and strengthen oversight, and now we're in the position where more claims are processed and reviewed in a single day than were reviewed in an entire year under those opposite. The bill strengthens integrity and safeguarding within the NDIS through targeted reforms. It introduces a tiered penalty framework so penalties reflect the seriousness of misconduct and deter wrongdoing. Registration conditions will be expanded, and information-gathering powers will be enhanced. Banning powers will also be extended to additional actors involved in the scheme, including auditors and consultants, ensuring consistent standards. This bill also introduces antipromotion orders to restrict harmful or misleading practices, and it strengthens the commission's enforcement tools and improves information sharing. The bill includes enabling measures for the agency. It provides clearer pathways for participants who wish to exit, allows the CEO to specify how claims are submitted to support secure digital processes and clarifies plan variations. This bill is not about making it harder for providers, the vast majority of whom do the right thing. It is about ensuring a fair and consistent system, protecting it from exploitation, supporting good providers and building trust. The NDIS is a cornerstone of our social safety net. It reflects our values as a nation and our commitment to fairness and inclusion. This bill takes an important step towards achieving those goals and ensures that the NDIS remains focused on what matters most: supporting people with disability to live with dignity, independence and opportunity. I commend the bill to the House. 12:30 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite The National Disability Insurance Scheme is one of the most important social reforms in Australia's history. It was built on the simple but powerful idea that people with disability deserve dignity, choice and control. But that promise only holds if the scheme is protected. That's what this bill is all about. The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2026 delivers tough new laws to protect participants and safeguard the scheme from fraud. It is about restoring integrity, it is about enforcing accountability and it is about making it absolutely clear that exploitation has no place in the NDIS. This bill throws the book at serious misconduct. For the first time, it will be a criminal offence to fail to comply with a banning order, carrying a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment. If someone has been banned from the NDIS and chooses to ignore that ban, they should not be working in the sector. This bill ensures they face serious consequences. Similarly, it will become a criminal offence to provide supports that require registration without being registered, with penalties of up to two years imprisonment. This goes directly to participant safety. Unregistered, unqualified operators delivering high-risk supports puts lives at risk, and that must stop. This bill also substantially increases financial penalties. For the most serious breaches of code of conduct, where misconduct leads to serious injury or death, fines will increase from around $400,000 to more than $15 million. That is a necessary change because, for too long, penalties have been treated as a cost of doing business for those seeking to exploit the system. This bill also tackles one of the most disgraceful forms of exploitation: misleading and predatory conduct. New antipromotion orders will allow the NDIS commission to crack down on businesses that advertise supports in ways that mislead participants. We have seen examples of marketing that encourages participants to misuse their plans, promotes fake deals or lures people into inappropriate or unsafe arrangements. That behaviour is unacceptable, and under this bill it will be stopped. The reforms also expand banning order powers. For the first time, the commission will be able to ban not just providers and workers but also auditors, consultants and business advisers. This does close a dangerous loophole, because you cannot have a system where those advising providers are also responsible for assessing them. It is a conflict of interest, and this will respond to that. You cannot have the same actor playing both coach and umpire. This reform restores integrity and independence to the system. This bill also strengthens whistleblower protections, ensuring people can safely report unsafe or unlawful practices. It enhances the monitoring, compliance and enforcement powers of the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. As Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on the NDIS, I know that the overwhelming majority of providers do the right thing. But it's so important that we continue our work to restore integrity to the scheme. It's why my committee has launched an inquiry to further tackle this issue. We know it's impacting the social licence of the NDIS, and more must be done to ensure Australians continue to have trust in a scheme that delivers so much for people with disability. In closing, for those who seek to exploit the scheme, this bill sends a clear message. If you defraud the NDIS, if you put participants at risk, if you attempt to profit from vulnerability, you will be caught and you will face serious consequences. The NDIS was never meant to be a 'get rich quick' scheme. It was meant to change lives. This bill ensures it continues to do exactly that. 12:35 Ms JORDAN-BAIRD 316021 Gorton I'm proud to rise in support of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Integrity and Safeguarding) Bill 2025. Former prime minister Julia Gillard put it best when her Labor government established the NDIS in 2013: Disability can affect any of us and therefore it affects all of us. The risk of disability is universal, so our response is universal. The introduction of our National Disability Insurance Scheme was a once-in-a-generation reform, and it has reshaped the lives and the futures of Australians living with disability, their families and their carers. In Gorton, a number of my constituents receive life-changing support from the NDIS. For people with high needs, like a constituent of mine who suffers from motor neurone disease, the NDIS provides high-intensity supports like nursing and hospital equipment that is absolutely essential for her survival. For others, like my young constituent from Caroline Springs, the NDIS helps to fund supports like therapeutic swimming lessons and day care, which are indispensable to her quality of life. It was great to visit a local service provider in my own community recently, alongside the Minister for the NDIS. Steve and Jenny from NeuroRehab in Deer Park are doing fantastic work in my community providing wraparound support for NDIS participants. I'd like to thank them both for kindly sharing with us the challenges they're facing as they advocate for their participants who are constituents in my community. The scheme has had its ups and downs, and our role here in parliament is to re-evaluate and to improve it, because that's what a Labor government does. Labor introduced the life-changing scheme we call the NDIS, and Labor is here to secure the future of the NDIS. We have service providers like NeuroRehab right across the country working hard to support NDIS participants and doing the right thing. But we also know there are service providers out there who are behaving fraudulently and that there are breaches of code and conduct in the system. Where we see fraud, too often we also see violence, abuse and neglect. The bill makes practical changes to crack down on fraud and misconduct by dodgy NDIS providers. It means that providers who do the wrong thing will face harsher penalties. This will include new offences, stronger civil and criminal penalties for misconduct and giving the NDIS commissioner more powers to punish providers, because NDIS participants and their loved ones deserve quality care. This is about justice—justice for participants who have been taken advantage of. We are sending a clear message to fraudulent service providers: dodgy behaviour will not be tolerated. Breaches to the NDIS Code of Conduct may include providers failing to safeguard a participant from harm or breaching a participant's privacy, and punishments for providers whose breach involves a significant failure or a systemic pattern of conduct will be increased. The code of conduct is central to ensuring that participants can access the quality care they deserve, so we are strengthening it. This comes after reports of dodgy NDIS providers intimidating participants to change service providers and reports of providers trying to attract participants with offers of alcohol, tobacco or cash. Providers then allegedly drained participants plans while not providing the standard of care that was expected. This conduct should outrage us all. For vulnerable Australians to be taken advantage of like this is absolutely disgusting. Let me be clear: these reforms are being debated today because it is a Labor government who is addressing these issues and putting these changes forward. Under the previous coalition government, these sorts of behaviours went unchecked. When Labor came to government in 2022, we inherited a system that was not ready to meet the challenges of the future. We inherited a total mess. The NDIS lacked basic prevention controls for fraud and noncompliance. We acted fast, investing $550 million into tackling fraud and noncompliance and passing the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Getting the NDIS Back on Track No. 1) Act. While those opposite put reform in the too-hard basket, we're doing the real work to secure the future of the NDIS and we're making sure the scheme works for the participants who it is designed for, not against them. Here we're continuing our work to crack down on fraud and noncompliance by dodgy providers. It will mean better outcomes for people with disabilities and their families. When Labor introduced the NDIS, it wasn't about providers taking advantage of vulnerable people. The NDIS is about dignity, and that's what this bill is here to protect. This bill is in essence about dignity, which is why I'm so proud to commend this bill to the House today. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 The immediate question is that the amendment be agreed to. Question negatived. Original question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 36 12:41 Ms WHITE 224102 Lyons by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026 36

Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026

Report from Federation Chamber 36 Third Reading 37 12:43 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. (Quorum formed) COMMITTEES 37 COMMITTEES Human Rights Joint Committee 37 Report 37 12:47 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, I present the committee's report entitled Human rights scrutiny report: Report 4 of 2026. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 by leave—I am thrilled that there are so many people in the House right now to hear about this report that I'm tabling, which is report 4 2026 of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights. It is wonderful to see how many members are interested in finding out about the human rights that we comply with and how our bills are looked at in relation to this. In this report, the committee has considered six new bills, one restored bill and 139 new legislative instruments. It has commented on two bills and six legislative instruments and concluded its examination of three bills and two legislative instruments. Of particular concern in report 4 is the Migration Amendments (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026, which finally passed both houses on 12 March 2026. This act amends the Migration Act 1995 to provide the minister with the power to make an arrival control determination by legislative instrument. The determinations will apply to a class or classes of non-citizens outside Australia to prevent them from entering Australia from a temporary period with some expectations. Providing the minister with the power to issue arrival control determinations engages and limits various human rights, including the right to protection of the family, and may have implications for Australia's non-refoulement obligations. The committee notes the measure is accompanied by some safeguards, such as the permitted travel certificate scheme. However, considering the broad scope of the determinations, the inadequacy of available safeguards, the lack of review and the availability of fewer rights-restrictive alternatives, the committee considers that it has not been demonstrated that the limitation on these rights is proportionate. The committee has made some recommendations to assist with the proportionality of the measure, including amending the act to prevent possible detentions of persons who are in transit while a determination is made. In this report, the committee has also concluded its assessment of two migration instruments. These instruments prescribe the bodies and international obligations to which officers may disclose identifying information about individuals. The prescribed bodies include 107 state and territory police forces, federal intelligence agencies, foreign police forces and foreign intelligence agencies. Disclosing identifying information to these prescribed organisations limits the right to privacy and may engage and limit other rights depending on who the information is shared with and for what purpose. While it is important to ensure the integrity of Australia's border and migration system and protect Australia's national security, community safety and social cohesion the committee considers that it remains unclear whether the disclosure of information to all prescribed organisations would be rationally connected to the stated objectives. It is also not clear whether the safeguards are sufficient to ensure the measure is compatible with various human rights in practice. The committee has therefore recommended that the instruments be amended to assist with proportionality. I encourage all members to consider the committee's report closely. With these comments, I commend the committee's scrutiny report 4 of 2026 to the House. DELEGATION REPORTS 37 DELEGATION REPORTS Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the MIKTA Speakers' Consultation 2025 and Bilateral Visit to the Republic of Korea 37 12:52 Dr REID 300126 Robertson I present the report of the Australian parliamentary delegation to the MIKTA Speakers' Consultation 2025 and the bilateral visit to Seoul, Republic of Korea, from 10 to 13 November 2025, and I seek leave to make a short statement in connection with the report. Leave granted. Dr REID 300126 I rise to table the report of Australia's participation in the MIKTA Speakers' Consultation and our associated bilateral visit to the Republic of Korea. In Seoul, the speakers consultation provided a valuable forum for dialogue between like-minded countries and reinforced the role of middle powers in supporting sustainability, stability, rules based cooperation and regional resilience. Complementing this, our bilateral engagements allowed for more targeted discussions on shared strategic priorities. These included security, economic cooperation, energy transition and the governance of emerging technologies. From my perspective as both a parliamentarian and a clinician, these conversations are not abstract. They are about the systems that underpin the safety, health and prosperity of our communities at home. I sincerely thank my fellow delegates President of the Senate, the Hon. Sue Lines, Senator Kerrynne Liddle and the member for Melbourne for their professionalism and constructive engagement throughout the Republic of Korea visit. I also acknowledge the Department of the Senate—including the delegation secretary, Ms Rachel Callinan—for their exceptional support in facilitating this delegation. Finally, I extend my sincere appreciation to the officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and to the Australian embassy staff in Seoul, whose expertise, preparation and on-the-ground coordination were instrumental to the success of both the consultation and the bilateral program. This report reflects the importance of sustained parliamentary diplomacy and meaningful international partnership. I commend this report to the House. BILLS 38 BILLS Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 38

Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025

Second Reading 38 12:55 Mr VENNING 315434 Grey In summing up—when the signal drops, productivity stops. Farmers are being forced to fund expensive workarounds like Starlink because the service they are paying for is failing them. This is unacceptable in this day and age. Places like Tarcowie, Balaklava, Cummins, Wudinna and Weetulta cannot wait any longer. Since I last spoke on this bill, the latest round of the Mobile Black Spot Program was released. The electorate of Grey, covering 92.3 per cent of South Australia, an area bigger than New South Wales, has been allocated one new tower. Under the previous coalition government, 56 towers were installed. Fifty-six versus one is unacceptable. Imagine if these kinds of mobile black spots were in Canberra. There would be a royal commission, not silence and inaction. What would happen if those opposite couldn't make a call to triple zero if their house was on fire? There would be an outrage. It would be front-page news. But, because it is out of sight in the bush, for this Labor government it is therefore out of mind. We have the Better Connectivity Plan and we have the funding. What we lack is the urgency to get transmitters on towers and signals into these areas. I call on the minister and Telstra to stop hiding behind terrain maps and technical excuses and finally switch on phone connection in the bush. I am committed to the people of Grey. My job is to ensure that, whether you are in Wallaroo, Port Pirie or Ceduna, you are not treated like a second-class citizen by a government that only cares about the inner-city suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne. This bill provides the tools to punish bad providers, and that is a good thing. But there is much more that needs to be done in this area, especially in regional and rural South Australia. We need to stop the scams that target our isolated and elderly residents—scams that cost Australians over $100 million last year. We need the emergency call database to be accurate so ambulances show up to the right house or the right farm at the right time. But a fine of $10 million doesn't help a farmer who can't call an ambulance. A registration process doesn't help an elderly woman whose fall-detector battery is dying because it is constantly searching for a signal that no longer exists. The coalition supports the bill, but we condemn the neglect. We need a government that understands that regional Australia is the engine room of our nation. Our farmers, our miners and our regional small businesses deserve better than a 'sorry; no service' message from the Albanese government. Regional SA is calling out for help. The question is: will the government answer? 12:58 Ms JARRETT 298574 Brisbane I rise to support the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025. Telecommunications is no longer about making a phone call. It's about how we work, how we learn, how we do business, how we entertain and how we stay safe. In Brisbane and across the country, connectivity underpins almost every part of our daily lives. Whether you're a parent working from home in Paddington, a small cafe in New Farm using online ordering systems or a student at the Queensland University of Technology streaming lectures, telecommunications is not optional. It is essential infrastructure. It keeps us connected to what we do. Just a few years ago, COVID accelerated the development and uptake of technology, making it easier for people to work from home and do business more quickly. Teams and Zoom are now part of the fabric of how we work, but it's just one piece of the technology landscape. Living in a digital age has changed in my lifetime, and it's certainly different to what generations before us experienced. In my first speech, I relayed the story of how a few of us at high school pushed the community and the school to get one computer that we could all share. Now we all carry them around in our backpacks and in our bags, along with our tablets and our mobile phones. Even as I'm speaking here, I'm sure there are people in this chamber using their devices to respond to emails or catch up on the news. We are more connected than ever before. That's why Australia deserves a telecommunications system that is fair, accountable and built on trust. And it's why this Albanese Labor government is taking action through this bill to give the Australian Communications and Media Authority, ACMA, the power it needs to hold companies to account, to protect consumers and to build a system that works for everyone. For too long, penalties for misconduct in the telecommunications sector have been too low to really act as a genuine deterrent. The maximum civil penalty for breaching an industry code or standard has been $250,000. That may be a lot to a family living in Brisbane and dealing with the cost of living, but to a billion-dollar telecommunications company it is nothing more than loose change. We've seen the consequences: too many Australians have been hit with unfair fees and misleading offers and left stranded without services. You may recall the recent story where Optus was investigated by the ACCC and then admitted to engaging in unconscionable conduct. The company agreed to a $10 million penalty for selling customers phones and contracts they didn't need. In some cases, people were sold plans even though they lived in areas of our country where Optus services weren't available. This is unconscionable, and the consumer watchdog sued the telco in October over these practices, but it affected hundreds of vulnerable customers. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said that 'many of the affected consumers were vulnerable or experiencing disadvantage', including living with a disability, being unemployed or having English as a second language. As we know from the news, many of those consumers were First Nations Australians from regional, remote and very remote parts of Australia. In one instance, we heard that a First Nations consumer who spoke English as a second language was approached by Optus staff outside a store and pressured to enter into a contract. They then entered into multiple phone plans and contracts for products including high-end phones, the ACCC said, for a total minimum cost of $3,800 or more over a 24-month period. This person didn't even have Optus coverage at their home address and was later pursued by debt collectors. Can you imagine how much anxiety would be associated with being in that position? I've also heard stories from families in my electorate, families in suburbs like Newmarket and Ashgrove, who waited weeks to have a simple service issue resolved—some related to ongoing intermittent services—and who couldn't get a straight answer from their provider. For a small business, we know that weeks without internet or EFTPOS, or even with intermittent service, is not an inconvenience. It means loss of income. It means potentially lost jobs. This bill recognises that reality. It lifts the penalties 40-fold, from $250,000 to nearly $10 million, and it modernises the framework so that the courts can impose fines that actually bite and will hurt these companies that do the wrong thing. These can be $10 million, three times the benefit obtained from the breach or up to 30 per cent of turnover. What this means is that the penalties will match the scale of the harm done and match the size of the company that's doing it, because consumers in Brisbane and across Australia should never again be left thinking that telcos treat penalties as just a cost of doing business. Another major reform in the bill is making telecommunications industry codes directly enforceable. At present, compliance with industry codes is technically voluntary. If a provider breaches the code, the ACMA can only issue a warning or direct a company to comply. Real enforcement only comes if the company continues to break the rules. This means companies get away with egregious breaches for far too long while consumers get left in the lurch and get hurt. This bill ends that nonsense. With these reforms, ACMA will be able to take direct enforcement action straightaway. For families or individuals in suburbs like Stafford, Alderley or Kelvin Grove, this means stronger assurance that their provider will treat them fairly, not after three warnings, not after months of back and forth, but from the outset. This bill establishes a carriage service provider registration scheme. A carriage service provider is simply any company that uses carrier facilities to supply phone or internet services to you, me, and others—think Optus, Telstra and Vodafone, just to name three biggies. Right now, there is no comprehensive list of exactly who these providers are. The consequence of that is it makes it harder for ACMA to engage with them, educate them, track misconduct or even remove dodgy operators who cause the most harm. We know that scams and fraudulent operators thrive in the shadows. Without transparency, consumers in Brisbane and across the country can be targeted by providers who appear legitimate but are anything but. It's only fair that consumers know exactly who they're dealing with, and this bill fixes that by creating the register. It increases visibility, increases accountability and gives ACMA the power, as a last resort, to exclude dangerous or dishonest providers from the market. We have seen similar powers work in the energy sector, where the regulator has been able to shut down unscrupulous retailers to quickly prevent harm. The same should apply here, because in Brisbane—whether you're a renter in Bowen Hills setting up your first internet account or a retiree in Red Hill looking for a cheaper phone plan—you should be able to trust that the provider you choose is honest and is playing by the rules. These reforms did not just come out of nowhere. They build on a strong track record by the Albanese government of protecting consumers in telecommunications. Already we've introduced new industry standards requiring telcos to provide meaningful support to customers in financial hardship. We've brought in a new standard that compels telcos to support people experiencing domestic, sexual and family violence. We've amended the Competition and Consumer Act so that telcos, alongside banks, digital platforms and others, must actively work to prevent, detect and disrupt scams. I want to stop on that last point because scams are a growing issue not just in Brisbane but around the country. Late last year, I spoke with David, who is part of one of our local Neighbourhood Watch groups, and he shared a story with me where a pensioner from his area had nearly thousands of dollars drained from his account after a sophisticated phishing scam that was linked to a compromised mobile service. This government has acted decisively so that telecommunications companies can no longer shrug their shoulders. They must step up, they must detect scams and they must protect consumers. Through this bill, we are backing that expectation with serious enforcement teeth. Scams are an economy-wide problem and we need an economy-wide response. That's why we've released the Scams Prevention Framework. The National Anti-Scam Centre has brought together the expertise of regulators, law enforcement and the industry to stop scammers reaching Australians. Their united efforts are working, with scam losses reported to Scamwatch falling by about 41 per cent over a 12-month period. The community also needs more tools to arm themselves against scammers. To tackle this, the government ran a campaign to improve community awareness of scams and to help Australians identify and report scams. But we still have more to do. Consumer protection is only one part of the story. Connectivity itself remains a challenge, especially outside our capital cities. The Albanese government has invested heavily to change this, including our Mobile Black Spot Program and legislation to ensure mobile coverage for our rural and regional areas. Now, I know Brisbane's not classified as regional in the same way as Central Australia or the Pilbara; however, our city still feels the pain of poor connectivity, particularly on major highways and fringe suburbs. Anyone who's driven along the Bruce Highway, heading north out of Brisbane—thousands will do that this weekend—or out to Ipswich for a site inspection will know the frustration of dropping out of coverage. For commuters, for businesses transporting goods and for families on the road, these aren't minor inconveniences; these are actually safety issues. By investing in regional connectivity, we are not just helping rural communities; we are strengthening the arteries that connect Brisbane and other major cities to the rest of our nation. These reforms aren't about punishing industry for the sake of it. They're actually about creating a level playing field and restoring trust. This is critical in today's world, where almost everything we do relies on connectivity, and where we have very large companies that provide the majority of necessary infrastructure and many small businesses that keep our communities humming. Brisbane is a young, dynamic, growing city. Our electorate is full of students, families, startups and small businesses who expect and deserve telecommunications that are reliable and fair. When I speak with students from the various universities we have in Brisbane about the rising cost of living, they tell me that even a small disruption to internet access can mean they miss a lecture, they don't get to do their shift at work, they might get an assignment in late or they might fall behind. When I speak with small-business owners in Clayfield, they tell me that losing EFTPOS or online ordering for a few hours or even for a day can mean hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars lost. What does that translate to? A poorer economy and job losses. That's why this bill matters. It says to the telcos, 'If you do the right thing, you have nothing to fear. But, if you breach the trust of Australians, if you exploit consumers, if you put profit before fairness, then you will face real consequences.' This bill is about fairness. It's about accountability and it's about trust. Australians should not have to wonder whether their telecommunications provider is cutting corners or gaming the system for their benefit not the consumer's. They should know that, if the rules are broken, action will be swift, penalties will be serious and consumers will be protected and compensated. The Albanese government is committed to keeping Australians connected no matter where they live, no matter their circumstances, and with this bill we are ensuring that the regulator is empowered, that industry codes are enforceable and that dodgy providers can be identified and can no longer slip through the cracks. It's about making sure consumers are protected and that there is trust in our telecommunications system. It's about delivering a telecommunications system that supports our families, our businesses and our communities. I commend the bill to the House. 13:11 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax There was a day when telecommunications was considered a luxury. Certainly, in the modern world, it is an essential service. Indeed, it underpins everything we do—from the lives we live to the work we do, what we learn and how we engage with each other. That gives rise, of course, to the importance of consumer protections. When it comes to the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2025 that is before the House today, it's noteworthy that this bill will create a register of carriage service providers, enable the direct enforcement of industry codes, amend the existing two-step process for the application of penalty amounts for infringement notices and increase the maximum penalty amount for breaches of the codes from $250,000 to $10 million. Given the bill strengthens consumer protections, streamlines enforcement and provides greater visibility of operators in the market, it will receive support from the coalition. The new carriage service provider registration scheme will ensure that all telecommunication providers apply to the Australian Communications and Media Authority for registration to operate in Australia. This will provide the ACMA, as the regulator for the sector, with visibility of all operators in the Australian market, of which there are estimated to be 1,500. This will ensure ACMA is able to educate, monitor and, where necessary, take swift enforcement action for breaches of any codes or standards. Should providers breach their obligations or pose a risk to consumers, ACMA will have the ability to cancel their registration to operate. These arrangements are similar to those in the energy sector, where the Australian Energy Regulator, the AER, has the power to exclude operators from the market where there is a risk to consumers. As part of the scheme, providers will also be required to report all cybersecurity incidents. Where there is a cyber breach, the appropriate bodies must be notified and remedial action must be taken and taken swiftly. Full visibility of all telecommunications operators will also ensure ACMA can target compliance and enforcement activities and, where necessary, take appropriate action. Schedule 2 of the bill amends the Telecommunications Act to make registered industry codes directly enforceable by ACMA. The telecommunications industry has a co-regulation model by which industry is responsible for the preparation of codes, which are then submitted to ACMA for registration. Once a code is registered with ACMA in force, the code must be complied with by the sector. In practice, what has been established under the act is a two-step enforcement process. If there is a complaint or wrongdoing, or a breach of industry code, ACMA will direct or provide a provider to comply. They will send that direction to the provider, essentially issuing a warning for them to correct their behaviour and do the right thing. Should they not, ACMA's enforcement powers will then become available. This enforcement action can include penalties through the Federal Court, enforceable undertakings or the issuing of an infringement notice. Currently, part 6 of the act says: Compliance with an industry code is voluntary unless the ACMA directs a particular participant in the telecommunications industry … to comply with the code. This phrasing has led to a misconception that compliance with industry codes is voluntary. As the explanatory memorandum to the bill states, while code compliance is technically voluntary, after ACMA issues a direction to comply or a formal warning to a provider, it can then take enforcement action if the provider continues the noncompliance. Since January 2024, ACMA has issued 19 formal warnings, one remedial direction, 16 directions to comply, four enforceable undertakings and infringement notices totalling close to $16 million. Some of these breaches relate to people's safety, which is of the highest priority. For example, there were seven notices issued to providers in 2024 for breaches of the emergency call database rules. These rules require the telco providers to keep a person's telephone number and address updated so that, when the number calls triple zero, emergency services—police, fire or ambulance—are deployed to the correct address at the first moment. Adherence to this code is vital. People's lives quite literally depend on it. The requirement to monitor and report suspected scams is another important one. If telcos aren't adhering to the code, the impact on people, financially, psychologically and emotionally, is significant. In 2024, phone scam had the highest overall losses of scam types, with more than $107 million lost by nearly 2,200 people. Since the start of 2024, ACMA has issued 10 directions to comply with reducing scam calls and SMS code, but none of these resulted in a financial penalty to providers, because of the two-step process. The changes in this bill will strengthen ACMA's powers and the speed at which they can use them, to provide even greater protection for consumers and ensure we have responsible operators in our telecommunications sector. The bill will make compliance with industry codes mandatory, removing the requirement for a two-step process before ACMA can take enforcement action. There'll be no more warning shots, ensuring more immediate action can be taken for breaches of the code. I will note, given much scrutiny of the telecommunications sector over recent years, that this is a change the sector itself has called for. Notably, the Australian Telecommunications Alliance, which represents the telecommunications industry, has been calling for these reforms since 2023. Finally, the bill will increase penalties issued to providers for breaches of industry codes and standards from $250,000 to $10 million. The revised penalty framework will allow penalties to be based on the value of the benefit obtained from the breach of conduct or the turnover of the provider, allowing for penalties greater than $10 million should it be deemed appropriate. The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network, the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission have long advocated for civil penalty reform to ensure penalties for breaches of codes and standards reflect the severity of the breach and the harm caused. The increase in penalties will address this and align the telecommunications penalty framework to those in the energy and banking sectors, competition legislation and Australian consumer law. Thus, the coalition will support the bill. At the end of the day, it will strengthen consumer protection, streamline enforcement activity and provide greater visibility of operators in the market. 13:19 Ms JORDAN-BAIRD 316021 Gorton I rise to speak in support of the Telecommunications Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards) Bill. Every Australian deserves reliable, quality and affordable telecommunications no matter where they live. In 2026, connectivity is not just a nice-to-have. It's not a luxury. It's a necessity. In this day and age, we rely on communications for basic daily activities, like using a credit card or checking the news. Many of us rely on telecommunications to work, to get an education and to stay in touch with our loved ones. In rural and regional areas, many Australians even rely on telecommunications to see a doctor through telehealth. In 2026, a quality, reliable telecommunications service should be a given, and yet it isn't. That is unacceptable, and that's why we've brought forward this bill. This is yet another part of a bigger picture of bringing all telcos up to standard. Poor connectivity is one of the most pressing issues faced by constituents of my electorate. Gorton is one of the fastest-growing electorates in the country. In fact, we have the area with the fastest growth rate in the country in Fraser Rise and Plumpton. In the matter of a decade, dozens of new estates have popped up and whole new communities have been established. These are beautiful communities filled with young families and new migrants who want to feel connected, supported and proud of the place they live. They believe in the west and they're committed to making these suburbs the best places to call home. But, while my constituents are investing in Melbourne's outerwest, the infrastructure they depend on simply hasn't matched, meaning that in peri-urban suburbs in my electorate—namely, in the Mount Atkinson area—residents are lucky to have one or two bars of service. This is a huge issue for residents of Mount Atkinson, many of whom work online, who have family overseas they need to contact or who need the peace of mind that they can call their child on the bus to school. But, most pressingly, the poor quality of their telecommunications services has interfered with their ability to call emergency services. It's truly unacceptable that in a country like Australia, where we have some of the highest living standards in the world, there are communities that cannot reliably call triple zero in an emergency. Making matters even worse, some areas in my electorate still don't have the NBN infrastructure at all. In others, developers have engaged alternative broadband providers that often fail to meet minimum expectations for speed, data and reliability. When the fixed line service isn't strong, families end up relying heavily on mobile towers just to get basic connectivity. Those towers are lifelines. When the towers are not there or the service they provide is not quality or reliable, these communities suffer greatly. I am passionate about making sure this situation improves as quickly as possible. I'm proud to say that, through round 2 of the Peri-Urban Mobile Program, the Albanese government is funding new mobile towers in my electorate and high-growth outermetro communities. I'm also proud to be supporting this amendment, which better regulates telcos to make sure they are accountable for providing quality, reliable telecommunications services to every Australian. But I know there's still more to do, and that's why I'll keep advocating for the constituents in my electorate to get the connectivity they need as quickly as possible. Right now, I'm proud to be launching a mobile connectivity survey in my electorate so we can work with the community to gather their data on mobile black spots. We intend to use this data to engage with stakeholders so that we can address this issue. I know how important this issue is to my community, and I'll keep working until it's resolved. Telecommunications is essential to the lives of every Australian. In 2026, the importance of quality, reliable, affordable telecommunications services really can't be understated. The amendment before us is about recognising the importance of telecommunications services as essential services and treating them as such, holding telcos accountable for providing good services to every Australian, giving our telecommunications regulator the tools it needs to crack down on telcos that are not meeting this standard and making sure the industry is transparent so that we can oversee and regulate the conduct of every provider. As the member for Gorton, I'm incredibly passionate about making sure that, when it comes to telecommunications, no-one is held back and no-one is left behind. Seeking to better regulate the telecommunications industry when it comes to essential infrastructure and services like telecommunications is incredibly important. The telecommunications amendment is part of a broader piece of work this government is doing to put consumers back at the heart of the telecommunications industry. The truth is that, for some time now, not all telcos have been putting consumers first, and the results have been devastating. In recent years, a number of network outages have seen consumers unable to make triple zero calls. The Optus network outage last September saw lives lost. The telcos involved did not have the proper systems in place to manage the network outages and minimise harm, and when these outages occurred they didn't fulfil their duty to keep consumers informed and ensure they were looked after while the systems were restored. These incidents are indicative of a broader issue to do with the lack of consideration for consumers shown by not all, but some, of the telco companies. Some telcos have failed to provide adequate support and information to consumers experiencing financial hardship and vulnerability. They've taken liberties with customers, including breaching public safety rules by failing to upload their information to the integrated public number database used by emergency services. Just two months ago, Optus was ordered to pay $100 million in penalties for unconscionable conduct for putting undue pressure on vulnerable customers to buy products and then pursuing them for debts related to these purchases. That incidents like these are still happening in our country, and that some of our telco companies have not fulfilled their duty to ensure consumers are at the core of everything they do, is disgraceful, and this government will not stand for it. The bill before us updates the Telecommunications Act 1997 to strengthen enforcement of and compliance with consumer safeguards. It does this in three ways. First, it increases the maximum civil penalties the Federal Court can issue for breaches of industry codes and standards by 40 times—from $250,000 to almost $10 million. Right now, the penalties are too low. They don't reflect the real harm caused when telcos fail to meet basic standards, and they don't deter companies from doing the wrong thing. The fact is that major telco providers can absorb a fine of $200,000 pretty easily, and, because of this, it hasn't been working as a deterrent for breaches of industry codes and standards. Under the bill before us, if a telco commits a serious breach—for example, if their triple zero service goes down and they haven't put proper failsafe systems in place to keep emergency calls flowing—the Federal Court can now issue a fine of up to $10 million. In the most serious cases, the penalty can go even further. It can be set at three times the benefit the company gained from the breach or 30 per cent of the company's turnover, whichever number is higher. This means telcos won't be able to treat penalties as pocket change any more, and the punishment will finally fit the harm done. It also brings telecommunications in line with other major sectors that provide essential services to Australians, like energy and banking, where dodgy operators face real consequences when they fail the public. Telecommunications are essential services, and they need to be held to the same standard as other essential services. Second, this bill delivers faster enforcement of industry codes. Right now, ACMA's hands are tied. Even when a telco commits a serious breach, ACMA cannot act straight away. It must first issue a formal direction to comply, then it has to wait and see whether the telco decides to comply or not. ACMA can only take real action if the company breaks the rules again. This process is slow and ineffective. It delays consequences for wrongdoing. The result is that Australians are left exposed while regulators jump through hoops. Families, businesses and communities affected by breaches are left waiting for providers to be penalised, while providers get yet another chance to fix something that should have never gone wrong in the first place. The bill before us cuts through all of this, removing the two-step process entirely. Industry codes will now be directly enforceable. That means, if a provider breaches the rules, ACMA can act immediately—no delays, no waiting, no repeat failures before something happens. This empowers the regulator to protect Australians in real time. It makes sure complaints are taken seriously from the start. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 249710 Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 44 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Fuel 44 13:30 Ms BOELE 26417 Bradfield Soaring fuel costs are affecting Australians everywhere. Homes and businesses across my electorate are struggling, and some of our most valuable frontline community services are under real threat. Every week, the Village Chef in Turramurra, our local Meals on Wheels service, cooks and delivers fresh meals to around 950 clients. On top of that, 2,000 more meals go to partner services and aged-care homes weekly. This financial year alone, they've delivered nearly 90,000 meals direct to homes. This service runs on hard work and goodwill. They have 30 paid staff and 500 volunteers. The volunteers are reimbursed just $10 per meal delivery run, even when those runs are long and use up a lot of fuel. In the last two weeks, some volunteers have started cancelling shifts. We don't know why exactly, but we can make an educated guess. And it's not only volunteers feeling the pressure. Suppliers are now adding fuel charges to every delivery of fresh food—that's bread, meat and vegetables—and at least one supplier is increasing costs by nearly 10 per cent. Another is adding a flat fee to every single invoice. The Village Chef is working hard to adapt to this new situation. They're looking at changes to ordering cycles, storage and supply chains, while trying not to compromise on the freshness and the quality of the meals that they provide to their clients. Hundreds of people in my electorate depend on this service. Let's not lose sight of the very real human impacts— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The member for Solomon has the call. Sergeant Matthew Locke MG Charity Shield, Jack Fitzgibbon Cup, Bade, Dr Patrick 44 13:31 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon I rise to speak about two soldiers, a sister, a mother and father, and a surgeon. On Saturday the Sergeant Matthew Locke MG Charity Shield match was played in Matt's home town of Bellingen, New South Wales. Matt was a distinguished SAS veteran of Timor-Leste, Iraq and Afghanistan. He was awarded the Medal for Gallantry and was killed in action, while serving our nation. This event in his memory is run by his sister Debbie, who is an absolute legend, and, through her leadership, the charity has delivered five kindergartens in Timor-Leste and provided vital support for veterans. On Sunday, the second Jack Fitzgibbon Cup was played between the parliamentary rugby team, the Wombats, and a 2nd Commando Regiment team. I acknowledge the extraordinary grace of Jack's mum, Dianne, and his dad, our mate Joel Fitzgibbon, who attended this match honouring their son, who died during training. Funds raised support the Commando Welfare Trust. Finally, happy birthday to NT surgeon Paddy Bade. Paddy has saved many Territorians, but in 2008 he operated on President Jose Ramos-Horta after an attempted assassination, and in 2023 he saved the life of US Marine Corporal Travis Reyes following injuries sustained in an Osprey crash. To you all: my admiration and thanks for the service that you and your loved ones have provided to our grateful nation. Yamba Surf Life Saving Club 44 13:33 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page I'd like to acknowledge and congratulate a group of outstanding young athletes from the Yamba Surf Life Saving Club who achieved wonderful results at the recent Australian Surf Lifesaving Championships at North Kirra. Mostyn Brown was recently selected in the New South Wales Surf Interstate Pathways team. He is the first from the Yamba surf club since 2006. This is a fantastic achievement and a great reflection of his training. At the championships he won gold in the under-14 beach flags, marking the club's first medal in that event since 1966. Mostyn also recently competed at the NSW Surf Life Saving Championships near Newcastle, where he won the under-14 male beach flags, as well as the flags as part of the New South Wales team, claiming the interstate cup. Congratulations. I also want to recognise the under-13 surf team of Reed Batinovic, Ziggy O'Brien, Leo Dean and Clarry Dougherty, who secured the club's first ever gold medal in this event. Leo Dean and Clarry Dougherty also placed third in the under-13 board rescue. These excellent results reflect the hard work and dedication of not only the athletes but the members and coaches of the surf lifesaving club and their families. For a small regional club, these are truly remarkable achievements. Congratulations to everyone. Biosecurity, Perth Zoo 45 13:34 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan With H5 avian influenza on our doorstep, the Albanese government's $100 million investment in biosecurity preparedness is critical. It's helping organisations like the Perth Zoo, in my electorate of Swan, to protect threatened species in captivity. H5 bird flu is a growing global threat, and Australia is the only continent in the world where it has not been detected. But experts are clear: this will change. Overseas, H5 has devastated wild bird populations and disrupted agricultural industries that communities rely on. H5 does not recognise borders. It does not stop at our coastlines. It spreads quickly and without discrimination. That's why preparedness matters. The Albanese government has provided over $200,000 to strengthen the Perth Zoo's biosecurity measures for numbats, black cockatoos and the critically endangered western ground parrot. When I visited the zoo earlier this year, I saw this funding in action, including in new roofing that prevents wild birds from entering enclosures. I met amazing zookeepers like Sara Amies and Vicki Power. Their expertise is critical to protecting these species. It was fabulous to be hosted by the CEO, David van Ooran, and Kaylee Martin. It's important that we protect these species for future generations. Public Sector Governance 45 13:36 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin After robodebt wrongly accused hundreds of thousands of Australians of being in debt, this government promised that it would never let something like this happen again. Now, the government is rolling out tools for automation in aged care and the NDIS, so that your level of support is determined by an automated tool and human assessors are not allowed to change or override a decision even if they think it's wrong. This comes more than two years after the robodebt royal commission recommended a legislated framework for automated decision-making in government and clear transparency and oversight. Despite the gravity of getting this wrong, the government has not acted on this recommendation. I'm not arguing against the use of automated tools. Done well, automation can help government move faster and be more efficient. But we need a clear framework for the use of automation to prevent a repeat of robodebt. This framework must be legislated and mandatory for government. It must include transparency requirements so Australians can understand automated decisions that affect them. It must include decision-level controls so that government gets the decisions right. And it must embed provisions for review and oversight so Australians can be confident that the government is following the rules for automated decision-making. This is how we get automated decision-making right. This is how we unlock government decisions that are fairer and faster. Thornton, Ms Olivia 45 13:37 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean I wish to acknowledge Olivia Thornton, who is concluding her time as Chief Executive Officer of Cricket ACT, marking the end of an extraordinary period of leadership for the organisation and for cricket in the territory. Olivia has led Cricket ACT through one of the most defining chapters in its history and is leaving the organisation stronger and more connected and well positioned for the future. Olivia played most of her club cricket in Sydney, playing pathways and state-level cricket in New South Wales, with a stint over in county cricket for Nottingham. As Cricket ACT's first female CEO, she broke new ground while delivering results—from record participation growth across boys' and girls' cricket, to the reinstatement of ACT pathway teams, strengthening community engagement throughout Canberra. A highlight for me was working with Olivia to secure upgrades to facilities at Chisholm Oval to ensure the oval can remain one of the ACT's stand-out grounds. Her commitment to ensuring cricket has impact beyond the boundary, through partnerships with charities and community organisations, has been a hallmark of her tenure. I thank Olivia for her service to the Canberra community and I wish her every success as CEO of Tennis NSW. She is a first-class cricketer and first-class person. Let's continue Olivia's work to get that Big Bash team here in Canberra. Cost of Living 46 13:39 Mr KENNEDY 267506 Cook What will the Easter bunny be bringing this year? A couple of chocolates? A bunny? A lolly or two? How about an eye-watering power bill? How about a mortgage repayment that makes your eyes water as well? How about grocery prices that make you think twice about inviting family or friends over for that Easter lunch? For some families this year, the Easter bunny won't be making an appearance. They won't even be able to afford the fuel to go away with friends for the long weekend or to see extended family. When parents should be getting ready to take a break, unwind and spend time with family and extended family, instead they're going to be thinking about how they'll afford the extra $27,000 in mortgage interest alone, or the extra $1,400 in energy bills, or the extra $1,400 in fuel, or wondering about the fuel rationing the Prime Minister might announce tonight. Well, this reduced standard of living hasn't just come out of thin air. This government has been failing, year after year, to have the foresight to prevent crises. Energy is the economy. What we've done on electricity and gas was wholly foreseeable. This government is always flat-footed, behind and slow to react. I sometimes wonder: who would do a better job—the Easter bunny, or the Prime Minister in charge of this country? National Reconstruction Fund Corporation, Macquarie Technology Group 46 13:40 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong I'd love to inform the House that the National Reconstruction Fund, established by the Albanese Labor government, has announced that it's making a $200 million hybrid note investment into Macquarie Technology Group. Macquarie Technology Group is a 100-per-cent-Australian-owned startup company that has been around for a while and has a significant footprint in Bennelong. It provides sovereign cloud cybersecurity services and AI infrastructure for mid to large Australian businesses, critical infrastructure sectors and, importantly, government agencies. This investment by the NRF will support the secure protection of sensitive data and ensure that it remains safely in Australia, exactly where it should be. This huge investment has a big impact for everyday Australians—not just for our personal data, but for workers too. The NRF's investment is set to create 140 really highly-skilled job opportunities with Macquarie technology that specialise in innovation and software engineering. This investment will mean that Macquarie technology can scale up its services in Bennelong to platform crucial growth in AI-enabled cybersecurity and build out a sovereign data facility. Australian companies need local cybersecurity capability to compete and win on the global stage. It's because of the Labor government that they can do it. Cost of Living 46 13:42 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I rise today to speak for the families in my electorate of Capricornia who are looking at the calendar this month with a sense of dread rather than excitement. Easter should be a time for families to come together to enjoy a well-earned break and to share in the simple traditions that make our community strong. But for far too long, for many people in Central Queensland the reality of this economy has been biting hard. The simple truth is that Australians are struggling to afford Easter this year under this Labor government. Whether it is the price of seafood for a family meal on Good Friday, the cost of fuel to drive to see the grandkids or even the basic cost of chocolate eggs for the kids, the soaring cost of living is stripping the joy out of the holiday season. In towns like Rockhampton, Clermont and Sarina, I'm hearing from parents who are having to make heartbreaking choices. They aren't choosing between different luxuries; they are choosing between paying their electricity bill and providing a traditional Easter celebration for their children. Under this Prime Minister, the promises of relief have turned out to be nothing more than empty words. It is simply not good enough. This government is completely out of touch with the financial pain being felt in the regions. Our families deserve better than a government that stands by while Australians struggle to afford Easter. It is time this Labor government stopped the spin and started delivering real economic solutions for the people of Capricornia and the rest of the country. Wages and Salaries 46 13:43 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt Yesterday, the Fair Work Commission handed down a long-overdue decision: they abolished junior rates for Australians over 18. This is a massive win for young workers in retail, fast food and pharmacy and a major step towards a fairer workplace system in this country. Eighteen-year-olds are adults. They can vote. They can drive. And they face the exact same cost-of-living pressures as every other adult. They do not get a discount on their rent, they do not get cheaper groceries and they do not pay less for petrol simply because they are 18, 19 or 20. This decision is going to make a real difference to around half a million young workers across Australia. I want to thank the SDA and Gerard Dwyer for their relentless 'Adult Age = Adult Wage' campaign. I also want to particularly acknowledge Michael Donovan. For 30 years as SDA's Victorian state secretary, Michael has stood up for some of the lowest paid workers in this country. Persistently and effectively, he has fought to deliver real change, and yesterday's historic decision is a testament to that work. From now on, adult age means adult wage. O'Connor Electorate: Fuel 47 13:45 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor I rise today to make the House aware of the dire predicament of just one of the 46 local government authorities across my electorate of O'Connor. Rebecca McCall, CEO of the wheatbelt shire of Narembeen, has shared the results of their recent community survey. The survey confirms a rapidly worsening situation, with farmers, local business, essential workers and residents all reporting growing difficulty securing fuel, sharp price increases and escalating disruption to freight deliveries and essential services. For farmers, this could not come at a worse time. With recent rains, seeding is imminent, and uncertainty around fuel and fertiliser supply places production, productivity and long-term financial viability at risk. Beyond agriculture, there are emerging threats to food supply, health services and emergency response capability, all of which depend on reliable fuel access. Regional Australians do not have the luxury of alternatives. Fuel is not optional in communities like Narembeen. It is fundamental to keeping people safe, keeping business operating and placing food on the table. The Shire of Narembeen survey highlights the ongoing failure by this federal Labor government to deliver meaningful fuel cost relief and to ensure reliable fuel supplies to regional Australia. Regional communities like mine deserve certainty of supply, fairness in pricing and guaranteed essential service provision—nothing less than their city cousins receive. Bendigo Electorate: Health Care 47 13:46 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo I'm really proud to stand here in the House today and say that Bendigo's largest GP clinic today will become a Medicare bulk-billing practice. The Bendigo Primary Care Centre is our largest. It has 39,000 patient records. It has 23 doctors. It has nurses and allied health. It is a big clinic, and from today it will be a 100 per cent bulk-billing clinic because of our government and our investment in Medicare. The centre is co-located with another great Labor legacy. It is co-located with the Bendigo Medicare urgent care centre, which is already bulk-billing patients. This centre is known to people in Bendigo. It was built with the former Labor government's GP super clinic funding. It is on the health precinct, co-located with our Bendigo hospital. That is what is so profound and exciting about today. We have finally realised and achieved the vision of so many in our town. The original plan for this to be a bulk-billing clinic has now been achieved thanks to the investment of the Albanese Labor government. I'm so pleased to stand here today, and I really want to thank the doctors who've come on board to agree to bulk-bill all their patients and thank them for their patience and for working with us. Maranoa Electorate: Fuel 47 13:48 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa This Easter will be the hardest Easter for Australians in living memory not only because they're paying $27,000 more for their mortgage. Their electricity bills have gone up by 40 per cent and their insurance by 30 per cent. Now we've got a government that said there was no crisis on fuel, but, now they've found one, they're going to make sure that Australians are going to do it even harder over this Easter. Let me make it a little bit more local and give you a human toll. What will happen, not just for those that can't afford to pay their mortgage but for those that were going to go out and visit western Queensland? You see, this is the start of western Queensland's tourist season, because it starts to cool down. We get over 60,000 visitors out to the Australian Stockman's Hall of Fame, the Qantas Founders Museum, the Waltzing Matilda Centre in Winton and right back in to the Charleville Cosmos Centre and the Big Rig in Roma. We are already seeing cancellations because they don't have confidence that this government has handled this crisis of fuel properly. They don't believe that they can go out there and get from town to town and be able to spend money in these economies. If we don't have that money, we start to go broke. Then we rely on the weather, and we hope the rain comes and we can continue to produce your food and fibre. This is a stark reality. This is the human toll that we are seeing, from caravan parks in Stanthorpe all the way through to Longreach, which is the trail that many people will start on these Easter holidays. This is the human toll of an Albanese government that has mismanaged its economy and mismanaged our nation. Consumer Protection 48 13:49 Ms JARRETT 298574 Brisbane This government is serious about protecting Australians so they can keep more of what they earn. Today I joined the Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury to announce a crackdown on unfair trading tricks and traps. At a time when cost-of-living pressures are biting, Australians should be able to trust their markets to be transparent and not to be stacked against them. That's why we're introducing legislation to ban unfair trading practices, crack down on drip pricing and put an end to subscription traps. I know that everyone in this room has probably had trouble cancelling a subscription that they've signed up to. Just when you thought you could click that button and it would all be done, you find yourself down a rabbit hole. That's called a shutdown subscription trap, and we're cracking down on it. Businesses often use confusion, dark patterns or consumer fatigue to keep people paying. They won't be able to keep doing that. Have you ever tried to book a hotel, a flight or maybe even a ticket to see your favourite band, then you've gone to the check-out and found that fees have been added and the final price has gone up? That practice is called drip pricing, and we're cracking down on that too so Australians can see the real price upfront. Lastly, yesterday it was announced that Australians will no longer pay $1.6 billion in credit card charges from 1 October. When you buy that beer or you buy your groceries, you won't be slapped with these extra charges. These are more measures being taken by this government to keep more money in your pockets. Fuel 48 13:51 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Easter is a holy time. It's a time when families get together, and they look forward to those reunions. Often, they look forward to having their city cousins coming to the regions. But this won't be happening this weekend for many, many Australians. The reason for that is our metropolitan friends won't be able to visit the country, as they normally do, because they won't be able to afford the fuel—that's if they can actually get supplies of fuel. This is a disaster. This is a national crisis. Not that Labor would admit that, just a few short weeks ago, but all of us— Mr McCORMACK 219646 There are supplies, I hear the minister say. If there are supplies, why aren't they getting out to the regions? Why is Andrew Duff at Gooloogong, who is out of petrol, having to take his trucks off the road for three weeks because he can't get fuel? The minister says the supplies are there. Well, the supplies might be there, but they're not getting out to regional Australia, and people are going broke because of it. People are going bankrupt because they can't get their trucks on the road. Our farmers can't get the fuel in their tanks to sow the crops to grow the food to feed you lot—you ungrateful lot—who have deserted regional Australia for far too long. An honourable member interjecting— Mr McCORMACK 219646 You can yell all you like. Go out to regional Australia and tell them that, because they are jack of it. They have had a gutful of this government's poor policies. (Time expired) Labor Government 48 13:52 Mr SOON 298618 Banks Last weekend, I spent some time in the great suburb of Peakhurst, right in the middle of my electorate of Banks, knocking on doors and speaking to residents. The locals in Peakhurst are focused on looking out for their health, ensuring their kids get the best start in life and managing their cost of living. I was so pleased to be able to tell the people of Peakhurst that, because of this Labor government's record investment in Medicare, there are now two fully bulk-billing GP clinics in Peakhurst. I was also able to tell residents that, thanks to the Labor government's Better and Fairer Schools Agreement, Peakhurst Public School, Peakhurst West Public School and Peakhurst South Public School will all be fully funded and that recurrent funding from the federal government has already grown significantly since we came to government. Last week, I was able to tell people about the government's suite of cost-of-living measures. Among them is the further tax cut they will be getting in just 91 days. Thank you to everyone who took the time to speak with me. I look forward to being back out in my community, knocking on doors, as soon as I get back from this place. I look forward to making sure the community's concerns are heard and this government can continue to work for them. Cost of Living 48 13:54 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay Once upon a time there was a little chicken running through a village shouting, 'The sky is falling, the sky is falling!' Everyone laughed. They laughed because it was too much—too over the top to be real. But let's picture her for a minute not in a village, but in a supermarket. She's in the Easter aisle, surrounded by pretty foil wrappers, and everything looks exactly as it should. She reaches for a 300-gram bag of mini eggs and turns it over—$37! Since when is a bag of Easter eggs $37? Suddenly, she's not a chicken; she's a mathematician. That bag is 11 bottles of milk. It's 12 loaves of bread. She grabs a 100-gram Cadbury bunny instead—$9.50! That's three loaves of bread for one hollow ear. Even the hot cross buns are $1.38 a pop. I suppose we should be grateful. The real miracle of Easter is finding a chocolate egg that does not require a second mortgage. Here's the part that isn't funny. Families are skipping Easter. One in six Aussie kids are growing up in poverty. Forty-five per cent of people are too ashamed to ask for help. One in three households are wondering what, if anything, they can put on the dinner table tonight. It won't be chocolate, that's for sure. The Albanese Labor government is saying, 'Everything is under control,' while families are frantically doing mental arithmetic in the aisles. The sky is falling. It sounds like a bad April Fools' joke, except it isn't; it's just what it costs to live right now—#costsofcelebratinginaustraliaunderthealabaneselaborgovernment. (Time expired) Propel: Australian Submarine Scholarship Program 49 13:55 Ms CLUTTERHAM 316101 Sturt Last week, the Albanese Labor government launched the Propel: Australian Submarine Scholarship program, a $15.8 million initiative to support the development of Australia's future nuclear-powered submarine workforce. Under this program, up to 3,000 scholarships will be offered to students studying priority STEM subjects at Australian universities. As well as financial support, the program will provide opportunities for the students to learn from accomplished Australian scientists and engineers. The program is being delivered through a partnership between the Australian Submarine Agency and the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering. Its purpose is to grow the highly skilled workforce needed to deliver and sustain Australia's nuclear-powered submarines, the SSN-AUKUS class boats, which will be so critical to our maritime defence capability. Over the coming decades, 20,000 highly skilled jobs will be created across Australia in aid of the nuclear-powered submarine program, including almost 10,000 at various stages across the program in my home state of South Australia. That we need a pipeline of qualified and motivated workers is an understatement, and the Propel program will help to shore up and ready this workforce capability. Greater degrees of self-sufficiency is all about the Albanese Labor government's deliberate policy agenda of a Future Made in Australia. Fuel 49 13:57 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume Searching for a servo that's not empty, filling up a car at an exorbitant cost, cancelling travel plans altogether—this is the Easter that so many Australians face. Instead of a happy holiday, for many, there will be uncertainty. Yes, the fuel crisis started abroad, but it has been amplified here in Australia by complacency and confusion from this government. First, the energy minister denied there was a crisis. He is a gaslighter extraordinaire. Then, after admitting there was a problem, he sat on his hands. He outsourced his responsibilities to the so-called fuel tsar, and then he blamed Australians for buying too much. He and the PM told us there was plenty of fuel. But, if that's the case, move the fuel. Meanwhile, we know that over 600 servos are without fuel. Then, after the coalition proposed a fully costed plan to slash the fuel tax on Friday, Labor took the weekend off, and then on Monday, they begrudgingly adopted our plan but couldn't say how they would pay for it, adding to the inflationary fire that the Treasurer has overseen. This government's failure to prepare has become its failure to act, and a failure to act always lands on the shoulders of the Australian people. Fuel 49 13:59 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence Today is the day. Our promise to cut the fuel excise by 50 per cent has started to come into effect. These changes cut 26.3 cents per litre from fuel prices, saving around $19 on a 65-litre tank. For families across the north, that's not loose change; that's groceries and school supplies. It's a bit of breathing room at the end of a long week. Because, when fuel goes up, everything goes up—the weekly shop, getting to work, getting the kids to school and even the cost of keeping small businesses moving. This is practical cost-of-living relief delivered now, for tradies heading out of the crack of dawn, for shift workers arriving home late, for truckies keeping our shelves stocked and carrying Australia. This matters. It means fewer tough choices between filling the tank and paying the bills. It means supporting the very people who keep our economy moving every single day. Importantly, it recognises that Australians should not be punished at the pump for global pressures beyond their control. We are stepping in, easing that burden and putting money back where it belongs—in the pockets of everyday Australians. At the end of the day this is about fairness. I'll tell you something else about fairness. It would be fair of the opposition to start supporting the leader of this party and of this country in getting on with making the lives of everyday Australians that little bit better, and stop politicising the fuel crisis on our borders right now. The SPEAKER 53517 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 50 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Fuel Security 50 14:00 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Prime Minister. Yesterday the Prime Minister told ABC Melbourne 'fuel supplies have not been disrupted'. Tonight the Prime Minister will deliver an emergency address to the nation. Prime Minister, what has changed since yesterday? 14:01 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Nothing has changed since yesterday—neither this government's resolve to deal with issues of supply and the cost of living nor the opposition's approach to these issues, which are outlined in their talking points that are out there for all to see. Their talking points suggested that, rather than act responsibly, what they would do was talk up issues that are facing Australians. The issues are real. The war in the Middle East is real. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left will allow the Prime Minister to update the House on this issue. Mr ALBANESE R36 The war in the Middle East is absolutely real, and that is why I certainly agree with the statement, which is real as well. I'm actually talking to Andrew Hastie, the deputy Liberal leader in the House of Representatives, who said—and this will be consistent with what I will say tonight—this is where every Australian has to just keep calm and carry on, and do what they can to look after themselves and their neighbours. We've got a lot of oil and gas and other precious commodities trapped in the Persian Gulf behind the Strait of Hormuz, so until the war is resolved we're going to feel supply pressures. That was real when the member for Canning said it. It's real when every member of the government understands it. But it's also real to say that every single shipload of fuel that was due to come here in March arrived on schedule. That is absolutely true. What is required at times like this is to be considered, be orderly and work through issues—not to pretend there aren't challenges. The government doesn't pretend that; they're being faced by the entire world, whether they be issues of supply down the track or whether they be income pressures that are on people. That's why we've acted on both of those issues in a responsible and orderly way, which is how my government operates here. Fuel Security 50 14:03 Ms DOYLE 299962 Aston My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government helping to shield Australians from the worst of the impacts of the war in the Middle East? 14:04 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the fantastic member for Aston, who, three years ago today, became the first government member to win a seat off the opposition in the House of Representatives in 100 years, and then turned that victory in a by-election into being re-elected as the member for Aston last May. The war in the Middle East has caused the biggest spike in global fuel prices in history, and Australians are feeling and seeing that across the economy. I know people are doing it tough, which is why we've acted to make a real difference. From today, we've halved the fuel excise, directly helping families and businesses save 26c per litre at the pump. We're backing truckies, slashing the heavy vehicle road user charge to zero and making sure that they get paid fairly and on time, with the legislation we brought before the parliament just last week. Australia's national strategic reserve is now law, so shiploads of fuel, fertiliser and other essentials can flow into our economy. We're giving small businesses more economic breathing room and support through the Australian Taxation Office and the measures that we've taken there. Leaders across state and federal jurisdictions have adopted the National Fuel Security Plan. Importantly, it's been adopted across the political spectrum by the eight states and territories, as well as the Commonwealth, so we're ready for what may come in an orderly way. We're planning and making sure that we put those procedures in place. No government can eliminate all of the pressure, which is on right around the world. That's just the truth, and we're being straight with people about that. There are challenges ahead, but, no matter what the world throws at us, we can take action and we will continue to take action. We'll do it in the Australian way, backing in our national interest, securing our economic resilience and making sure that any measures we take to deal with short-term issues also set us up to be more resilient in the future. We're learning the lessons that are there from being at the end of supply chains and making sure that we deliver real support to people that makes a positive difference as well. We're navigating those rough seas that are there at the moment, but we always have our eyes on the horizon—on the future—as well. Fuel Security 50 14:07 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to his previous answers. On Monday, the Prime Minister's statements included: 'Australia's fuel supply outlook remains secure' and 'There is more fuel available today than there was prior to the war commencing.' Since then, has the government received advice about any additional fuel carriers bound for Australia that have been delayed or cancelled? 14:07 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler The advice that I gave the parliament on Monday was correct. Every single ship that was due to arrive here in March arrived. That is a fact. Of the 81 ships that were due to arrive here in April, six were cancelled. They were more than replaced by six plus three—nine—additional ships arriving. In addition to that, of course, extra fuel is available from that produced here, because what we did was change the standards for both petrol and diesel so that every bit of fuel that's produced here is kept here domestically. That adds to supply as we go through. We continue to engage with our international partners as well. A range of further discussions will take place over future days, including over Easter. We'll continue to engage with our partners. We're a reliable supplier of energy security around our region. We expect that to be reciprocated. Cost of Living 51 14:09 Ms AMBIHAIPAHAR 315618 Barton My question is to the Treasurer. What steps is the Albanese Labor government taking to help Australians with cost-of-living pressures brought on by the war in the Middle East? How does that compare to other approaches? 14:09 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin What a wonderful addition to this parliament the member for Barton is already. I thank her for the question and her work in her local community in Sydney. All of Australia and, indeed, all of the world's economies are going through a very substantial shock. The people of Australia didn't choose these circumstances, but they are paying a very hefty price for them at the petrol bowser and more broadly as well. We acknowledge that, we understand that but, more than that, we're acting to step up and step in where we responsibly can to help people through a difficult period. Now, a big part of our efforts is working with industry, with states and territories, with international partners, with regulators, with unions, with communities and with others to make sure that we are working together as much as we can to work through these serious issues in a serious way, befitting the pressures that we know Australians are feeling right around the country. So our plan, whether it's about securing supply, making sure the distribution is working, cracking down on the rip-offs, helping with the cost of living and helping small business—all of that—is about working in a cooperative way and a collaborative way where we can. Today, the Minister for Small Business, supported by the Assistant Treasurer and others, brought together the peak business groups, the BCA and COS BOA, as well as the ABA, the Banking Association, to see what we could do to make sure in particular that our small businesses are being well supported. I want to thank the small business minister for her work in this regard. It also means, when it comes to the tax office, that the tax office is being supportive and flexible where it can, recognising the temporary pressures that a lot of wonderful Australian small businesses are feeling as a consequence of the war in the Middle East. Earlier this week we cut the excise, halved the excise, to provide cost-of-living relief for motorists and truckies as well. Work was done by the transport minister and others with the PM to ensure that that relief is already flowing. We've seen reports from the NRMA that that relief is already flowing today. Obviously, the full benefit will be felt in the coming days, but the NRMA has made it clear that that relief is already flowing. I've asked the ACCC to provide us with a report today on how that rollout is happening. The contrast here is really clear, and we see the contrast in the leaked coalition talking points that we read about this morning. This is a government working through serious issues in a serious way. What we know from those talking points is that those opposite are desperately hoping that Australia fails. We know from their talking points they're desperately hoping that Australia fails because they see a political opportunity in that for them. Is it any wonder that they were performing better under Sussan Ley than they are under the member for Hume? (Time expired) DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 51 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Acknowledgement 51 14:12 The SPEAKER 53517 I'm pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery today is a Commonwealth Games Australia delegation, including: Ben Houston, the President of Commonwealth Games Australia; Craig Phillips AM of Commonwealth Games Australia; Petria Thomas, the chef de mission for Glasgow 2026; and Cody Lynch. We're also welcoming today Councillor Jill Whittaker OAM, the Mayor of Campbelltown, as a guest of the member for Sturt. I also see Mrs Yvette D'Ath, the former member for Petrie in this place and the former attorney-general and minister for justice in the Queensland state parliament. In the southern gallery is a group of students and teachers from Carine Senior High School visiting from the electorate of Moore. Welcome to you all. Honourable members: Hear hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 52 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Gambling Advertising 52 14:13 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, many Australians have lobbied tirelessly for gambling advertising reform, so you can imagine how interested we are in today's media report that the government is set to announce some reforms. To be clear, they are only a first step, though, because they will only partly address just one of the 31 recommendations in the Murphy report. So what is the veracity of today's report and what's the government's plan to address the other 30 recommendations? 14:13 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler The government has not made any decisions. We work things through in an orderly way, as I've said to previous questions regarding gambling reform. We haven't concluded what we're doing. We've worked through and are continuing to consult appropriate interested parties, including members of the crossbench. But I've made it also very clear that my view is probably different, it's fair to say, from the member for Clark. With respect, he's long been an advocate in these issues. I think that we need to get absolutely the balance right between people's right to have a punt and the view that I have, which is that it is too prevalent and that people, particularly young people, should be able to watch sport and not see a link between sport necessarily and gambling. We need to de-link those issues. The government continues to work on these issues. I don't know, with regard to the member for Clark's suggestion, what's been supported and what hasn't been supported. When the government makes decisions, which it makes collectively, it then announces them. Fuel Security 52 14:15 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. With the war in the Middle East disrupting global supply chains, how has the Albanese Labor government acted to strengthen Australia's fuel security? 14:15 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the member for her question, and likewise congratulate her on her contribution in this House. In the time that she's been here, she has been a much valued colleague. Securing Australia's fuel supply has been the focus for this government since 28 February. Since the National Security Committee met at eight o'clock in the morning on the day after the bombing of Iran, that has been our focus—and in all the meetings since. It was our focus when we changed the fuel quality standards. It was our focus when we released 20 per cent of the strategic reserve. It was our focus when we changed the diesel standards. These were all actions undertaken by this government—not called for by the opposition, not suggested by the opposition. The opposition, when we've done it, have said, 'They've been too late,' even though they've never suggested them in the meantime and have never called for those actions. But it's also what's driven our legislation in relation to giving Export Finance Australia the capacity to support Australian importers and refiners to go and get the fuel that is available in the world for Australians. I'm pleased to tell the House that the legislation, of course, passed the House on Monday, passed the Senate tonight and will be submitted to Her Excellency the Governor-General for signature this evening, and subject to her agreement will be the law of the land and will be implemented tomorrow. But we're not waiting. I can also tell the House that Export Finance Australia has been in detailed conversation with 10 separate companies about going and getting those cargoes, and those conversations started on Sunday, just after the Prime Minister and I announced this intervention. This gives us the best chance in a very difficult international environment—with supply chains under real pressure, with real pressure from the Middle East—to go and get those cargoes for Australians, where we want them in the national interest. And that's a good thing. We also continue our engagement with our supply partners, our international partners. This morning, I met with my friend and much valued colleague the Singaporean minister for energy Dr See Leng Tan, who is in Australia at the moment, to discuss the energy crisis. I had a very good chat with him. He informed me he's gone to see Senate question time, which I told him was a very poor choice on his behalf! Nevertheless, he's in the Senate chamber as we speak. He assured me, as Prime Minister Wong assured Prime Minister Albanese earlier this week, that Singapore regards their role in supplying our liquid fuel security most seriously indeed. Tomorrow, I'll be meeting with my Brunei ministerial counterpart, Dato Azmi, who is another important supplier for Australia. That discussion is important as well in terms of ensuring the flow of energy between our two great nations, Brunei and Australia. So, whether it's international engagement or giving our agencies the tools they need to get the job done, securing Australia's fuel security has been our focus since 28 February. (Time expired) Fuel Security 53 14:18 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning My question is to the Prime Minister. Yesterday, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy said: The truth is all the ships are arriving. But there are reports today that government ministers have cancelled travel and events in April. Has the government received advice of any additional fuel ships bound for Australia that have been delayed or cancelled? 14:19 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for his question. If he's referring to what was a proposed trip by me for Anzac Day in Gallipoli on 25 April—yes. Because of the circumstances of travel to Turkiye at the moment, obviously I have cancelled it. I've prioritised what we are dealing with at the moment, engaging with our regional partners—that's the responsible and the right thing to do. Fuel 53 14:20 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur My question is to the Minister for Transport. What work is the Albanese Labor government doing to support Australians and the transport industry, who are feeling the impacts of war in the Middle East, and who is standing in the way? 14:20 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I very much thank the member for Macarthur, and I know he won't mind me saying this, but I know he's a very proud dad of his son, who I first met on the Western Sydney airport construction site. He's a great construction worker. I understand he's now working on the M6, another terrific project for Western Sydney, so I do want to shout out to him. We have been working really closely with the transport and fuel industries to make sure we're all working off the same information and tackling challenges as they arise. This morning, the Treasurer, alongside the Minister for Small Business and the assistant minister, announced that the ATO will provide temporary relief to businesses unable to meet their tax obligations. We're also making it easier and faster for small businesses to access credit and working with banks on options for loan deferrals and other supports for customers doing it tough. I spoke last week with Tim, one of my local freight owners in Ballarat, and he told me these—amongst the fuel, excise and road user charges—were very much needed. They are happening alongside our temporary three-month halving of fuel excise and reducing the heavy road user charge to zero for three months. This will reduce the cost of moving essential goods across the country, taking pressure off every part of our supply chain. That helps Australians as they do the weekly grocery shop, visit Bunnings or make purchases from a local small business, and they've been welcomed by industry. This morning, I spoke with the Australian Trucking Association, who told us these changes will really help road freight operators feeling the pinch of high fuel prices. Road Freight NSW said it provided immediate and meaningful relief to operators, and the Australian retail sector has called the measures critical for retailers facing increased freight and shipping costs. This, of course, builds on the work that we've already done: releasing 20 per cent of the minimum stockholding obligation; underwriting additional cargo so we can get more fuel, fertiliser and other essential goods into Australia; amending the fuel standards for petrol and diesel to allow more supply into the market; strengthening the ACCC's hand in doubling penalties for companies found guilty of unfairly rising fuel prices; changing the Fair Work Act so transport operators in particular can renegotiate their contracts quickly to help cover rising fuel costs; and working with our regional partners, whether it's Singapore or Korea, to shore up supply, strengthen energy security and support the flow of essential goods. These are just some of the practical actions this government has taken within this week alone. From peak bodies to unions and to small operators, we have been taking these actions because they have told us that they are vital and urgent. Meanwhile, we see from the coalition's leaked talking points that they are being instructed to tell Australians that—despite that we do have a clear plan, they're going to pretend that there's no plan, and, despite our work to secure fuel supply, they're out there heightening fears within the community. There is no leadership from the Leader of the Opposition. Fuel 53 14:23 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister commit to releasing, on a daily basis, the latest information on (a) the number of service stations which are out of fuel, (b) detailed fuel stockholdings by location, and (c) the number of ships which are bound for Australia and how many have been cancelled or delayed? 14:23 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler (—) (): I'll commit to continuing to be transparent, continuing to provide information as me and the energy minister have done, continuing to be engaged as we have, not just in this parliament, but in the multiple press conferences that we've had before the entire—I've held more press conferences in the last month or so here in Canberra than his predecessor did in the previous three years. Tomorrow, I'll be at the National Press Club, again, being accountable to the entire population. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 53517 The manager will resume his seat. When the House comes to order, I will hear from the Leader of the House. Mr Burke DYW There's a new habit from the Manager of Opposition Business that, when he stands there and doesn't get the call, he shouts anyway. I just remind— Mr Burke DYW The microphone's not on. No-one hears you do it, but it just doesn't help with the order of the House. The SPEAKER 53517 On the point of order, the manager is entitled to respond. Mr Tehan 210911 Speaker, the Prime Minister was baiting me, and that's why I just— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. I'm trying to bring the House to order, and I'll just remind all members that it would assist greatly if people who are taking points of order wait for the call and simply state the point of order. We'll all have a happy life—at least my life will be happier. Road Transport Industry 54 14:26 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor Patience is a virtue. My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How is the Albanese Labor government easing pressures on the road transport industry? 14:26 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I'd like to thank the member for Lalor for her question and, of course, her ongoing advocacy for truck drivers right across this country. The spike in fuel prices as a result of the conflict in the Middle East is putting pressure on families and businesses. Of course, our government recognises these are challenging times for Australians, including for our road transport industry, and that is why the Albanese Labor government has taken swift action to secure our fuel supplies and ease pressures on businesses, households, truckies and the transport sector. Our government has reduced the heavy vehicle road user charge to zero from today for three months to help truckies continue their vital work for our nation. The government has also deferred the next schedule increase in the heavy vehicle road user charge by six months. In addition to these measures, we have halved the fuel excise for three months to make fuel cheaper for Australians. These measures are making a real difference across Australia, including to our road transport industry. The Australian Trucking Association chair, Mark Parry, describes these combined measures as a lifeline. In addition to these measures, I am very pleased to inform the House that Labor's fairer fuel bill passed the Senate on Monday. This bill creates an urgent pathway with a high threshold that allows truckies and transport operators to argue for a fairer share. Labor's fairer fuel bill has been welcomed right across the transport industry by the industry operators, the owner-drivers and, of course, the unions. Frank, a truck driver who was in parliament this week, said the amendment would go a long way to helping truckies manage rising costs. I am pleased to report to the House today that these laws are already having an impact. Zac, a truck driver, told me that the passage of these laws is already making a difference by encouraging negotiations. He said businesses are now coming to the party to make sure our higher fuel costs are covered, and this is a good thing. Truckies and transport operators, like Zac and Frank, deserve the increase in fuel costs caused by the conflict in the Middle East to be shared fairly across the supply chain and not be forced to shoulder these rising costs alone. It is only a Labor government that has and will take strong action to secure our fuel supply and help people with the cost of living and keep Australia moving. Fossil Fuel Industry 54 14:29 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, the Queensland LNP government is using its powers to fast-track drilling for oil in the Taroom Trough. Given our national fuel crisis, will Labor work with the coalition to fast-track approvals for Australian oil projects, including the Taroom Trough, so our country can build our own energy security? 14:30 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler The coalition won't be involved in this. The Queensland LNP is the Queensland government. I work constructively with the Crisafulli government. When it comes to any proposals, they go through our environmental laws, which we improved last year without the support of those opposite, so that what we can do is actually do things faster and more efficiently. Agriculture Industry 55 14:30 Ms TEESDALE 314526 Bass My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. How is the Albanese Labor government helping our farmers, fishers and producers to manage the impacts of conflict in the Middle East and to continue producing food for millions of Australians and our international neighbours? 14:31 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I want to thank my fabulous Tasmanian colleague the member for Bass. I know that the member for Bass has been talking to farmers and primary producers in her electorate, like many people in this building have, about how the war in the Middle East is impacting them at the moment and impacting globally. Certainly we understand that the work our farmers and foresters do underpins our food security, our regional economies, our national economy and, of course, our critical trading relationships. Over recent weeks, we know, they have been facing some challenges due to this war in the Middle East and its global impacts. That's why our government has been working day and night to help ease the pressure on our farmers and our fishers. We know that front of mind for our food producers is the fuel and the fertiliser, which is why we've been taking action to keep Australia moving and our farmers farming. We've passed legislation to underwrite the purchase of fuel and fertiliser by the private sector to help get these critical inputs into Australia and to our farmers that need them. We've halved the fuel excise on petrol and diesel. We've amended the petrol and diesel standards, and we're releasing up to 20 per cent of our strategic fuel stockpile to get more fuel into our regions where our farmers need it. We understand how important diesel particularly is for our farmers, for keeping our trawlers and our fishing vessels moving and for ensuring our heavy vehicles can continue to deliver our world-class food and fibre. Our Fertiliser Supply Working Group is set to have its first meeting tomorrow. This group will build on the work already underway in our government and across industry to help improve the availability of fertiliser for our farmers. We've heard also from the Treasurer today how we're helping small businesses, including our farmers and our fishers, to access credit by extending the small business responsible lending obligation exemption; and how the ATO will be establishing hardship measures which will also help our ag and fishing industries. As I said yesterday, with engagement with the industry, we have taken the decision to defer the full cost recovery for export services for one year until 1 July 2027. The chief executive of the Australian Meat Industry Council, Tim Ryan, said yesterday: They have listened and responded to industry concerns … That is exactly what our government has been doing this whole time with the war in the Middle East. We have been working with industry, listening to their concerns and working together in the national interests. All of us in this place and right across the country need to be working in the national interest, not going around with talking points to undermine what the government and industry are trying to do together. We should all be working to help shield all Australians, including our farmers and our fishers, from some of the worst impacts of this conflict in the Middle East. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 55 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Acknowledgement 55 14:34 The SPEAKER 53517 I would like to welcome the Mayor of Mackay, Councillor Greg Williamson, as a the guest of the member for Dawson. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 55 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Fossil Fuel Industry 55 14:34 Ms BOELE 26417 Bradfield My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. The government's east coast gas reservation is due to start next year. It will compel the three Queensland LNG exporters to reserve up to 25 per cent of our gas for domestic market. While most gas producers support the scheme, some, like Beach and Senex, have asserted that it could crush gas supplies. Minister, at the same time as you work urgently to end our reliance on costly fossil fuels, will the government stand firm on the domestic gas reservation scheme to ensure that our resources work for us and not multinational corporations? 14:34 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for the question. The answer is that we are very much absolutely confirmed and determined to introduce the gas reservation policy announced by the Minister for Resources and me just before Christmas. We announced it would start on 1 January 2027, although we announced that also from the date of announcement we would regard any contracts entered into at that point as being new and therefore covered by the new regime. The Minister for Resources and I have been consulting very deeply. We called for submissions in December. That call for submissions closed about a fortnight ago. We received, I think, 53 submissions that the minister and I have been working through very carefully. We are now engaged in detailed design. There are a number of elements that need to be determined in close consultation with industry, and by industry I don't just mean gas producers. I also mean heavy industry and gas users. We are talking to both sides of the equation, if I put it that way. That's what a good government does—consults deeply. But ultimately the cabinet will decide the parameters of the gas reservation on the recommendation jointly from the Minister for Resources and me, and we intend to make sure it works for Australians because the gas that's under our soil and our waters should be gas that the Australian people have first rights to when it comes to the needs of heavy industry and the Australian energy system. Cost of Living 56 14:36 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt My question is to the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services. In the face of global instability, how is the Albanese Labor government taking practical action to protect Australians from rising cost-of-living pressures and to crack down on unfair fees and hidden charges? 14:36 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser I thank the amazing member for Holt, who has been an absolute champion for consumers throughout her time in this place. We know that Australian families, Australian workers, farmers and businesses are doing it tough right now. Conflict in the Middle East means higher fuel costs, higher inflation and supply pressures. That's why the Albanese government is focused on strong practical action that makes a real difference to household budgets and helps Australians deal with cost-of-living pressures right now. We've acted to make fuel cheaper for the people who need it by halving the fuel excise and reducing the road user charge for heavy vehicles to zero, cutting costs for families at the bowser and for truck drivers moving goods across the country. To ensure these savings are passed on, we've backed that up by increasing maximum penalties for price gouging to $100 million so unfair and illegal profiteering is met with real consequences. Today we also welcomed efforts by regulators and industry— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The minister will pause. The member for Fisher has been injecting all throughout question time. So you'll leave the chamber. Constantly in the last answer and this answer, your voice continues to chime in. Don't act surprised. If people are going to continually interject non-stop—everyone's had a pretty good go this week, but people have just got to control themselves. The member for Fisher then left the chamber. Dr MULINO 132880 Today we also welcomed efforts by regulators and industry that provide support at this difficult time through greater flexibility in the tax and in the banking systems, practical support to ensure businesses can continue operating, employing Australians and delivering essential goods and services. We're also cracking down on unfair business practices that quietly drain family budgets. Whether it's hidden fees added at the last click or subscriptions that are hard to cancel, this government, through the hard work of Assistant Minister Leigh, who introduced legislation to ban unfair trading practices today, is putting a stop to business tactics that cost Australians time and money and which sap their confidence. By strengthening protection against unfair contract terms, banning unfair trading practices, tackling subscription traps and banning drip pricing, we're cracking down on sneaky tactics that quietly rip people off. There are many products that deliver little or no value—subscriptions to news sites that you only use once, ongoing charges for apps that your kids downloaded or membership of the Liberal Party. That's because while under our consumer laws— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 No. The minister was— The SPEAKER 53517 I'll deal with this. You don't need to say it, so you can resume your seat. The minister wasn't asked about opposition policies or talking points. I'm going to ask the minister to be directly relevant. There was no tag in that question. Dr MULINO 132880 On this side of the chamber, we've been getting on with the job. Yesterday we supported the Reserve Bank's decision to ban card surcharging. This puts an end to excessive and confusing fees at the check-out, particularly when families are under pressure and every dollar counts. These had been nuisance fees that had rightly been annoying consumers for too long. It's this government that has acted. And while supporting Australians and standing up for consumers is in this government's DNA, the opposition, as always, continues to oppose or delay practical support. In uncertain times, Australians expect their government to be on their side, and that is exactly what we are doing. National Fuel Security Plan 57 14:40 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee My question is to the Prime Minister. Under the so-called National Fuel Security Plan, can the Prime Minister list who will be classified as a critical user? Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The minister for infrastructure, I can't hear the question. It's a two-way street. I've got to hear the question and then I've got to hear the answer. I'm going to ask the member for Mallee to begin her question again so that I can hear it. Dr WEBSTER 281688 Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Prime Minister. Under the so-called National Fuel Security Plan, can the Prime Minister list who will be classified as a critical user? 14:41 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for her question. I note that in the question she speaks about the 'so-called' National Fuel Security Plan. I hope that the member has informed Premier Rockliff, Premier Crisafulli and Lia Finocchiaro in the Northern Territory that she doesn't regard the hard work that was done over the weekend to produce the National Fuel Security Plan, and who, in the days afterwards— Opposition members interjecting— Mr ALBANESE R36 I was asked about the National Fuel Security Plan, and I am answering it. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The Prime Minister is answering the question. Just everyone— Mr Chester IPZ We'll wait till seven o'clock for it. The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the Nationals in the House of Representatives! I showed a great deal of respect for the member for Mallee. We just can't have a free-for-all. It's not on. Questions are going to be heard in silence. Courtesy was given to one side; do the same for the Prime Minister, or any other minister, answering a question. Prime Minister. Mr ALBANESE R36 Thanks, Mr Speaker. I was asked about the National Cabinet document that was agreed unanimously at National Cabinet. We know from their talking points, backed up by the questions they have asked here today, that they actually want things to get harder for Australians because they think it will be better for them. The SPEAKER 53517 Has the Prime Minister concluded his answer? Mr Albanese R36 Yes. Fuel 57 14:43 Ms JARRETT 298574 Brisbane My question is to the Minister for Housing, Minister for Homelessness and Minister for Cities. How is the current fuel crisis impacting housing construction? How is the Albanese Labor government responding? 14:43 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I thank the member for Brisbane for her question, and I acknowledge her outstanding advocacy for better housing opportunities for her wonderful constituents. The war in the Middle East is impacting Australia's economy, and as housing minister I am particularly concerned about the effect on housing construction. At the outset, I want to acknowledge the enormously constructive way this sector has engaged with me and with our government on some of the challenges they are facing. The Master Builders Australia, HIA, civil contractors, construction workers and others have been meeting regularly with me and my office and helping us understand the situation that they face today and indeed what is likely to happen over the coming weeks. They are strong partners of ours and are enormously strong advocates for their members. Industry have been really clear with us about two main things. First, of course, construction is an essential industry to our country. It is also amongst the largest users of diesel across the Australian economy. When fuel prices rise and when supply is disrupted in some way, that flows directly and immediately on to our construction industry and to our builders. Fuel is also a key part of the manufacturing process of materials that builders rely on. I think the parliament would be aware of the discussion that's been happening in recent weeks about PVC piping; that is a good in which oil is a direct input. The countries we usually buy that product from are experiencing issues managing the fuel shortages. There is one very important and immediate priority that the sector has put to me, and that is our government doing everything that we can to secure fuel supply. That is why the work of the Prime Minister and the work of the Minister for Climate Change and Energy—which they've spoken to the parliament about this week—is so important to our economy. The minister for energy has talked about releasing fuel reserves and adjusting standards so we can stretch supply further, and there's been the work of Export Finance Australia and the government in using the global and diplomatic channels that we have to make sure that we're at the front of the queue for future supply. The work with National Cabinet, of course, is absolutely essential. State premiers are helping us to make sure that fuel is getting to the parts of the country where it's most needed. The Treasurer and the Minister for Small Business announced today some of the leniency and support that will be offered to small business, which is absolutely critical for construction. I think the parliament would understand that this is a sector that is heavily dominated by small and microbusinesses, and they are going to need that support. The sector enters this challenge on a more stable foundation than it has been on. When we arrived in office, construction costs were rising at 17.3 per cent, the highest in 50 years. On last count, they were rising at 1.8 per cent. That doesn't mean there won't be challenges ahead. We'll work with the sector in partnership to manage them. Albanese Government: Automated Decision-Making 58 14:46 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin This is a question for the Attorney-General. It's coming up to a decade since the implementation of the robodebt scheme, but there's still no mandatory framework for the use of automated decision-making in government. There are now real community concerns about the use of automated decisions in aged care and the NDIS. You engaged in a community consultation on automated decision-making well over a year ago. When can we expect to see a legislated and mandatory framework for automated decision-making in government to prevent a repeat of robodebt? 14:47 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I thank the member for her question and for her ongoing interest in this important reform. The Albanese government is working to protect Australians against a repeat of the former Liberal government's illegal and immoral robodebt scheme. We are developing a consistent whole-of-government framework for the use of automated decision-making, or ADM, implementing recommendations of the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme. Responding to the royal commission with durable reform is a priority for the government, particularly where it strengthens the integrity, lawfulness and transparency of Commonwealth decision-making. For the benefit of the House, ADM refers to the use of automated systems to carry out administrative actions and make decisions. For example, when you receive a Medicare benefit on the spot instead of having to lodge a claim, that is an automated decision. A well-designed ADM framework will achieve much, including improving accuracy and consistency of administrative decisions, embedding robust safeguards and ensuring ADM tools are used lawfully, responsibly and with appropriate human oversight. It will also enhance public trust by providing transparency about when and how automation is used in government. It will also lift productivity and service delivery performance, enabling faster, more reliable services that are aligned with community expectations. I can assure the member the framework is being developed carefully and methodically to ensure that it supports innovation whilst maintaining strong protections for individuals, especially where decisions affect rights, entitlements or obligations. Striking that right balance is essential. The government has undertaken extensive consultation, including with the public, to ensure the framework reflects community expectations. Ongoing engagement is also occurring across government to inform the design of the framework, including work with agencies that do have significant experience deploying ADM in their frontline services. The Albanese government's approach is future focused and it's focused on delivery. It ensures Australia can responsibly adopt new technologies, derive better quality services in a more timely way and avoid the types of systemic failures identified by the robodebt royal commission. When I'm in a position to provide further information on the timing of these well advanced reforms, I'd be more than happy to engage with the honourable member and any other interested members. Health Care 58 14:50 Ms COFFEY 312323 Griffith My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. How is the Albanese Labor government improving access to free health care for all Australians? 14:50 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I thank the member for Griffith. She's made a terrific contribution already in her first year in this place. I know that in health that contribution is very much shaped by her time as the CEO of the Kookaburra Kids Foundation, a terrific service that supports kids who are impacted by family mental illness. By the time parliament returns, it will be a year since the last election. We have been busy delivering on all of the promises and all of the commitments that we made to the Australian people back in May last year, including to strengthen Medicare. Central to that particular commitment was the record investment we made to turn around bulk-billing on 1 November. Already more than 3,600 general practices across Australia are now bulk-billing all of their patients all of the time. We didn't expect to get to that number until 2028, but we are there already. I'm pleased to say that, in the member for Griffith's electorate, the number of 100 per cent bulk-billing practices has doubled since November. We're also delivering new models of care to better meet the needs of modern Australia. Today we've got 134 Medicare urgent care clinics open for business, delivering high-quality urgent care for people who have non-life-threatening emergencies. More than 2.7 million Australians have been fully bulk-billed. On 1 January 1800MEDICARE opened for business. It is delivering high-quality health advice 24/7 365 days a year as well as a referral to a free telehealth consult with a GP after hours on weeknights and right across weekends if the triage nurse thinks that's appropriate. Today I particularly want to say that the Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention and I were delighted to announce the next phase of Medicare Mental Health Check In. It's a service that's convenient, free and backed in by Medicare. From this week, that service will also provide Australians with low-intensity therapy services online or over the phone with qualified professionals. That's particularly for Australians who are experiencing more moderate or more temporary episodes of mental distress. That means better care for them, of course, but it also takes pressure off the higher intensity mental health services. Importantly, there is no need for a GP referral. Importantly, there are no out-of-pocket expenses. Importantly, it is high-quality care backed in by Medicare. That's 12 months of delivering on our commitment to strengthen Medicare, changing the lives of and making a real difference to millions of Australians. Fuel 59 14:53 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister list who will be classified as a critical user under the National Fuel Security Plan? 14:53 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for his question. The National Fuel Security Plan, as agreed by National Cabinet, says that preference would be given to critical users, such as life-supporting services, utilities and emergency services. Also relevant, although we've made very clear we do not contemplate needing to use it, is the Liquid Fuel Emergency Act, the instrument that is current, which outlines the essential and critical services. They are an ambulance service, a corrective service, a fire or rescue service, a police service, a public transport service, a state emergency service or equivalent organisation and a taxi service. This is determined by a determination issued by the minister for energy. I'm happy to table the current determination, which reads 'I, Angus Taylor, minister for energy, make the following determination'. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! When the House comes to order, I would like to hear from the honourable member for Cunningham. Tertiary Education and Training 59 14:54 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham My question is to the Minister for Education. What action is the Albanese Labor government taking to reform higher education and build the workforce of our future? 14:55 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I thank my friend the classy member for Cunningham for her question. Mr CLARE HWL Can't get anything past you, Daz! Under Bob Hawke and Paul Keating, the number of kids finishing high school jumped from about 40 per cent to 80 per cent. That was nation-changing reform. It created businesses and a workforce that otherwise wouldn't exist. A couple of years ago, I released the Australian Universities Accord. What that says is that, over the next few decades, we'll need a workforce where not just 80 per cent have finished school but they've gone on to TAFE or to university as well, and the accord sets out a plan for us to get there. Over the last few years, we've bitten off a big chunk of it. We've cut student debt. We're rolling out paid pracs for teaching students, nursing students, midwifery students and social work students. We're rolling out free TAFE and study hubs in the bush and now, for the first time ever, in the outer suburbs, and we're funding more places at university. This week we took the next step. Just yesterday, we passed legislation to set up the ATEC. That's the Australian Tertiary Education Commission. That'll help us to break down the barrier between TAFE and university, make it easier to move between the two and make it easier to get a degree more cheaply and faster. It'll also help to end the hunger games, where universities are eating each other alive for students. Instead, the ATEC will allocate places to individual universities. It will also help more kids from poor families, from the regions and from the bush to get a crack at going to uni in the first place. In the next few months I'll introduce legislation that will guarantee a place at university for kids from poor families, from the regions and from the bush. If you've got the marks or you've got the skills to take on a degree—if you've got what it takes, you will get a place. The Australian Tertiary Education Commission will help us to roll all of that out. That'll change what universities look like. But we've also got to change the way universities act. Students have got to be their top priority, and that's what the National Student Ombudsman is all about. The boards of universities have got to become more accountable, and that's what the next stage of reform is all about—including the use of consultants. And the university regulator, TEQSA, needs better powers to be able to act where universities don't or won't. That legislation is coming too. Great Western Highway 60 14:58 Mr GEE 261393 Calare My question is to the Prime Minister. The Great Western Highway is closed indefinitely, and two days ago a car accident on Chifley Road shut down all access in and out of the Central West. Ian Fitzgerald, who operates ICF Haulage, has 14 permanent employees. He's about to start laying them off because this closure is sending the business broke. Last week in question time you said: The truth is that all governments, state and federal … should have done something about this … It's true. So will your government now lead on delivering a support package for our local businesses being smashed up by this closure? 14:58 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Calare for his question, and it follows a question he asked in the House last week. I committed then to speak to Minister Jenny Aitchison in New South Wales, and I did so, as did the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government here. We've also been closely engaged, of course, with your colleague on this side of the House, the member for Macquarie, who has been very concerned. I've visited Mount Victoria and that part of the community with the member for Macquarie on a number of occasions over the years, so I'm very conscious that if the road there is shut then it has a real impact on the wonderful small businesses delivering services—in particular, in the tourism sector but others as well in that community. New South Wales has advised that the road is not safe, and it can't reopen until it is safe, and there can't be any shortcuts when it comes to safety. Management of the closure and the reopening decision, of course, sit with the New South Wales government, who are responsible for that area of the road network, and the expert advice that they receive. Based upon that advice, the New South Wales minister informed me that it's expected to remain in place for at least three months. This is a serious issue. The Australian government announced assistance for small business today, including temporary tax relief for businesses unable to meet their tax obligations due to fuel supply issues. It also includes more generous payment plans, remission of interest and penalties and support in varying PAYG, pay as you go, instalments where there's been a downturn in taxable income. New South Wales has also put in place significant support for businesses and commuters. I'm happy to continue to work with the member, as will the Minister for Small Business, the member for Cowan, and others on this side of the chamber. We will continue to work with the member for Macquarie as well, because we are aware and very conscious of the fact that this has occurred by absolutely no fault of any of the communities there, and that is why they are deserving of support. Cost of Living 60 15:01 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering cost-of-living relief for Australians, including in the social services portfolio, and are there any risks to this? 15:01 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney Thanks so much to the member for Canberra for her question. I was really pleased this morning to visit Vinnies Samaritan House here in Canberra with the member for Canberra and to meet Brett and Elizabeth and the whole team there at Samaritan House. We know that members right across this parliament love the work that Vinnies and services like Vinnies do around Australia, helping people at times of need. The war in Iran is a long way from Australia, but the impacts are being felt here. We're doing our very best to make sure that we're keeping the fuel supplies coming, but we're also doing our best to help Australians with the cost of living and the pressure that that's putting on Australian families. I was very pleased today to be able to announce that the Albanese Labor government is investing an extra $11.7 million in emergency relief funding for services like Vinnies and others right around Australia. That includes $8½ million for 196 Commonwealth funded emergency relief providers. Those services will get an extra 15 per cent on top of their annual funding. We announced that today. That will help them with things like food parcels for families that need that help. We're also putting almost $2¼ million extra into financial counselling and an extra million dollars for emergency relief providers that are in those Top End areas that have been impacted by Tropical Cyclone Narelle. The extra funding has been welcomed by UnitingCare, Anglicare, the Salvation Army and, of course, St Vincent de Paul Society. Vinnies said, 'This funding is welcome and necessary.' Anglicare said, 'This funding will help make sure people can get support when they need it most.' Of course, we're investing almost $460 million over five years in supports like this. When those opposite were in government, they cut $20 million a year from these programs. That's not all we're doing to help Australians with the cost of living. There are tax cuts and more tax cuts coming for every taxpayer. We've been supporting wage increases, paid parental leave expansion, three-day childcare guarantee, cheaper medicines, more bulk-billing, five per cent deposits for first home buyers and free TAFE and cutting student debts. Since we came to government, aged pensions have gone up by about $5½ thousand dollars a year, unemployment benefits have gone up about $4,300 a year, and Commonwealth rent assistance has gone up $1,900 a year. Opposition members interjecting— Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Those opposite are interjecting. When you were in government, you tried to cut a billion dollars from pensioner concessions and raise the age to 70. Fuel Security 61 15:05 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia My question is to the Prime Minister. Has the government received advice of any additional fuel ships bound for Australia that have been delayed or cancelled? 15:05 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon The Prime Minister has already answered that question. The answer is no, and the situation remains, as the government has said on multiple occasions. There were six ships scheduled to arrive sometime in April that were cancelled, and they have been replaced, and then replaced by more, with three spot cargoes, and I expect that number of spot cargoes to increase materially with the passage of the government's bill to enable Export Finance Australia to support the import of fuel. I can confirm that, for the month of April, orders that are finalised and confirmed amount to two billion litres of diesel, 719 million litres of petrol and 740 million litres of crude. Now, I'm not quite sure what case the opposition is trying to make here, but the case that the government is making is that the international circumstances are very uncertain. There is a massive impact on the global supply chain of oil and petrol, as we have been saying all through March, but our job is to secure as best we can the supply of fuel in those circumstances, and that's exactly what we've done. We have provided information on that transparently each and every day, and I'll continue to do so over Easter. Albanese Government 61 15:06 Ms WITTY 316660 Melbourne My question is for the Prime Minister. At a time of global uncertainty and economic pressure, how is the Albanese Labor government fulfilling its commitments and delivering for Australians. 15:07 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Melbourne for her question. She is the best member for Melbourne we've had here for some time. An honourable member interjecting— Mr ALBANESE R36 Always looking for unity across the parliament! We know that at the moment Australians are feeling anxious about what is happening on the globe. They watch it. The Middle East war means there are real pressures on people. There’s the uncertainty, from how it will end to when it will end. It means that the uncertainty is there. We acknowledge that. We're dealing with it. The job of leadership is to deal with immediate issues as they arise, but also to always have our eye on the horizon and how we build a stronger Australia going forward. That is what we have responded to. We have responded to the biggest spike in global fuel prices in history by cutting the fuel excise in half, establishing the national strategic reserve and delivering a national fuel security plan to make a real difference. But, at the same time, we've been focused on the agenda that we took to the election last May. Just this week, we have delivered on better wages, fairer prices and a stronger Medicare. We've abolished unfair junior pay rates. We've ended credit and debit card surcharges. We've taken action on unfair hidden fees and subscription traps online. And, from today, the Medicare mental health check-in service has started. It’s another week in a year of delivery, ticking off our commitments one by one. We have 134 Medicare urgent care clinics open, with just three to go. We have cheaper medicines and more GPs bulk-billing every patient. There's the biggest ever investment in women's health, including 33 endo clinics. We have 230,000 Australians owning their own home for the first time with just a five per cent deposit. The 20 per cent cut to student debt was delivered. The gender pay gap is at an all-time low. There are over 300,000 families and businesses with a cheaper battery, going forward. There are $10,000 incentives for construction apprentices and paid prac. There are 750,000 enrolments in free TAFE. There is an income tax cut coming in July. This is the last question time, of course, before the budget. We haven't bothered to have a question from the shadow Treasurer in the last question time before the budget. It shows that their focus is not on talking Australia up, just talking things down. On that note, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION 62 PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION Farrer Electorate 62 Issue of Writ 62 15:10 The SPEAKER 53517 I inform the House that today I issued the writ in connection with the by-election for the division of Farrer, and the dates fixed were those announced to the House on 5 March 2026. AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS 62 AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS Report No. 28 of 2025-26 62 15:11 The SPEAKER 53517 I present the Auditor-General's performance audit report No. 28 of 2025-26 entitled Settlement engagement and transition support program: Department of Home Affairs; Department of Social Services. Document made a parliamentary paper. BUSINESS 62 BUSINESS Leave of Absence 62 15:11 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That leave of absence be given to every Member of the House of Representatives from the determination of this sitting of the House to the date of its next sitting. Question agreed to. DOCUMENTS 62 DOCUMENTS Presentation 62 15:11 Mr BURKE DYW Watson Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 62 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Prime Minister 62 15:11 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a letter from the honourable Leader of the Opposition proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The Prime Minister's failure to lead during times of crisis. I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:12 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume In times of crisis, Australians look to leaders for clarity, for conviction and for direction. The strength of a nation's leadership isn't measured in the good times; it's measured in the tough times. The truth is, across our country right now, Australians are worried. They're anxious. They're deeply concerned about what the current challenges mean for them, for their families, for their businesses and for their communities. They're confused by mixed messaging coming from the government. These aren't abstract concerns. They're felt around the kitchen tables. They're felt at the cafes, at the pubs—wherever people gather, they're talking about it, and they're confused, they're worried and they're anxious. Australians remember, with great trepidation, the long days spent confined to their homes during the pandemic. They recall governments determining where they could go, who they could see and how they should live their daily lives. These experiences have not been forgotten. Australians want reassurance that the government has a coherent plan—one that is firmly anchored in the national interest and one that doesn't return us to the days of heavy-handed government intervention. Right at the heart of it, they want transparency. They want to know what's going on. That's how Australians are. And it's fair enough too. We live in one of the greatest democracies in the world, and transparency is a central principle in that democracy. In these circumstances, transparency means understanding what is going on with this fuel crisis. And we've heard the Prime Minister in recent days say that national coordination is essential and the Commonwealth government is responsible for national fuel security. But, two days later, he was back to denying any leadership role, saying the response to the fuel shortages was a matter for the states and territories, not a question for him. Then he was insisting that everything was fine and there was no crisis. Mistakenly, a few days later—I don't think he was supposed to do it—the energy minister said there was a national crisis. He said that. He realised what he'd said, and they went into a complete tailspin about it. Time and time again, we've heard the government say that there's lots of fuel, that there's more than there's ever been and that no shipments have been delayed or cancelled, or they've already been replaced. Today we asked a question, as we have every day, about what we are seeing in our supply chain and what fuel there is. We asked the Prime Minister to commit to releasing, on a daily basis, the latest information on the number of servos that are stocked out without fuel, the detailed fuel stock holdings by location, the number of ships which are bound for Australia and how many have been cancelled or delayed. I would have thought that, in the middle of a fuel crisis, they are pretty reasonable things for the Australian people to want to know about. You know what they were saying over there? They were saying, 'No, that's too political.' Several of the ministers yelled out: 'No, that's way too—we can't have the Australian people knowing the facts. That way, we can't spin our narrative.' Australians deserve to know what's going on. They are completely confused. The fact that a minister can stand here at the dispatch box and say that there is more fuel in our supply chain than there was before the crisis and then acknowledge under pressure that there are over 600 fuel stations without fuel—it is no wonder Australians are anxious. They're confused, and they want to know what is going on. Rather than being honest and open with the public, the opposition has had to pry information out of the government question by question in parliament, and they sneer. Every time they have to actually say what is going on, they sneer. They're sneering at the Australian people. They are sneering at people who want to know whether or not they can take their family on a holiday or to meet other family members or to go to church or to other events at Easter time. These people want to know—all Australians want to know—whether or not they can do that. The Prime Minister's lack of leadership was again on show in the response to our proposal for dealing with affordability of fuel at the bowser. We laid out a very clear plan, fully funded so it wouldn't fuel inflation, to bring down the price of fuel by over 26c a litre. You know what one of the ministers said that day? They said it was a 'thought bubble'. Then they went away and had the weekend off. They came in on Monday, and they suddenly realised in a panic that they actually had to bring down the price of fuel. They brought down the price of fuel. We showed leadership, and they showed a complete absence of leadership in dealing with this. Alongside transparency and responsibility, leadership requires accountability too. The lack of a willingness to take accountability from this government is like nothing I have seen. In the course of my career, I've not seen anything like it. Soon after this crisis began, they said that all the inflation that you're feeling and all the interest rate rises that you've seen were all caused by the crisis. But we know that, before this began, interest rates were already rising. Inflation was at the highest level of any developed country in the world. We also know that the Treasurer has found a long list of people to blame for his complete failures on managing the economy. He's blamed Xi. He's blamed Trump. He's blamed Putin. He's back to blaming Trump now. He'll always find someone to blame. The one thing he will not do is take accountability and fix the problem. There is no accountability at all. Australians are feeling the weight of this in their electricity bills, in their health insurance premiums, which are up 4½ per cent today, and in the cost of putting a roof over their heads, which is $28,000 a year after tax. I'm always reminded this is after tax. They're having to pay extra because of rising interest rates under this government. The lack of leadership from this treasurer and this prime minister has impacted Australians lives for the worse for the last four years. Not only had Australians been grappling with rising inflation, high inflation and rising interest rates going into this fuel crisis; they have also been suffering from an economy that just does not work for them. As I said in this place the other day, whilst the economy has grown by 7½ per cent, population in this country, mostly immigration, has grown by exactly 7½ per cent. It is no wonder Australians are having to work harder for less. Australians are struggling to put food on the table. So many families are struggling, and they are struggling now to put fuel in their cars. Australians are watching and they're worried. They are looking for leadership. They're looking for clarity. They're looking for action. They're not looking for confusion, contradiction and delay, and this government has repeatedly failed to provide the leadership that they need. I call on the government to get on with the job. On top of following our lead by bringing down the price of fuel, they should immediately make the fuel stocks—what's available across the supply chain: in servos, on the way to the servos and in ships coming to the country—transparent on a daily basis. It needs to be made transparent on a daily basis. They then need to move the fuel to those servos. We know there are 600 servos without fuel—that's the latest count, although we've seen other counts published of 800 or even 900 servos without fuel. There is a complete lack of clarity about this. But we know it's a lot because we see it when we're getting out and about around our electorates. It is time to move that fuel that they keep talking about to those servos so Australians can have confidence that it's there. They need to come clean about what happens next. If they are going to impose heavy handed mandates on Australians, they need to tell Australians that. Tonight, at seven o'clock, the Prime Minister has an opportunity to do these things. These are the tests for him tonight: showing transparency, accountability, responsibility and telling Australians where this goes next—because right now they have simply had enough. 15:22 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith Oh, the irony of the Leader of the Opposition moving a motion regarding leadership during a time of crisis! This is the man whose policy response to increasing our nation's fuel reserves was to store more of our fuel offshore, in another country, the United States. Imagine if the 'minister for offshore fuel' over there were the Minister for Climate Change and Energy now. With an international oil crisis due to the war in the Middle East, instead of being able to release 20 per cent of our fuel reserve, as our government was able to do over the last couple of weeks, if the Leader of the Opposition were the energy minister we'd be begging the United States to release and ship fuel to Australia, and the response from the United States could have been, 'Get your own oil.' That could have been the response that we'd got. But thank God we have a responsible Labor government in charge, which had the foresight to bring Australia's strategic fuel reserves back here to Australia, onshore, where they belong. During times of international crisis, Australians want stable, responsible leadership and cooperation, and that is exactly what the Prime Minister and our government are delivering during this difficult period. As soon as the war broke out in the Middle East, we convened the National Security Committee of cabinet to develop a plan to secure our fuel supplies and to keep prices as low as possible. Since that day, we've listened to the experts and consulted with the states and territories, but, most importantly, we've listened to the Australian people. We know that they are feeling pain because of the increase in international energy prices due to the war, and we understand the difficulties that this is creating for families, for households and for businesses. But we've developed a plan in consultation with the Australian people and the states and territories to maximise the supply of fuel, to minimise the price pressure, to crack down on price manipulation, to eliminate energy bottlenecks, to protect regional communities and industries and to prepare a plan for all contingencies. The conflict in the Middle East has reduced supply and inflated international prices for oil, and no nation, including Australia, has been able to escape that reality. We know that this is hurting households' and businesses' budgets, so we're putting in place measures to reduce prices. Today we've halved the fuel excise to 26½c a litre for three months, and that is already starting to flow through to prices at the bowser. We've cut the heavy vehicle road user charge to zero for three months to lower the cost for truckies, who are essential to keeping food on the shelves, and there is financial support as well. We're providing financial counselling for farmers, who we know are doing it tough due to supply constraints in rural and regional areas. We're also acting to increase supplies throughout the Australian market. We've released 20 per cent of Australia's strategic fuel reserves, about 760 million litres, predominantly of diesel. We're able to do that because we brought that strategic reserve back to Australia. Rather than having a voucher system where we would have relied on the United States to not only release the fuel but then ship it to Australia, we've now got the stockpile here. Those are the actions of a responsible government for a contingency such as this. We've temporarily changed the petrol and diesel fuel standards to get more fuel flowing. We've legislated new fuel security processes and powers to allow governments to underwrite the purchase of fuel on international markets to give supply confidence and to keep buying fuel for Australia's needs. And we're engaging with international partners. Over the course of the last couple of weeks, I've met with the Japanese minister, regarding fuel supplies, and representatives of the Republic of Korea to ensure fuel supplies to Australia. We're acting to stop price manipulation. We've doubled penalties for price gouging to $100 million. The ACCC has launched enforcement investigations into major fuel suppliers over anticompetitive behaviour. We've consulted the states and territories to develop a national fuel security plan endorsed by those governments, including LNP governments, and we've coordinated a response for supply by removing bottlenecks where they were occurring in the regions. As well as that, we've appointed a national fuel supply taskforce coordinator, who's working with the states and territories to ensure consistent supply and provide regular updates. But, most importantly, we're consulting with the Australian people. Our MPs and senators have been working with their communities regarding supply constraints and feeding that in to the minister for energy. We're working with the states and territories energy representatives and the premiers and chief ministers. We've worked with business groups, farmers and the agricultural sector, and they are on board with the plan. The only ones who aren't on board with the plan seem to be the opposition. This is what the Business Council of Australia's Bran Black said on 23 March: … that's the work that Australia's companies are doing collaboratively with the government. And that's the point that I want to stress. This is a time where we really do need to adopt a 'Team Australia' moment. We need to come together, we need to be working together, we need to be collaborative, we need to be engaged and we need to recognise that it's only by being together and working together that we'll get through it. …   …   … … the challenges that we're experiencing are largely driven by increased demand. That's the view of the Business Council of Australia, a peak business body. Then we've got the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry's David Alexander, who said on Monday: Fuel supply is at a national level continuing, but obviously there are hotspots where there are gaps in distribution and the government's working to plug those gaps. … …   …   … … the government announced it would underwrite the purchase of oil in alternative markets. … that's a very smart move by the government. That's the view of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. What have the National Farmers' Federation said about the government's plan? They said: The National Farmers' Federation welcomes the appointment of Anthea Harris as the Fuel Supply Taskforce Coordinator. …   …   … We acknowledge the global factors at the core of these issues, and that the need for a calm and considered approach to supply chain issues is imperative in responding to global trade and import disruptions. Even the deputy leader of the Liberal Party is on board with our changes to policy. Senator Jane Hume said recently: 'Interestingly, when you cut the fuel excise, you actually potentially reduce inflation. So the first effect is that it actually cuts inflation. It's great news for Australian families and small businesses who are going to pay less for fuel now.' Darren Chester, the Nationals leader in the House of Representatives, said: I think from an Australian consumer's perspective, they will welcome the relief. So we have the business community, the farming community, the Liberal Party and the National Party all on board with our government's approach to dealing with this international fuel crisis—all except the Leader of the Opposition. Isn't it ironic that the Leader of the Opposition talked about accountability? This is from the man who, when he was the energy minister, tried to hide increases in electricity prices for Australian consumers until after an election. He cannot come into this chamber and talk about accountability given his track record when it comes to electricity prices. What our government is doing is ensuring that we are working with the Australian people. Tonight, the Prime Minister will speak to the nation, the Australian people, about the difficulties and the challenges that our nation is facing. Most importantly, he will outline the actions that our government is taking—strong actions that are collaborative with the states and territories—to ensure that we do everything we can to boost supply, to reduce prices and to remove bottlenecks. The opposition are being critical. They have become rather hysterical over the last couple of days in their criticisms of the government. They're very good at the criticism. They're very good at parliamentary speeches. But what we haven't seen from the opposition is a plan. Where is your plan? What is your plan for the Australian people to get through this difficult situation? I'm not aware of any policies that have been released by the opposition, because they have no credible alternative plan. They have no detail, they have no pathway and they have no solution. Most importantly, they have no leadership. 15:32 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina The member for Kingsford Smith, the assistant minister, ought to know that the fuel excise cut was what the coalition asked—demanded, implored—the government to do, and the government then saw fit to do it. It was the plan put forward by the coalition. The road user charge was also proposed by coalition members to make sure that we could keep our trucks on the road. Speaking of keeping trucks on the road—I spoke to Andrew Duff from Goolagong. He's got a couple of trucks in that little town on the Lachlan Valley Way in the Cowra shire, and this is what he said to me. Labor members ought to listen to this. He said: 'We've got no reception; we've got no services. We've always bought bulk fuel off BP Lowes, and we're not hoarding. We've always paid our bill. I've always paid my taxes. I've been in business. I've had my own truck since I was 26, and I'm 41 now. This is the first time in 15 years that I'm staring down the barrel of financial ruin. That's hard to swallow because we've never defaulted on anything. I went to check the account three weeks ago because I knew what was coming. What a lot of these politicians don't understand, or maybe they do—I'm talking about this Albanese government—is that the margins weren't there before this happened. The base inflation is killing us. When I started out, I used to buy a 20-litre drum of Cat DEO for engine oil. It was $80. I bought oil; one of our trucks was out. We buy bulk everything now. It's the only way to save. It cost me $200 for 20 litres of oil the other day. The margins and the insurances have literally, and I'm not being dramatic in this sense, collapsed the industry. They have. But the thing is that they haven't realised it.' Andrew Duff and his wife, Claire, are good people. They are emblematic of people right throughout regional Australia. They can't afford to pay for the fuel for their trucks. That's if they are lucky enough to have fuel. Goolagong, in the Central West of New South Wales, has been out of diesel and fuel for three weeks, and that's simply not good enough. When the Prime Minister comes in here and says that he and his government are transparent—well, yes they are, because people can see right through them! The issue is about supply, accessibility, availability and affordability. All of those things have disappeared in regional Australia. It's just like the leadership of this Prime Minister and his government, because they have been missing in action right throughout regional Australia. And it's not just the truckies. It's also the farmers because it is sowing season. I know a lot of those opposite don't realise how crucial it is to have diesel at this point in time, in April and early May when the seeds go in the ground to grow the crops that are then harvested later in the year. That's how it works. But it can't work, and it won't work, if farmers have no diesel to put in their tanks to drive their heavy farm machinery to sow the crops—to direct drill and to scarify. Then, later in the year, they won't be putting their headers out in the paddocks because they won't have a crop to strip. And that is so tragic because the fuel security crisis will lead to a food security crisis, and that will lead to a national security crisis. And this is all on Labor's watch. What does the Minister for Climate Change and Energy do? He appoints Anthea Harris. My goodness! As if she's not busy enough already doing the review into the Water Act, he gives her his own job; he outsources his own job, for her to do it as well. That's not good enough, Minister—simply not good enough. It's as if the people of the Murray-Darling Basin haven't got enough on their plates and on their minds. Now the person who's supposed to be doing the Water Act review is now doing another task outsourced by the hapless minister. It's simply not good enough. This is the same minister who couldn't stop the boats when he had the responsibility to do so. Now he can't tell us what boats are coming and what isn't coming. It's simply not good enough. As a little aside, it's Easter this weekend. I just finished speaking to Rhiannon Druce from the Junee Licorice and Chocolate Factory. She said their sales for chocolate Easter eggs are at an all-time low because people simply can't afford them. The other thing is that people aren't going through their little shop because they can't afford the fuel to get out to that place. That is just a tragedy for that business. It's emblematic of what's happening right across regional Australia. 15:37 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid I have listened very closely to the contributions from those opposite, and I know that they speak with great passion for their constituents and farmers. If only they could convert that passion into a plan to bring more fuel into this country in the short-term, because they don't have a plan. During times of national crises, Australians want us to pull together. They want us to work together—the coalition, the crossbench— across the parliament in the national interest. And Australians do that best. We've seen that in natural disasters, with mates helping mates. We saw that during the global financial crisis, when the opposition, at the time, supported the bank deposit guarantee. And we saw that during COVID and lockdowns when the Labor opposition, at the time, supported JobKeeper to make sure that people were still getting paid. These were big shocks to our country, external to anything caused by any government at the time, but we all pulled together to get through. What we are facing at the moment is another big challenge. The Executive Director of the International Energy Agency, Fatih Birol, said: This crisis, as things stand now, is two oil crises and one gas crisis put … together. This is a time when we should be pulling together and working in the national interest. And we are. Even the member for New England, the One Nation member, is pulling together and willing to pitch in. The only people who aren't are those opposite. I want to be very specific when I refer to those opposite, because the crossbench have also been willing to contribute. I am talking about the Liberal and National members. Let's look at what they've been saying. Matt Canavan said: Now thanks to Labor's war on fossil fuels Australians are at breaking point. What a ridiculous statement! We are in this situation not because of our climate change agenda but because of the war in Iran. Let's get the facts straight. Senator Michaelia Cash said: … the government needs to come clean with the Australian people, and I have no confidence … At a time when we need people to trust in government, when we need people to listen to our messages, what do they do? Undermine trust in our political system, in our democracy and in our government. That is a complete and abject failure on their part. She went on to say: … get Chris Bowen in a blasted tanker and get him to drive it to those stations. They have completely misunderstood the lessons from their time in COVID, when Scott Morrison went around talking about not holding a hose and the constituency in Australia punished him for that. It's not that they want you to actually hold a hose. They want you to show leadership and be in the country, not in Hawaii. That's the message they were trying to send you. They don't actually want Chris Bowen to go around driving a tanker. That is ridiculous. They didn't want Scott Morrison to hold a hose. They wanted him to show leadership. Chris Bowen is showing leadership. He's in this country. He's standing up and showing leadership every day by getting more fuel supply into this country. Those opposite have been alarmists. They have been breeding mistrust in the community, and they have been causing people to panic buy and stockpile. It's little wonder that they cannot find leadership. Whilst they all have 'leader' in their titles, it's not about having 'leader' in your title; it's about showing up, the actions that you choose to take and the things that you choose to say. I could very well come up here and talk about the failure of the previous coalition government. I could talk about the fact that they didn't keep fuel reserves onshore—that they kept them in Texas. I could talk about their failure to incentivise Australians to electrify faster. I could talk about the fact that they let four of the six oil refineries leave our shores. But that would be petty. That would be politicising the issue. I'm not about pointscoring. I'm all about leading. 15:42 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey The member for Reid did just go there! Although I would remind her that two of those refineries were announced as closures under the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government, so those opposite should be very careful about criticising. The member for Reid talked about commentary in crises, and I was prepared because I thought this might come up today. I'm going to read out a few quotes from someone that gave commentary during a crisis—COVID, when we all needed to band together. We've heard from those opposite that you shouldn't be criticising leaders during COVID—that it's a failure of leadership if you criticised during COVID. Let's play bingo. Who said this? 'At this moment of crisis, the Prime Minister has failed to lead.' That was the then opposition leader, Anthony Albanese, during COVID. That's one. 'The Prime Minister has no plan, just more confusion and blame shifting.' That's two. It was opposition leader at the time, Anthony Albanese. Let's go with three. 'This government will blame any weakness on crisis, but that is disingenuous at best.' Who was that? Opposition leader Anthony Albanese. I've got a whole page. I'm not going to read them. I hope the member for Reid takes these to the Prime Minister and holds him to account for his commentary during COVID, because, let's be honest, we are sick of the sanctimony from this prime minister. His own words show the hypocrisy of this prime minister and show a complete failure in leadership. Let's talk about this failure in leadership. This prime minister is not a leader. At best, he's a manager. At best, he looks to manage the situation and spin it to his own advantage, and we've seen that this week. They do say that imitation is the greatest form of flattery. Well, the Prime Minister paid the coalition a great form of flattery—working proactively, offering policies to solve the challenges that we face—by imitating and copying our policy on Monday to cut the fuel excise and reduce the road user charge to take pressure off the Australian people. It was announced on Friday by the coalition. The opposition leader wrote to the Prime Minister. Three days later, on Monday, it became government policy. That is about leadership by the opposition leader—working constructively, bringing forward a policy that will take pressure off the Australian people. It was such a good idea that the Prime Minister took it, so well done, Prime Minister. But, surprisingly, Member for Riverina, there have been some members in this House that have criticised that policy. Surely not, in a crisis where fuel prices are above $2.50 and diesel is above $3. Mr McCormack 219646 Name them! Mr VIOLI 300147 Well, we can't name them, because they are nameless Labor backbenchers. They were happy to background against the Prime Minister and the Treasurer in the Australian, but they didn't have the courage to put their name to the quotes. We'll read those. This is a quote from an unnamed Labor backbencher that was backgrounding against the Prime Minister—the Prime Minister should start watching his back! They said, 'Surprised we've done this given how many of us were against it.' There we go! Here we hear the truth. The Labor backbenchers are actually against cutting the fuel excise. If you're struggling to pay your petrol bill, just realise that the Labor backbenchers didn't want the 26c-a-litre cut. Here's another quote from the unnamed backbenchers. There are multiple backbenchers providing quotes. They said: To say most backbenchers are perplexed would be an understatement. Two things have happened there if they're perplexed. If those backbenchers that are backgrounding and white-anting the Prime Minister are perplexed, that proves that it was not part of the Prime Minister's plan, and he took the coalition policy. Imitation is the greatest form of flattery. It also means that those opposite on the backbench are clearly not talking to their communities. They are clearly not talking to their communities and understanding that Australians are struggling, truckies are struggling, the diesel price— A government member interjecting— Mr VIOLI 300147 I'm making stuff up? I'm literally reading quotes your backbenchers provided. Talk to your colleagues. We'll go to the third quote, for the member for Hunter: We've studied article after article that says this doesn't help, it's a … short term sugar hit. Three unnamed Labor backbenchers are happy to background in the Australian. They've gone very quiet because they apparently don't support cost-of-living relief for the Australian people. Well, the opposition does, because we know our communities are doing it tough. We know that they need support. That's why the opposition leader led. He wrote to the Prime Minister, requesting this policy. The Prime Minister backflipped and followed us. But we know those opposite don't actually support relief for the Australian people. They said it in their own words. Could you be more out of touch? 15:47 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter When people in my community talk to me at local events, at mobile offices, at Cessnock, Singleton or Morisset Bunnings, they're not interested in political games. They're not interested in motions like this. They're not interested in cheap political pointscoring. What they are interested in is very simple. They want us to get on with the job. They want us to listen. They want us to act. In times like this, when a crisis is coming from beyond our shores, Australians expect their government to step up and lead with practical action. Right now people are feeling the pressure. They are seeing it every time they fill up the car. They are seeing it in their businesses. They are seeing it at their kitchen table when they're working out what the week ahead looks like. That's what's been driving the conversations I've been hearing back at home. The one thing I'll say about the people of the Hunter is this: they will always let you know exactly how they're feeling—thank you for that, too. They'll tell you straight up that fuel prices are hurting and cost of living is tough, and they just want to know what's being done about it. I've heard it from small business owners, tradies and families juggling mortgages and groceries all saying the same thing. They do not expect miracles, but they do expect us to take them seriously and do something practical. I've had people say to me: 'Just keep it simple. Just listen and do what you can.' That's exactly the approach I've taken. Last week I took those conversations directly to the PM. I've spoken with the relevant ministers as well, and I've made sure those voices are being heard. The important thing is they are being listened to and action is being taken. That's how this government works. We listen and we act because this situation of the conflict in the Middle East is pushing up fuel prices right across the world, and that is not something that we can control, but what we can control is how we respond. What I've seen and what my community is seeing is a government that is responding. We've halved fuel excise for three months, taking off more than 25c per litre of fuel. That's relief straight up. That's money straight into people's back pockets. We've cut the heavy vehicle road user charge to zero, because we know that, when transport costs go up, everything else follows. We're cracking down on petrol companies doing the wrong thing, with tougher penalties and real enforcement. And we're working with states and industry and our international partners to make sure fuel keeps getting to where it's needed most. At the same time, we're continuing broader cost-of-living support, whether it's tax cuts, cheaper medicines or strengthening Medicare. Now, that didn't happen in a vacuum. That happened because people spoke up and because this government is all about listening and acting. And that's the difference, because what Australians expect in times like this is not noise. They expect us to step up. They expect us to work together. They expect us to focus on them. Instead, what they're seeing from those opposite is the same old behaviour: oppose everything; knock everything; offer nothing—and that's at a time when Australians just want us to get on with the job. People see straight through that. They know it doesn't help them pay their bills. They know it doesn't help them make their fuel cheaper. They know it doesn't make their lives easier. What helps is action. What helps is listening. What helps is getting on with the job. And that's exactly what this government is doing. I've seen it firsthand. I've taken concerns from my community straight into conversations with the Prime Minister and ministers, and I've seen those concerns turn into real decisions. That matters, because it shows people that their voice travels from their street to their local member and through to the decisions at the highest level. That's what good governments do. That's what people expect. That's what we are delivering, because it's about keeping Australia moving and supporting communities like mine. So, yes, this is a challenging time, but what matters is how we respond. And this government is responding by listening to Australians and acting on their interests. That's what leadership looks like: not noise; not politics; just getting on with the job. That's what I'll continue to do for my community. My community is telling me, every single day that I'm speaking with them, that they actually want us and the people on the other side from us to work together on this. We, right now, are in a national crisis. It's not something that we ever should be arguing about. This is the second time in less than five months that we've been in a situation where we should be working together, and it's utterly disgusting that those opposite are playing political games with people's lives right now. It is putrid. You can see why their numbers are going down, down and down in the polls. You can certainly see it. You guys need to have a good hard look at yourselves and think about what Aussies want, because Aussies want us to work together. The people of the Hunter want us to work together and actually do better for them, instead of being up here arguing over petty little things. 15:52 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee Well, from panic buying to, apparently, tonight at 7 pm, a panic address by a prime minister who is really struggling to pull the narrative back to 'he's in control'. This MPI is about leadership and the PM's failure to lead. I do have a few pages here that might address that issue, but I really want to look at one. I asked the Prime Minister today in question time about the National Fuel Security Plan and whether he could tell us who will be classified as critical users. Well, he couldn't. He wasn't happy about the question and sat down. We asked it again, and we finally found out that it is emergency workers, as you would expect—the police, the SES, the ambulance and the firies. And we understand all of that. What fills me with dismay is that this Prime Minister and his cabinet do not understand that farmers and the trucking industry ought also to be in that critical user list. That's because, if our trucks stop, Australia stops. If farmers can't get their seed into the ground then it doesn't grow. And guess what? It doesn't make food, and they can't harvest it. Fuel is essential for our farmers. On top of that, urea is essential for our farmers. What is this government doing about it? Well, a little too little, too late, frankly. I would say that, right from the get-go, this prime minister has failed the leadership test, from the fact that he turns to us in the coalition, time after time, and says, 'Well, what's your solution? Come to me with your answers.' No. You are the Prime Minister and you have a cabinet who should be working with everyone to sort out these issues. These are complex issues. Nobody is denying that. But there are people who are being left behind, and they are people in regional Australia. The Prime Minister has repeatedly said he will leave no-one behind, but I would argue that he is absolutely leaving regional Australians behind. Of course. we called for the halving of the fuel excise on Friday. We also called for the road user charge to be dropped. By Monday, finally, the Prime Minister came forward and said: 'Oh, guess what we're going to do. We're going to halve the excise, and, in agreement with the states, we're going to drop the road user charge.' And tonight I dare say we will hear from the Prime Minister about his next steps. It is a government that is acting to preserve its status rather than acting in the interests of all Australians. That is my deep concern. We belled the cat yesterday on a crazy plan to expand the number of MPs in parliament. My goodness me, that was tone deaf, absolutely tone deaf. There is no way that the Labor Party can walk away from this. The negotiations were happening. We know they were happening. Don Farrell, the Special Minister of State, made the statements last week, so we know that it was on the table. The Prime Minister then said, 'No, no, no.' Mr McCormack 219646 'Nothing to see here!' Dr WEBSTER 281688 'There's nothing to see here. I'm actually happy with the make-up of this parliament.' That's exciting. So suddenly that was off the table. That's not leadership. Why were those discussions even taking place in the crisis that this nation is facing? It's a really good question. Failure No. 2—let us talk about antisemitism just for a moment and the awful events that took place at Bondi. The Prime Minister took four years to finally call out antisemitism, and he would not use the words 'Islamic extremism'. Consequently, Bondi took place. Suddenly they're at panic stations, and things need to take place; action needs to happen. We called for a royal commission over and over again. It took the Prime Minister around three weeks to eventually come to a point where a royal commission was actually called for. That is not leadership; that is following once the herd has bolted. Australians wanted a royal commission, and this Prime Minister did not come to the table. There are so many other examples of his failure to lead. Our nation deserves better. 15:57 Ms CAMPBELL 312823 Moreton Australians are so often defined by how we treat each other, by how we treat other people. In ordinary times, that might be described as friendly. It might be described as easygoing. It might be described as being a good mate. But, in more challenging times, those traits of mateship often transform. They transform into resilience, they transform into dependability and they transform into being someone who stands ready when things are tough and when times are hard. That's what happens in challenging times, and there is no doubt that these are challenging times. There's a war in the Middle East right now, a conflict that is happening that originated so far from our golden sandy shores but that nonetheless is having an impact on the global economy. And it's also having an impact here at home. We know it's impacting on families. We know it's impacting on farmers. We know that it's impacting on businesses. The test for leadership in challenging times is listening, it's setting out a vision for our country and it's making that vision a reality. We've pulled together leaders and experts—this Prime Minister, this Albanese Labor government to listen. We've set out a clear plan for that vision, and we are undertaking the practical action to make that plan a reality for the Australian people. In that practical plan, we are halving the fuel excise to make sure that every litre is cheaper. We are taking the heavy-vehicle road user charge down to zero to make sure that trucks can get to their destination. We are cracking down on those seeking to take advantage of a crisis in the Middle East. We are underwriting fuel purchases being made on the international market, to make sure we can get more fuel into our country and drive up supply. We are making sure that truckies are being treated fairly. We are releasing 20 per cent of our fuel reserves—reserves that are now held in this country—to make sure that we have more supply in the pot. What I would say to those opposite is that talk without action is the natural enemy of reform. Leadership demands more than just a title. My message to those who sit opposite is this. This is the moment to get on board with Australia, this is the moment to choose the Australian people, this is the moment to choose our nation, this is the moment to be constructive, this is the moment to resist populism and this is the moment to back our country in. Leadership is not about how you tear down the show, although members opposite might be forgiven for thinking that, given what we've seen over the past 12 months. Leadership is not about how loudly you shout. Leadership is not about how much fear you can whip up with talking points designed not to back in Australians but to reap advantage from a tough time, when the chips are down. Deputy Speaker Claydon, if you want to know about leadership and if you want to know what this place is about, all you need to do is look up, because that skylight right there was put there to remind us that this place is more than just the people sitting in this chamber. It's about what's out there. It's about the Australian people. That's what leadership is. I remind members opposite to look up. 16:02 Mr REBELLO 316547 McPherson The absolute nerve of those opposite to come into this place at a time when Australians are doing it tougher than ever before and lecture us on leadership—the absolute nerve. We heard nothing but buzzwords, nothing but plans. 'We're going to take action. We're going to do X, Y, Z'—no details, but a lecture on leadership, something that those opposite are absolutely lacking. Australians are looking for leadership right now. They are crying out for leadership, because we have a prime minister, a treasurer and an energy minister who are not prepared to be upfront and honest with the Australian people and who are not prepared to have direct conversations with Australians at a time when Australians are concerned, at a time when they're anxious. What we're seeing is that they're sending mixed messages, and that's resulting in confusion. It's resulting in people who, at a time when Australians should be celebrating—we're approaching Easter. Families should be coming together. People should be thinking about things other than how they're going to get to places or if they can get to places. We're seeing people on that side of the chamber dismissing those concerns. Mr Wallace 265967 Nothing to see here. Mr REBELLO 316547 There's nothing to see here; that's right. What we need is reassurance about the plan, and we need transparency. This is something that we have asked for time and time again, in question time and at every opportunity we have had. We need to know what's going on with this fuel crisis. We have memories of COVID—and I speak to the people in my electorate of McPherson, especially because we are a border community down the southern end of the Gold Coast—and the country went through a lot. The world went through a lot. We need some sort of reassurance from this government, from this prime minister, that the government is in control and that our lives are not going to be taken over by government again. The Prime Minister has previously passed the buck to states and territories, and he sent out his minister for climate change and energy, who I think, somewhat unscripted, came out and said, 'This is a national crisis.' So we've seen mixed messages time and time again. Just about every day, in question time, the coalition has stood up and asked things that I think are relatively simple. We've asked about fuel stockholdings. We've asked about outages at petrol stations. We've asked about shipment delays and details. For a government that spends so much time talking about transparency, talking about integrity and talking about the importance of democracy, we're not getting any of those qualities from this so-called leadership. Australians deserve to know what is going on now. The coalition is prepared to be constructive, and one of the things that members on this side of the House have said is that we are happy with the fact that the government has come to the table in relation to reducing the fuel excise. This is something that we have been calling out for. The Prime Minister and the minister seemed to just ignore it over the weekend, and then they came back this week and said, 'Yes— Mr Wallace 265967 They weren't thinking about doing it. Mr REBELLO 316547 They weren't thinking about it; they took a weekend off! And now they've come back and said, 'Yes, we're going to agree with the coalition and we're going to do this.' We will take it. That is great. It is good for the Australian people, because they're hurting from this fuel crisis. But it's not just the fuel crisis. It's the fuel crisis on top of everything else. It's on top of all the pressures that have been piled on, one after the other. That's not to mention the 14 interest rate rises, not to mention their mortgages going up and not to mention the costs of groceries, electricity, fuel and everything; insurance is a massive one. This is on top of all of that. Despite the fact that one government minister referred to our idea of cutting the fuel excise as a 'thought bubble', they've now adopted it, and we applaud them on doing that, although every day they didn't do it it cost Australians $16 million in extra fuel costs. Coming to the table is not leadership, so to the member for Moreton, who spoke before, I say that, instead of coming in here and lecturing us on leadership, you should actually look at yourselves— Ms Campbell 312823 You asked us to come here and talk about leadership. Mr REBELLO 316547 And don't be interjecting when you're not in your seat. You can blame everybody else, but, when it comes to leadership, you should actually sit up and pay attention because the Australian people deserve that. Mr Caldwell 306489 On the point of order raised by the member for McPherson, I think it would be timely to just remind members— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 He didn't raise one. He didn't give me the courtesy of addressing it at all, so sit down, please. I do not need to remind members; otherwise, I would have reminded your side some time ago as well. 16:08 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong Australians can see right through this. This matter reeks of hypocrisy and it demonstrates why the current leader of the opposition just doesn't get it. Leadership is not using a global crisis to stoke fear and weaponise real anxiety for political gain, yet that is all those opposite have done since this conflict in the Middle East began. But Australians are not quite surprised at this. They remember what leadership looked like under those opposite when the coalition last were in government. They remember being told, 'I don't hold a hose, mate,' by the then Liberal prime minister, who chose to holiday in Hawaii while regional Australia burned. They remember a vaccine rollout so bungled that, when the rest of the world was reopening, Australia couldn't, because, according to those opposite, it wasn't a race. And, in just the past three months, Australians have been reminded of this all over again. Former leader of the opposition Sussan Ley had the chance, in the wake of our country's worst terrorist attack in history, to do what every other opposition leader has done in recent memory—back team Australia, call for calm, call for unity. Instead, she manufactured outrage and stoked division, and one by one those opposite fell in behind her. Today, nothing has changed. This new leader of the opposition, rather than working with the government and in the interest of the Australian people, uses this chamber to play politics by spreading misinformation and scaring families who are already anxious while watching the events overseas unfold and then feeling that pressure at home. All those opposite want to do is talk Australia down, because they are more interested in what they can gain from this crisis than backing Australians. We're not. We're stepping up, and we're stepping in. That is what leadership actually looks like: disciplined, methodical action and the commitment to give Australians the confidence when they need it most. The conflict may lie beyond our control, but our responses do not, and this government is exercising that responsibility every single day. Under this prime minister's leadership, the government acted as soon as the crisis began, and we have acted every day since to give Australian households and businesses the best possible chance to withstand what this global crisis has already thrown at us and what it may still throw. We doubled penalties for false and misleading conduct and cartel behaviour by putting fuel companies on notice. We've given the ACCC stronger deterrence tools to protect Australians during this time of uncertainty. We have backed our trucking industry to keep moving so our economy keeps moving. And what do those opposite do? They didn't vote against it. I don't think they're even here, in the chamber. What is that leadership? Real leadership means stepping up and stepping in for workers, for businesses and for families under pressure. We have focused every day on securing and strengthening fuel supply. We released 20 per cent of our fuel reserves, which are actually here in this country—not overseas. We've eased petrol standards. We've halved the fuel excise, which has unlocked more supply and lowered prices for ordinary Australians. While those opposite have been consumed by their own leadership dramas, the Prime Minister convened the National Cabinet and brought the states and territories and the Commonwealth together behind a coordinated approach and plan. That led to the appointment of the Fuel Supply Taskforce, the activation of emergency fuel coordination mechanisms and an agreement under the national fuel security framework. Australians will remember what National Cabinet looked like under those opposite during the pandemic, when the then prime minister used it for political cover and attacked state premiers, who were simply trying to keep Australians safe. This is different. This is genuine national unity, and Australians recognise it. Time and time again, those opposite, who have sat on the government benches and know the weight of the responsibilities, have failed to rise to the occasion in this crisis. When Australians face hardship, their instinct is to look after one another—to look after their families, their neighbours, their community. Those opposite's first question isn't, 'How can we help?' Their first question is, 'How can we benefit?' This government, under the steady and disciplined leadership of our prime minister, is not interested in playing that game. He's not offloading responsibility to other leaders. He's not boarding a plane for an overseas holiday. He is here and is focused on delivering for every Australian. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The time for this discussion has concluded. COMMITTEES 72 COMMITTEES Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence 72 Membership 72 16:13 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The Speaker has received advice from the honourable Prime Minister nominating members to be members of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence. 16:13 Mr BURKE DYW Watson by leave—I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Defence Act 1903, Mr Burnell, Mr Chester, Ms Mascarenhas, Ms Swanson, Ms Templeman, Mr Thompson, Mr Wallace and Mr Zappia be appointed members of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence. Question agreed to. BILLS 72 BILLS Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 1) Bill 2026, Appropriation (Fuel Security Response) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026, Appropriation (Fuel Security Response) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026, Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2026, Commonwealth Parole Board (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025, Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025, National Health Amendment (Passive Immunological Products) Bill 2026, Excise Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025, Customs Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025, Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill 2025, Translating and Interpreting Services Bill 2025, Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Bill 2025 72

Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 1) Bill 2026

Appropriation (Fuel Security Response) Bill (No. 1) 2025-2026

Appropriation (Fuel Security Response) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026

Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures No. 2) Bill 2026

Commonwealth Parole Board (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025

Treasury Laws Amendment (Genetic Testing Protections in Life Insurance and Other Measures) Bill 2025

National Health Amendment (Passive Immunological Products) Bill 2026

Excise Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025

Customs Tariff Amendment (Draught Beer) Bill 2025

Corporations Amendment (Digital Assets Framework) Bill 2025

Translating and Interpreting Services Bill 2025

Migration Amendment (Combatting Migrant Exploitation) Bill 2025

Returned from Senate 72 Commonwealth Parole Board Bill 2025 72

Commonwealth Parole Board Bill 2025

Consideration of Senate Message 72 16:15 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I move: That the amendments be agreed to. The SPEAKER 53517 The question before the House is that the amendments be agreed to.  

The House divided. [16:19]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

93 AYES Abdo, B. J. Aly, A. Ambihaipahar, A. Belyea, J. A. Berry, C. G. Briskey, J. L. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Campbell, J. P. Chalmers, J. E. Chaney, K. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Clutterham, C. L. Coffey, R. K. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Comer, E. L. Conroy, P. M. Cook, K. M. G. Cook, P. A. Doyle, M. J. J. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. J. France, A. A. Freelander, M. R. French, T. A. Garland, C. M. L. Gee, A. R. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. P. Gosling, L. J. Gregg, M. J. Hill, J. C. Holzberger, R. A. V. Husic, E. N. Jarrett, M. L. Jordan-Baird, M. A. M. Kearney, G. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, C. F. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, R. G. Moncrieff, D. S. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. Ng, G. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Smith, M. J. H. Soon, X. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Teesdale, J. A. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Urquhart, A. E. (Teller) Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. White, R. P. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, J. H. Witty, S. J. Zappia, A. 33 NOES Aldred, M. R. (Teller) Batt, D. J. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chaffey, J. L. Chester, D. J. Conaghan, P. J. Hastie, A. W. Hogan, K. J. Landry, M. L. (Teller) Littleproud, D. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Penfold, A. L. Pike, H. J. Rebello, L. S. Sharkie, R. C. C. Small, B. J. Tehan, D. T. Venning, T. H. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

ADJOURNMENT 74 ADJOURNMENT Youth Voice Forum 74 16:29 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I wanted to come here to relay the youth voices of Warringah. Now remember, I rise to speak about representation and whose voices are heard here in this place and in this parliament. For me, it's so important that we make sure we hear the voices of our young people. This month I hosted a youth voices forum in Warringah. It's an event I have run many times—each year since being elected. Young people consistently tell me that they do not feel well represented in parliament and that the issues shaping their lives are not being taken seriously. As I've often said to them, if you're not at the table, you're on the menu. Far too many young Australians feel decisions are being made about them, without them. One student put it simply that day: Young people are 25 per cent of the population, but 100 per cent of the future. Throughout the day, students asked me what it was like to come into parliament after a career as a professional skier and as a barrister. They asked me what it was like being a woman in politics. Those questions were not abstract; they were about whether people with unconventional pathways and voices like theirs could see themselves belonging in this place and sitting at the table. The strongest message of the day was on mental health, and that's why it was so important. It was a really clear call. One student told me plainly: Half of all young Australians suffer silently with extreme psychological distress. This is unacceptable. Another explained why adolescence matters, saying: Your adolescence is the most fundamental period to gain skills on how to tackle mental health issues, but wellbeing programs in schools are not doing this. The students called for more counsellors in schools, earlier intervention and an end to stigma. These were not abstract ideas; they were clear policy priorities for those most affected. They also brought up equity and dignity. Equity emerged again and again, particularly for women and gender-diverse young people. On reproductive health care, one student said plainly: Universal reproductive healthcare is a need. Another was unequivocal, saying: Women deserve free period products— in schools and in other public places— We deserve them now, and inequality should be eliminated. These young people are asking for dignity, access and fairness and for this parliament to take their lives seriously. Others raised an environmental duty of care and artificial intelligence. Students spoke powerfully about the need for an environmental duty of care and about our responsibility to future generations who cannot yet vote. They are those people, and they are frustrated. One grounded that duty right here in Warringah, telling us: Dee Why Lagoon and Middle Harbour, some of our most central waterways, are among Australia's most densely microplastic-polluted. They warned clearly that inaction has consequences, saying: If we continue to let this pollution into our waterways and into our community, we are risking our wildlife, our natural wonders and our national identity. That same intergenerational responsibility shaped their concerns about artificial intelligence. Students raised concerns about bias, power and environmental impact. One noted: By the time I have finished this sentence, AI has already finished drinking a litre of water, and more. Their message was not anti-technology. It was a call for ethical, transparent governance guided by the public interest. They said: The government needs to reclaim the power to AI. Because if multiple companies control it, then who knows what information will become. These young people are not waiting quietly. I'm proud that a young woman from Warringah, Gemma, has in fact just been announced as a National Youth Parliament representative. That is what being at the table looks like, and I want more young people in Warringah and around Australia to know this. Politics is not a closed shop. If young people are not included in decision making, they will live with the consequences, because if you're not at the table, you are on the menu. We cannot encourage young people to engage, then ignore what they tell us. Representation can't be symbolic. It is practical and necessary. I will continue to bring the youth voices from Warringah into this House, because, when young people are at the table, our democracy is stronger and our future is fairer. A special thank you to the five students from my youth advisory council, Annabelle, Ambrose, Juliet, Molly and Violet, who helped plan the event. Thank you to Mosman High School, who generously hosted us, and to Raise Mentoring and their youth advisory council, who came and shared their insights—Isla, Darcy and Julia were incredible speakers. Finally, thanks to the many schools that attended and will attend future events in coming months. Domestic and Family Violence 75 16:34 Ms BERRY 23497 Whitlam I rise today to speak about the national crisis of domestic violence and outline the action the Albanese government is taking to uphold the right of Australian women and girls to live in safety. My electorate of Whitlam includes the southern Illawarra region, and I was very concerned to learn last week in the latest report released by the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research that the Illawarra recorded the highest increase in domestic violence assaults in New South Wales. While recorded incidents of domestic violence remained relatively stable across New South Wales generally, in the two years to December 2025 there was a very concerning jump of 12.1 per cent in the Illawarra. Almost 1,200 domestic violence assaults were reported to the region's police in the 2025 calendar year. This is about three domestic violence assaults each day. In one of my earlier roles that I held before I became the member for Whitlam, I was the CEO of the Illawarra Women's Health Centre. The centre provides a range of services to support women who are currently experiencing or have previously experienced domestic and sexual violence. An important initiative of the Illawarra Women's Health Centre in recent years is the Illawarra Women's Trauma Recovery Centre, which is located in Shellharbour in my electorate of Whitlam. This trauma recovery centre was made possible by a $25 million investment by the Albanese Labor government, and was opened 18 months ago by my predecessor as the member for Whitlam, Stephen Jones. He was joined by the New South Wales Minister for Health, Ryan Park, and the state member for Shellharbour, Anna Watson. The centre is the first of its kind in Australia, providing specialised support to victims-survivors of family, domestic or sexual violence. One in four Australian women have experienced violence by an intimate partner. These women are our mothers, daughters, sisters, aunts, nieces and friends, and we must recognise that violence against women and girls impacts, in some way, everyone in our community. The Albanese Labor government is committed to building a safer Australia where every woman and child can live free from gender based violence. Since being elected in 2022, we have invested more than $4 billion, more than any other previous government, in frontline services, preventative programs, behaviour change programs and support services for children. We have made the leaving violence payment permanent. That's $5,000 in financial help for women leaving violence. We have provided $1.2 billion for emergency and transitional accommodation for women fleeing domestic violence. We have legislated 10 days of paid domestic violence leave. We have expanded discretionary powers for Centrelink, so perpetrators can't use the social security system to burden domestic violence survivors with tens of thousands of dollars in debt. We have reformed the family law system so that it is safer, simpler and more accessible, and we've established the new national higher education code to prevent and respond to gender based violence. Eighteen months ago the Prime Minister convened an urgent National Cabinet meeting on gender based violence. As a result, we agreed to strengthen our collective efforts under the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. At the end of last year, Ministers Plibersek and Gallagher, who have done an absolutely outstanding job in this space, released an update on our progress. They reported that the Albanese government has boosted support for essential frontline services, with $700 million in new matched funding with the states and territories to support women and children at risk to reach safety. Informed by the Australian Law Reform Commission inquiry into justice responses to sexual violence, we are investing more than $21 million to expand trauma informed legal services and pilot new roles to help victims of sexual violence navigate the justice system. We have invested close to $4 billion in the new National Access to Justice Partnership, including $800 million for family violence legal services—the largest amount invested in Australia's history. The Albanese Labor government has made ending violence against women and children a national priority, and I'm proud of what we have delivered. But we are fully aware there is still much more work to do, and we will continue to take action to build a safer Australia for women and girls. Monash Electorate: Leongatha Healthcare, Gas Industry 76 16:39 Ms ALDRED 11788 Monash It has been 75 days since the Leongatha Healthcare clinic closed, and patients are still waiting for access to critical medical records. We've had a very dedicated group of local general practitioners and broader medical administrative staff work around the clock to set up a new clinic. I want to commend their dedication to our community. But the fact remains that many patients from the old clinic are still waiting on their medical records. Just last week, I had a Leongatha resident contact my office. He's been fortunate enough to find a new doctor, but he still cannot access his medical records despite having serious multiple health issues. He's currently awaiting surgery. He described this situation in two simple words. He said, 'It's just absurd and it is unacceptable.' It is unacceptable, and it reflects the broader failure in the Victorian health system, where pressure across regional services and a lack of leadership by the state government has led to multiple examples of unresponsiveness and lack of accountability. I'm calling for an urgent intervention from the health commissioner and the state and federal health ministers. I've written to the federal health minister, and I want to commend his office for helping in a number of sensitive and serious situations that have arisen during this time on this issue. But local people in my electorate deserve better. Danny O'Brien and Melina Bath, our two state MPs, have done an outstanding job. I want to acknowledge their tremendous efforts in sticking up for our community as well. There are families in my electorate having to choose between gas and groceries right now because the costs of both are going up. We've got businesses who can't electrify their processes. We've got food manufacturers who can't electrify. They need gas. It is absolutely critical to their business operations. Right now, we have a huge amount of hypocrisy from the teals and the Greens on gas policy. I want to go through a number of MPs who have supported a policy of increasing taxes and royalties on the sector at the moment while also making anti-gas and anti-gas-expansion comments prior to this year. The exception to that is my well-respected colleague the member for Chifley. I disagree with him on parts of the policy that he has raised, but at least he's been consistent, unlike the teals and the Greens. There are hidden agendas, and behind those hidden agendas there are higher bills. I think Australians deserve better, because when activism drives policy Australians pay the price. A Greens senator said, 'Blasting and new gas projects are environmental disasters and we must ban them.' That senator is now calling for an increase in taxes and royalties for the sector. Another Greens senator said: 'Gas companies are greedy and destructive. It's time to stop new gas projects.' We've got a teal senator who said: 'Gas is cooking our present. No more approvals. Protect future generations.' We've got an excommunicated Labor senator saying: 'We can't reach net zero with Labor's gas strategy. The transition off gas must happen faster.' We've got a teal MP in this House saying, 'Stop new gas fields.' We've got another teal MP in this place saying, 'We don't need more gas; we need smarter use and a faster transition to electrification.' Well, tell that to a food-manufacturing business in my electorate. Tell that to a family struggling to pay their gas bill. We've got another teal MP in this place saying: 'Labor's gas strategy betrays future generations. Expanding gas now wipes out climate progress.' These teals are like to lecture regional communities and low-socioeconomic families. The Greens do as well. They're on a unity ticket on this issue. Australians deserve better. Families in my electorate deserve better. Gas is incredibly important right now for industry. It is in a very sensitive and precarious state. It is very important as far as affordability and reliability for families in my electorate. I want to take a stand against the Greens and the teals, who have no consideration for people doing it really tough right now or for manufacturing businesses and small businesses that need affordable and reliable gas. I commend the member for Hunter. We have different perspectives on things, but coming from a regional area he gets this issue as well. Finally, I would just like to wish everyone in my electorate a happy Easter. Please stay safe on our roads. Barton Electorate: Community Events, Housing 77 16:44 Ms AMBIHAIPAHAR 315618 Barton I had the pleasure last Saturday at Gardiner Park in Banksia to support the bake sale hosted by Banksia Tigers Football Club to fundraise to support displaced Lebanese families. It was a very powerful reminder of the generosity and compassion that defines my local community. Families, players and volunteers came together to bake, to organise and to sell a wide range of delicious treats, all with the shared goal of helping those doing it tough. From homemade brownies to traditional Lebanese sweets, the effort from everyone involved was truly inspiring. It was great to meet the players, parents and volunteers who worked tirelessly to bring this event together. What is happening in Lebanon is impacting a lot of people in the electorate of Barton, and this Albanese Labor government recently announced an additional $5 million in emergency assistance to support one million people displaced in Lebanon. As we continue to see an escalation in this war, we reiterate that all parties must adhere to international law and protect innocent life. I want to thank the club's president, Hassan Chebli, the committee members and everyone who baked, donated, volunteered and attended. Your generosity will go a long way to supporting our Lebanese brothers and sisters. It was a great honour to attend the 45th anniversary celebration of CASS, recognising decades of service and support for multicultural communities across my local community. I was also proud to represent the Hon. Tanya Plibersek, Minister for Social Services, who is very committed to inclusive communities and strong social service that reflects the important work that CASS continues to deliver. For 45 years, CASS has played a vital role in supporting families, seniors, young people and new migrants. This organisation has helped generations to settle, connect and thrive, and this milestone is really a testament to the dedication of the staff, the volunteers and the community leaders who have contributed to its success. It was a great celebration, with speeches; performances, such as a Korean royal court fan dance and Vietnamese lion dancing; and a big birthday cake cutting. I would like to particularly thank Stephen Li, Henry Pan, Tica Lee and all the board members for their leadership, vision and commitment. Their work, alongside many others, such as the staff and volunteers, has ensured that CASS continues to evolve and respond to the changing needs of my very diverse community. Their passion and dedication were clearly reflected in the warmth and pride felt throughout the entire celebration. Anniversaries like these are an opportunity to not only reflect on the past but also look forward to the future. With strong leadership and community support, CASS will continue to make a very meaningful difference for many years to come. So congratulations again for 45 years of outstanding service, and thank you for everything you do for our community. I also rise today to speak about the important housing development in Arncliffe funded by our federal Housing Australia Future Fund. The New South Wales Labor government has announced that 75 per cent of the homes in this development will be dedicated to social and affordable housing. This is an incredible announcement which means that the Barton residents who need it most will be able to live right next to Arncliffe Station, close to our hospital and shops and public amenities. This announcement means 311 social housing apartments, 291 affordable housing apartments and 204 private market apartments. This increase will help address one of the most pressing challenges being faced in my community. This is a significant shift from the previous Liberal government, who had no plans for any affordable housing in this particular area. I know lots of locals will remember what that site looked like before: pretty rundown, low-density dwellings, pretty much in desperate need of repair. Not anymore. Because of the Albanese and the Minns Labor governments, our community is being built very much for a brighter future. I also want to acknowledge the Premier, Chris Minns; the Minister for Housing, Rose Jackson; and Minister Steve Kamper for their leadership and commitment to increasing housing supply in my area but also for delivering practical solutions to the housing crisis felt in New South Wales. I also want to recognise the vital role of St George Community Housing and Evolve Housing, whose experience and commitment will help ensure high quality, secure and affordable homes for the residents of Barton. This Arncliffe housing development is a strong example of state and federal Labor governments and community housing providers working together to deliver real outcomes and strengthen our community for the future. Manufacturing Industry, Boyne Smelters Limited 78 16:49 Mr BOYCE 299498 Flynn Last month, the federal and state governments announced a $2 billion bailout for the Rio Tinto Boyne aluminium smelter in my electorate of Flynn in Gladstone. This decision will mean the aluminium production in the region will continue till at least 2040, and, for the thousands of workers, contractors and their families who rely on this facility, that certainty matters. It means mortgages can be paid, kids can stay in the local schools and small businesses across Central Queensland can keep their doors open. I welcome that job security, and I understand and stand with the hard-working men and women in the alumina and aluminium industries who turn up every day to keep this country's manufacturing capability alive and who deserve the stability and the respect from their government. But while I acknowledge the outcome, we must also be honest about how we got here. It is a direct result of policy settings that are making it harder and harder for heavy industry to survive in Australia. We are seeing a situation emerge in which Australia, once a global powerhouse of manufacturing and resources processing, is now struggling to keep its own smelters and heavy industry viable. We have some of the highest energy prices in the developed world, and that is not by accident. It is a consequence of Labor's reckless all renewables approach that fails to ensure reliable, affordable baseload power for industries that depend on it. Aluminium smelting is energy intensive. It requires constant stable electricity supply at competitive prices. When those conditions disappear, so too does the competitiveness of our industries. And what happens? Instead of fixing the underlying problem, high energy costs, we end up with taxpayers stepping in to prop up facilities that should, in a well-functioning system, be commercially sustainable. That is not a long-term plan. That is a short-term patch, and it raises serious questions. Why are Australian taxpayers being asked to foot a $2 billion bill to keep a smelter open in a country that has some of the world's most abundant natural resources? This also is given the fact that the Labor government is charging carbon tax on this very smelter. Why are we allowing policies to drive up costs to a point where intervention becomes the only option, and how many more industries will find themselves in this same position? Across regional Australia, manufacturers, processors and producers are all feeling the squeeze. They are grappling with rising energy prices, increased regulatory burdens and uncertainty about the future. In Flynn, the Boyne smelter is not just another industrial facility. It supports local jobs, drives investment and underpins the prosperity of the broader region. When it is under threat, the entire community is under threat. We welcome the continuation of operations until 2040, but we cannot ignore the warning signs that this situation presents. If we continue down the path where energy policy drives up costs, where industries are forced to rely on government bailouts and where long-term competitiveness is eroded, then we will see more announcements like this—not good news stories but last resort measures. We should be exporting value added products to the world, not exporting jobs and importing uncertainty. We should be backing our own workers, not just with short-term funding but with long-term policy certainty that ensures their industries remain viable for decades to come, and that means getting energy policy right. It means ensuring reliability, affordability and 24/7 power generation—something a renewables only approach simply cannot do—and it means recognising that the regional communities like those in Flynn cannot be an afterthought in the national decision-making process, because when policies are made in capital cities without the regard for their real world impacts, it is regional Australians who bear the consequences, and they deserve more than just bandaid solutions. They deserve a government that understands the importance of industry, that values manufacturing and delivers policy that makes Australia a competitive place to do business. In closing, Mr Speaker, I would just like to take the opportunity to wish you, my fellow parliamentarians and all of the parliamentary staff are happy and safe Easter Lone Pine Barracks 78 16:54 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter Today I want to speak about an institution that is woven into the fabric of the Hunter and the Upper Hunter: the Lone Pine Barracks, home to the Australian Army in Singleton. For many Australians, Singleton is a name and a highway sign between Newcastle and the Upper Hunter. For those of us who live there, it's a proud military town. At the heart of it sits Lone Pine Barracks, one of the most important army training bases in the country. For decades, generations of soldiers have marched through those gates to begin their careers in service of our wonderful nation. It is the home of the School of Infantry and plays a critical role in training the men and women who go on to serve Australia both here and overseas. Lone Pine Barracks is more than a training ground. It's more than a workplace. It's part of our community. Every year, thousands of recruits, instructors and Defence personnel live, train and contribute to life in Singleton. They rent homes. They buy groceries. They join local sporting clubs. Their kids attend our schools and their families volunteer in our community groups. These are not separate from Singleton. They are Singleton. The economic contribution of the Singleton Army base to the Hunter region is significant. Defence investment supports local jobs directly on base and indirectly across our beautiful region. Local contractors provide maintenance, construction, catering, logistics and specialist services. Small businesses supply everything from equipment to uniforms to fresh produce. The ripple effect is real. When Defence invests in infrastructure upgrades at Lone Pine Barracks, that work flows to Hunter tradies and to Hunter businesses. When soldiers and their families settle in the area, it supports our real estate market, our rental sector, our retail sector and our hospitality venues. In a regional economy like ours, built on mining, agriculture, viticulture, thoroughbreds, manufacturing and tourism, Defence provides stability. It provides steady employment and long-term investment. That matters. It matters for young people in the Hunter who are considering a career in the ADF. It matters for families who rely on the certainty of Defence employment. It matters for Singleton businesses who know that the presence of the Army base underpins economic activity in our town. Beyond the dollars and cents, Lone Pine Barracks represents something even more important: service to this beautiful country. The soldiers who train at Singleton go on to serve in peacekeeping missions, humanitarian operations and combat deployments. They respond to natural disasters, support flood and bushfire recovery efforts, and stand ready whenever Australia calls. We saw that firsthand during the recent disasters, when Defence personnel stepped up to help communities right across New South Wales. Many of those soldiers trained in Singleton, and the Hunter is extremely proud of that. We are proud that our region plays a direct role in preparing the men and women who defend our nation. We are proud that Singleton is synonymous with professionalism, discipline and excellence in infantry training. And, yes, we're also proud of the slightly less well known but much appreciated feature of the Lone Pine Barracks: it's remarkable wine cellar. Only in the Hunter could you have one of the country's most important training bases sitting in the middle of one of Australia's premier wine regions. The officer's mess wine cellar at Singleton showcases the very best of the Hunter Valley wines and reflects the region's long and proud winemaking history. It's a reminder that the Army base is not isolated from its surroundings. It is connected to the culture, the industry and the identity of the Hunter. When visiting Defence personnel and dignitaries experience that cellar, they experience the Hunter. They taste our region. They take a piece of it with them. It's a small but symbolic example of how Defence and community are intertwined. Looking ahead, it is vital that we continue to support investment in the Lone Pine Barracks and ensure it remains a premier training facility for decades to come. That means modern infrastructure, quality accommodation for personnel and their families, and strong partnerships with local councils, businesses and community organisations. It also means recognising the value of defence to regional Australia. The Singleton Army base strengthens the Hunter economy, it strengthens our community and it strengthens Australia. To the soldiers, instructors, civilian staff and families connected to Lone Pine Barracks: thank you. Thank you for all you do. Thank you for the service you give to this beautiful country, thank you for your commitment and thank you for choosing to call the Hunter home even though it may only be a small part of your career there. To you, Speaker, and to everybody in this building: thank you to you all. Have a happy Easter. To all Australians and everyone in the Hunter: have a happy Easter. The SPEAKER 53517 For one minute, I give the call to the honourable member for Fisher. Easter 79 16:59 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Thank you, Speaker. I thank you for the indulgence of standing up. We've got a minute to go before five o'clock. Never one to miss an opportunity, can I express my best wishes to my parliamentary colleagues on both sides—and, of course, to yourself, Mr Speaker—for Easter. Easter is a time of renewal. It's a time of rebirth. It's a time when Christians around the world remember the death of Jesus Christ. It's a time for families to come together, just like at Christmas. I would encourage all my parliamentary colleagues to do just that and spend some quality time with their families. We'll see you all here in five weeks time. Question agreed to. House adjourned at 17:00 The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Lawrence ) took the chair at 09:38, a division having been called in the House of Representatives.

Wednesday, 1 April 2026

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Lawrence ) took the chair at 09:38, a division having been called in the House of Representatives.

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 80 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Aged Care 80 09:39 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo We've now had the new aged-care system for five months. This was supposed to make life better for older Australians, but for so many this has done the absolute opposite. We have long waiting lists. We have robo-assessments. We have fewer services at higher cost. We have no cap on fees, which allowed many providers, as soon as it turned over to 1 November, to very significantly increase their fees. We have packages allocated at a fraction of what they should be. This whole system is an abject failure. When we look at Senate estimates from February this year, as at 31 December 2025, we had 230,000 older Australians who were waiting for an assessment or waiting for care for simple care at home—230,000 older people, 103,000 waiting for an assessment, and 131,000 who were waiting for approved funding. The government are rationing out, eking out, that funding. Thirty-six thousand people have received interim funding of 60 per cent, and only 129 cases out of those 131,000 the government have deemed as urgent. I would say every single older person who has been assessed as 'needing care in the home' is an urgent matter. What happens is that people get sick. They end up in hospital. They end up malnourished. They end up having a fall. They end up not eating properly or not having a shower. We must turn our attention to this. If the job of all of us in this place is to take care of Australians, with respect to older Australians, we are failing abysmally. I'm receiving emails every day. Just this morning, I received an email from an elderly lady who said: Albo's Support at Home is an absolute joke, which would be funny if I was not part of it. I have been in receipt of a home care package … I was "upgraded" to a level 4 … and have recently been informed that I am only receiving 60% of the advertised annual amount, namely $36,000 out of $63,000. This means that I miss out on vital services, such as hydrotherapy, social support, and meal preparation. I also do not receive necessary assistance with technology and home modifications, which are … necessary. Why is the government doing this to older Australians? Please do better. Health Care 80 09:42 Dr REID 300126 Robertson Today, I rise to speak about a reform that, while practical in design, is profound in impact, and that is the new Medicare urgent care clinic at Erina. Behind every policy and behind every service, there is a moment—a mother holding a febrile child unsure of where to turn, an older Australian in pain from a rapidly progressing infection or a worker with a laceration, bleeding, anxious and needing care now. These are not abstract scenarios; they are real clinical presentations happening every single day right across the Central Coast. For too long, the only door open in those moments was the emergency department. Let me say this clearly and without qualification: our emergency departments right across the country are extraordinary. They are places of precision, of courage and of relentless professionalism. They are where cardiac arrests are resuscitated, where strokes are thrombolysed, where polytrauma is stabilised and where lives are quite literally pulled back from the brink. The clinicians who work in these environments are among the very best our system has to offer, and they aren't the problem. They are exceptional, but they carry a burden that they were never designed to carry alone, because alongside those life-threatening emergencies sits a growing volume of urgent but not life-threatening care. When everything is treated in the same place, pressure builds, waits lengthen and systems strain. That is why the Medicare urgent care clinic at Erina matters. This is not a substitute for emergency medicine; it is complement to it. It is a clinically appropriate setting for simple fractures, lacerations, acute infections and respiratory illness—care that is urgent, but care that is not critical. It is bulk-billed, walk in and delivered by highly skilled clinicians. This is what a good system looks like. It is about streaming patients safely. It is about preserving capacity. It is about ensuring that, when someone arrives in the emergency department in septic shock or cardiac arrest or major trauma, the system is ready—not stretched, not delayed, but ready. For the Central Coast, this clinic means better flow and safer care right across the health system. It means dignity in access. It means clarity in care. And it means a system that works in the way that it was designed to and the way that it should. This is how we strengthen Medicare—not just in principle but, indeed, in practice. This is why the new Erina urgent care clinic matters, alongside our pre-existing Peninsula Medicare urgent care clinic. Veterans 81 09:45 Ms SPENDER 286042 Wentworth Yesterday I had the privilege of touring the newly completed Anzac Hall at the Australian War Memorial with the Parliamentary Friends of Veterans. It was a powerful experience—a moment to reflect on the extraordinary service and sacrifice of Australians across generations. But, for me, this reflection is not just abstract, it's also deeply local. In Wentworth, I'm incredibly proud to represent a community with a strong and enduring connection to our Defence Force. We are home to historic and operational bases, including HMAS Watson, HMAS Kuttabul, Garden Island Precinct and Victoria Barracks. These institutions have been important in the lives of many families in our community over the years of their operation. Wentworth is also home to a large and vibrant defence community—current serving members, veterans and their families, who contribute enormously to the character of our electorate. Alongside this, our local RSLs—as well as RSL NSW and RSL Australia—play a vital role in supporting those who've served. I particularly want to acknowledge North Bondi RSL, Rose Bay RSL, Paddington/Woollahra RSL, Bronte RSL sub-branch, Bondi Junction Waverley RSL sub-branch and, just out of my electorate, the Coogee Randwick Clovelly RSL. These organisations are more than just clubs. They are places of connection, support and community. They provide advocacy and care for veterans and their families, while also creating spaces where everyday Australians can engage in our shared history. I want to give a particular shout-out to North Bondi RSL, which stepped up as an operational hub in the aftermath of the antisemitic terrorist attack at Bondi. They demonstrated exactly what these institutions represent: community, service and care in moments of need. As we approach Anzac Day, Australians across the country will pause to remember those who've served: those who gave their lives, those who returned and those who continue to carry the impacts of their service. But remembrance cannot be confined to a single day. Honouring our veterans means ensuring they're properly supported in their health, in their mental health, in their transition to civilian life and in their long-term wellbeing. It means supporting organisations who advocate for our veterans and also our serving defence members, including the Bravery Trust, Soldier On, Open Arms, the Athena Project and so many more. This is especially important at a time of increasing global uncertainty. With instability in regions such as the Middle East and with Australian personnel continuing to serve in complex environments, the demands on our Defence Force remain significant. We must ensure that the systems designed to support them—from defence to veterans services—are responsive, well resourced and capable of meeting both immediate and long-term needs. In Wentworth, this is not theoretical. These are our neighbours, our families and our community. So, as we move towards Anzac Day, let us recommit not only to remembering the past but to supporting those who serve today, ensuring that every veteran—and their families as well—is treated with care, dignity and the respect that they deserve. Warrandyte Festival 81 09:48 Mr NG 316052 Menzies I rise today to celebrate the Warrandyte Festival, which was held last Friday and Saturday and is now in its 49th year. Warrandyte is in the northern part of my electorate of Menzies, and, in some ways, it's like a small village. It's beautiful and bushy, with a strong sense of community. The Warrandyte Festival is the centrepiece of the local events calendar. It brings together the whole community. Even though it was drizzling on and off last Saturday, that didn't do anything to dampen people's spirits. Saturday kicked off with a parade along Yarra Street from Warrandyte Neighbourhood House down to Stiggant Reserve. There were monarchs of the parade from the Repair Cafe and Mange Management wombat protection. All the local schools turned out—Warrandyte High School, Warrandyte Primary School and Andersons Creek Primary School. Warrandyte arts, the silent disco and the Warrandyte Historical Society also marched. The CFA trucks were out, and Manningham SES were lining the route. And, of course, so were the Warrandyte Pink Ladies, who I've previously spoken about in this place for their incredible work raising money for cancer and other health issues. They won 'most creative float', riding on the back of a classic pick-up, throwing lollies to the crowd, with an arc of big pink balloons overhead. I've been to the Warrandyte Festival previously as a member of the community, but, for the first time, I had the honour of being able to take part in the parade. There were a number of volunteers who had kindly provided their classic vehicles to drive some of the elected members in the parade, and when I was asked, 'Would you like to be in a classic car or a motorcycle sidecar?' my immediate, maybe overly eager response was, 'Motorcycle sidecar!' Once we got to Stiggant Reserve, it was great to have a chat with members of Warrandyte and South Warrandyte CFA and Manningham SES. I also got my blood pressure and blood sugar checked at the Warrandyte Men's Shed stall and stopped in at the netball club stall as well. A really exciting feature of the day was the opening of the slab hut, a historic site that is a remarkably well-preserved example of an early settler dwelling. It could be 100 or even 150 years old or more. It has managed to survive because a new house was actually built around it and it was only discovered when that house was demolished. I'd like to thank the Warrandyte Historical Society and the National Trust for the tour and for teaching me about this fascinating local landmark. It's not very big. There's space for not much more than a bed and maybe a dresser. The walls were made from local clay. The roof was made from canvas. It's just a really fascinating example that shows that Warrandyte is one of the oldest places for settlement in Victoria. Thank you to Dwayne Schuler and the whole organising committee and the volunteers for bringing the Warrandyte Festival together. Next year will be the 50th festival, and I can't wait to get back. Volunteering, Easter 82 09:51 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson I rise today to address a silent crisis unfolding in the heart of my electorate. The Kidney Support Network in Mackay has detailed the critical challenges currently threatening their essential transport service. This lifeline operates six days a week, from 6 am until 9 pm. It ensures that renal patients across our region never miss the treatments they need to survive. For these patients, the service is quite literally their lifeline. But right now the lifeline is fraying under the weight of this fuel crisis. The service is volunteer led, and as prices at the bowser remain at record highs, these dedicated drivers are being forced to prioritise their own survival over their volunteer roles. They simply cannot afford to stay on the road. At the same time, the Kidney Support Network is seeing a measurable drop in donations as families struggle to manage under this Labor created cost-of-living crisis. They are now facing the heartbreaking reality of having to turn away new clients. If their expenses continue to climb, they may be forced to pause these critical services altogether. The coalition led the charge in calling for the fuel excise to be halved, and while I'm pleased the government followed our lead to bring some reprieve, it is clear that it does not go far enough for our charities. Our charities are so important for us. We need an immediate release of emergency relief funding and further fuel subsidies for transport-reliant charities where it is truly a matter of life or death. Our families and their small businesses are already wearing the burden of this economic pressure and we cannot ask our volunteers to shoulder the rest. A commitment must come from the government to support these essential services. We must ensure that the most vulnerable people in Dawson are not left stranded, because, in our region, we can simply not afford to let the wheels stop turning. As we head home to our electorates, I hope that the only division this weekend is whether fruitless hot cross buns should be banned from the oven. To my coalition mates, to the government, to the crossbench and to the Senate, I wish you all a holy renewal and unity and peace. I also want to give a massive shout-out to the legends who keep Parliament House ticking: our clerk, our attendants, our cleaners, our security and our hospitality staff. And to our staff: it truly does take a village to run this big house, and we appreciate everything you do for us. Have a magnificent Easter, everyone. Iranian Australian Community, Haitidis, Mr George, ESM 82 09:54 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I rise today in solidarity with Australia's much-loved Iranian community and for those in Iran who are living with fear, repression and uncertainty. I want to start by expressing my very deep and sincere gratitude to our Iranian community, particularly in Melbourne, who are so frequently willing to sit down with me and talk to me about what their community is going through. It is an enormously difficult time. The war in Iran is hurting all Australians, but for Iranian Australians this is deeply personal. For many, the past few weeks have been the most brutal swing from initial feelings of hope and perhaps even optimism to fear and then to real terror for the people that they love. Many Iranian Australians have not been able to contact their family at home in Iran for some weeks—not knowing if they're safe, not knowing what's happening and living with a silence that is not just distressing but utterly unbearable. I have spoken to mothers who are unable to contact their Iranian children—children who are doing the bravest possible thing, which is standing up to a murderous and brutal regime. They cannot speak to their children to know and understand if they're safe. To the Iranian community here in Australia: we see you; we hear you, and your voice matters to us. The community asks that we as a parliament stay focused on the safety, the dignity and the freedom of the Iranian people, who have withstood decades of repression and now war. That's what I'll continue to advocate for. Today I want to take a moment to recognise an outstanding member of our community who was honoured as part of the Australia Day honours earlier this year, and that is George Haitidis, who is the unit controller of Monash SES. It was a very exciting moment for our community. He was awarded the Emergency Services Medal, which is one of the highest honours available to SES volunteers. George has now dedicated two decades of service to protecting my local community. He joined the Monash unit in 2005, went on to become section leader three years later and then was appointed unit controller, a role that he has now served in for 18 years. That dedication was never more evident than the work that was done by George's team in February 2024, when my local council of Monash experienced the worst storm damage that we've seen in its history. During that time, SES volunteers responded to more than 1,200 requests for assistance. Monash is a safer place and our country is a safer country because of wonderful people like George. I want to sincerely thank him and every member of his unit for their tireless commitment to our community. Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence 83 09:57 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff Today I recognise the extraordinary work of the Women's Legal Service Queensland and wish to commend their powerful community initiative known as the Epic Walk for domestic and family violence. The Epic Walk brings Queenslanders together to walk five kilometres from North Burleigh Surf Club in my electorate to Burleigh Headland in the member for Macpherson's electorate and back, standing in solidarity with women experiencing domestic and family violence and raising vital support for the free legal services WLSQ provides. This walk is not just symbolic; it's necessary, because the reality is indeed confronting. In Australia, one in four women from the age of 15 has experienced physical or sexual violence by a current or former partner. In Queensland the situation is equally alarming. Domestic and family violence now accounts for more than half of all assault offences—56.9 per cent, which is up from just 24 per cent a few short years ago. In 2024, alone, there were more than 61,000 victims of assault recorded in Queensland, with the majority knowing their offender. These are not just statistics. These are the lives of women, children and families living in fear, often behind their own closed doors. On the Gold Coast, we know the pressure is real and growing. Reports show increasing demand on police and services, with rising breaches of domestic violence orders and sexual offences placing enormous strain on those frontline responders, who we thank. This is why the work of organisations like Women's Legal Service Queensland is so critical. Every day they provide free legal advice, representation and support to women navigating some of the most difficult circumstances imaginable. This is why events like the Epic Walk really matter because they do three things. They raise awareness, funds, and, most importantly a collective voice that says, 'Enough is enough; the violence in our homes, our communities and our country will not be tolerated.' To everyone who walked alongside us during that five-kilometre journey: thank you so very much. Thanks to my walking buddy Emily Jade O'Keefe for the fantastic conversation that we had around these very real issues. We're not just walking for a cause; we are walking for every woman, who deserves to feel safe; for every child, who deserves to grow up free from fear; and for a future where domestic and family violence is no longer a defining challenge of our society. We all have a role to play, and today we stand with all families, women and children who are forced to live with this scourge, this historic wrong in our nation, in our modern society that must be righted. Babana Aboriginal Men's Group Inc. 83 10:00 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I want to talk today about a fantastic organisation in my electorate. 'Babana' means 'brother' in the Dharuk language, and it's a unique brotherhood that embraces Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal men. It's powered by the simple but very powerful idea that self-determination begins with small practical steps. By providing a safe and supportive place for First Nations men, the Babana Aboriginal Men's Group are helping their families and communities. Over 20 years, this small organisation, founded by Mark Spinks and Jeremy Heathcote, has demonstrated its outsized power to transform lives. Babana initially grew from Mark Spinks's determination to help the Indigenous men who walked through the door of Centrelink in Redfern, where he worked. What started as a small, informal group of local men in 2006— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:01 to 10:15 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M What started as a small, informal group of local men in 2006 quickly grew to a much larger number with a much larger impact, and, some 20 years later, Babana's impact now resonates well beyond our local community in Redfern. At Babana, they understand that complex problems are addressed through practical solutions. There is an understanding that poor mental health, for example, is often the consequence, and not the cause, of economic exclusion, and that finding a pathway to financial independence first requires dealing with the basics. That might mean helping someone make better financial decisions, helping them get their ID sorted or helping them pay a fine so they can reclaim their licence so they can get a job. At Babana, solutions and pathways to financial independence grow out of the monthly men's group. It's a safe place to yarn, to admit personal challenges and to identify realistic opportunities for work. Men in this group identified traffic controlling as a job they could do and wanted to do. A conversation with local businessman and member of the Redfern Aboriginal community Shane Phillips led to contact with a traffic management business and the subsequent creation of Babana Traffic Control. Babana Traffic Control now employs people across Sydney—many of them not just the Indigenous men who came up with the idea but Indigenous women too. Today, as Babana brings businesses together with its members, I have no doubt that more practical steps will be taken and more lives will be transformed. Solutions that grow out of local communities are the solutions that endure. I want to congratulate Babana for the wonderful work they do to employ people to make sure that they've got all of the basics of life sorted. Albanese Government 84 10:17 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I'm going to do something completely contrarian today for this chamber. I am going to congratulate the Albanese government. Let's start by congratulating them on securing enough fuel and solving the Middle East crisis. Australians don't have to worry about fuel. Everything is fine. We have more fuel than we had at the start of this crisis. I'd like to congratulate the Albanese government on introducing a non-inflationary excise cut for fuel and the road user charge. There are no inflationary offsets, but they have managed to achieve the economically impossible, which is to make it non-inflationary—according to the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers. I'd like to congratulate the Albanese government on stopping all of the fraud and corruption in the NDIS. Despite the National Disability Insurance Agency projecting that 10 per cent of the NDIS is going towards fraud and corruption, the Albanese government has now solved it. Public money is back in safe hands. I'd like to congratulate them on stopping all of the issues around fraud in aged care, estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars. I'd like to congratulate the Albanese government on stopping all of the fraud in the childcare system which is continually being reported. And, of course, I've got to give them full credit and congratulate them on finally stopping all of the public money going to organised crime through the CFMEU-Labor cartel. Congratulations to the Albanese government on all the measures they are taking. Oh, it's 10.18 on 1 April. It's April Fools' Day. April fools on the Australian people for the reality of the Albanese government. We know full well the scale of the price Australians are now paying under the Albanese government. We've seen the highest public spending in 40 years outside of a recession and a pandemic. We've seen inflation continue to rise despite the government saying that we have turned the corner. We've had 14 interest rate rises under Labor, and Australians continue to pay the price of the Albanese government, with $27,000 more in the cost of a mortgage each year. At the same time, we've seen debt race towards a trillion dollars. It started under the 'Padawan Treasurer' and now the Treasurer, where we're seeing up to $50,000 a minute just to service that debt. Australia has had a decade of lost productivity, where the only economic improvement has come as a consequence of population growth, and the standard of living continues to decline. As we head towards the federal budget, so many Australians are going to look at this budget and say, 'Am I going to be better off after the federal budget?' The truth is that, at the moment, the only thing they're going to get is higher taxes to pay for organised crime. Australian-Philippine Association Illawarra, Namaste Mart Wollongong, Nan Tien Temple 84 10:20 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham I am so proud to represent the vibrant and multicultural Illawarra, where diverse communities enrich our region with celebration, life and colour. I recently attended the 47th anniversary of the founding of the Australian-Philippine Association's Illawarra chapter. From vibrant music and dance to delicious food and rich traditions, their work proudly showcases Filipino heritage and adds so much to the cultural fabric of the Illawarra. The association does outstanding work organising events and keeping the community connected, both online and in person. Thank you to President Estrella McKinnon, Secretary Erna De Los Reyes and the amazing management committee for everything they do to foster and strengthen the Filipino community's connection to the Illawarra. Wollongong also has a new Nepali and South Asian grocery store: Namaste Mart, a welcome addition to our multicultural landscape and a great way for locals to discover new flavours or reconnect with familiar ones. I was delighted to attend their grand opening recently. Businesses like this help to share traditions, celebrate diversity and bring people together through food. Congratulations to owners Uzi Bogati, Shan Bagale and Rojan Bhatta, and welcome to the Illawarra small business community. I was also honoured to recently attend the enshrining of the sacred relics of Venerable Master Hsing Yun at Nan Tien Temple in Berkeley recently. Venerable Master Hsing Yun was a renowned Chinese Buddhist monk, teacher and philanthropist who founded the Fo Guang Shan Buddhist order. He was a leading proponent of humanistic Buddhism, which seeks to integrate Buddhist teachings into everyday life and promote compassion, wisdom and kindness for all living beings. The Nan Tien Temple is the largest Buddhist temple in the Southern Hemisphere and was established in 1995 under the guidance of the venerable master, contributing greatly to the wellbeing and spiritual life of our region and beyond. It is now a New South Wales State Heritage listed landmark, recognised for its architectural beauty, cultural significance and role as a hub for mindfulness, wellbeing and intercultural community connections. The venerable master was passionate about education, and under his leadership the Nan Tien Institute's Wollongong campus opened opposite the temple in 2015. Venerable Master Hsing Yun sadly passed away in 2023 at the age of 97, and the enshrinement ceremony was a moving way to honour his life and legacy. Thank you to Venerable Hui-Kai, Venerable Man Ko and Venerable Miao You of Fo Guang Shan for their efforts organising this enshrinement ceremony and for ensuring the master's wisdom and compassion continues to be passed down to future generations. Hinkler Electorate: Tourism Industry, Rural, Regional and Remote Australia: Services, Hinkler Electorate: Schools 85 10:23 Mr BATT 315478 Hinkler Consumer confidence has now fallen to its lowest since records began. Regional areas like Hinkler need urgent support for the tourism and local business sector. In the aftermath of devastating floods and amidst the unfolding fuel crisis, many are feeling the pinch under this government. Delivering hope on the eve of Easter is the rollout of Bundaberg Tourism's new campaign, which captures what locals already know and love about the Bundaberg region—a place that's 'closer than you think' and 'greater than you imagine'. The bold new destination brand typifies our community, and I congratulate all involved in bringing together a reimagined website and coordinated marketing campaign. I've heard, sadly, that many tourists have cancelled their travel plans to our region because they can't afford fuel. On the other hand, caravanners in Hervey Bay have extended their stay because they're worried about travelling to other regions with such uncertainty over fuel supply. But the Bundaberg Tourism campaign delivers optimism at this tough time. It shares a story shaped by locals for locals and now shared with the rest of Australia, from the Southern Great Barrier Reef to the rich red soils of its hinterland, and by a spirit that is warm, welcoming and just a little bit cheeky. This brand now captures that spirit. It's about real experiences, good humans, moments you can't quite explain but never forget. It's old-school cool reimagined—classic Bundy but better than you remember. Rum, food, heritage, characters—laid-back, no fuss, no filters. So there's the invitation. You'd better visit us. You won't be disappointed. Congratulations to Bundaberg Tourism's Katherine Reid and Ellie Traynor, and the entire team, for developing this campaign. When it comes to issues impacting regional areas, health care is high on the list. Recently, I met with The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. They've put forward a proposal to give patients in communities like Hinkler greater access to general practice care for less than $3 million a year. The rural pathways program would fund GPs from major cities to spend four weeks each year providing care in country, allowing them to trial rural general practice, build on ongoing relationships with patients and communities, and train in the medical skills they most need. The more GPs who can be supported to provide care to regional areas like Hinkler, the better. I've talked at length about my commitment to deliver civics education across my electorate of Hinkler, and I'm delivering on my promise to visit every school in my first term. It's especially pleasing to see schools visit us here in Canberra, and I had the pleasure last week to meet with students from the Star of the Sea Catholic School in Torquay. I thank the Prime Minister for also giving some of his time to the students. To the parents, students and teachers of Hinkler wrapping up term 1, stay safe and enjoy the upcoming, well-deserved Easter break. Canberra Electorate: Health Care, Canberra Electorate: Old Narrabundah Community Council 85 10:26 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra For too long it has been too difficult for Canberrans to find a bulk-billing GP. We've been listening to them, and I'm proud that our government has been able to deliver extra support to Canberra to ensure that we can boost bulk-billing GP access in our city. The Albanese Labor government is really delivering on bulk-billing, tripling the bulk-billing incentive around the nation, but rates in Canberra have still lagged behind the national average. We've been able to secure $24.3 million in a package to boost fully bulk-billed clinics to get up and running. Last Friday I joined Senator Katy Gallagher, Andrew Leigh and David Smith to announce the locations of the three new bulk-billing GP clinics in the ACT that this has enabled to be established. Those will be a clinic in Gungahlin run by Macquarie General Practice, a clinic in south Tuggeranong run by Next Practice Deakin, and one in Molonglo run by Ochre Health. All three clinics will be opened by 30 June this year. I thank those doctors and practices who, through a very competitive process, have been granted the funds to get those clinics up and running. I thank all the doctors in Canberra who are bulk-billing, and all the doctors in Canberra for the incredible role that you play in our community. We have listened to you about how hard it can be, and that's why we're providing this extra support. This is a really great initiative and we're pleased to see that Canberrans will have better access to fully bulk-billed GP clinics around the ACT from 30 June. On Saturday I had the pleasure of attending the Old Narrabundah Community Council's annual community festival in Narrabundah. As always, it was a really well-attended and vibrant festival. There was great music there, including from the bands of Narrabundah College and Daramalan College, and lots of local producers providing great food. There were great performances and lots of people there enjoying a beautiful autumn morning in Canberra. These events don't happen by accident, and I thank the Old Narrabundah Community Council for everything they do. I congratulate them on what a successful event this always is. I particularly want to shout out to Andy Botham, and festival coordinators John Keeley and Tara Bucknall. I particularly enjoyed seeing the community garden, and it is really thriving—I congratulate Victoria Jewett and her team on the work that they've done there. They remediated a largely wasted area and made it into a thriving garden where community members can access a plot and grow their own vegetables. It was really great to hear people talk about what that meant to them and how they've been able to access this great fresh produce and a beautiful space to connect with nature. Australian National Flag, Fairfax Electorate: Homelessness 86 10:29 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax To love our flag is to love our country. Australians aren't a people who go for the pomp and ceremony like so many nations do, but that doesn't mean that we aren't deeply patriotic. Recently, I've seen that patriotism with younger Australians as they rally around the Aussie flag. I've had the great privilege of visiting some of the schools in my electorate recently. I want to say a very big thankyou to the Kenilworth state school, to St John's College, to Mountain Creek State School and also to the Good Samaritan in Bli Bli for welcoming me as we've been able to talk about the importance of the Australian flag. When you talk to these young students, you realise they have not only a very keen sense of Australian history but a very clear vision of Australia's future. They, like many of us, are deeply patriotic, and they too believe in the Aussie flag. As rents rise, interest rates go up and people are finding life just harder to live, we're seeing some Australians go not right to the edge of financial stability but beyond it. One of the worst consequences of such a cost-of-living crisis is homelessness. Even in my beautiful part of the world on the Sunshine Coast, we are seeing more and more people becoming homeless. This is something, of course, that every tier of government has a responsibility to act upon, but so too do we, as everyday Australians. I pay tribute to the community on the Sunshine Coast, who have swung in behind an initiative to get the Sunny Coast Sleeper to the town of Nambour. The sleeper is a bus that has nine sleeping pods, which allows those people who are homeless to have a safe, secure night's sleep in the bus. But, of course, ensuring that the bus is operating doesn't come free, which is why I launched a crowdfunding campaign to ensure that we can have enough funding to keep that bus in Nambour. I'm delighted to say that we have now reached $10,000, because everyday Sunshine Coast residents recognise, if they just give $15, that's enough to cover one night of safe sleep for somebody who otherwise would be on the street. So thank you very much to the community. By working together, we can keep tackling tough challenges like homelessness. Hawke Electorate: Community Events 86 10:32 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke Today I want to recognise some of the beautiful things that have been happening across our communities in my electorate of Hawke in recent times. It was a privilege to join the Sunbury community for SunFest's 50th anniversary just last month. There were two outstanding days at the Village Green that drew a fantastic crowd of 20,000 people to celebrate five decades of this beloved community festival. SunFest remains one of Sunbury's greatest community achievements, and, for a town that also happens to be the birthplace of the Ashes, that's really saying something. It's been going since 1976, and it doesn't happen without an extraordinary group of volunteers who show up every single year. Congratulations to the committee president, Angus McTaggart, the secretary, Kate Topp, the entire SunFest committee, and everyone who made this milestone such a success. It's been a year of fiftieths in my community. Last month, I also had the pleasure of attending the 50th Ballan Autumn Festival. I promise I'm not entirely biased, despite Ballan being my home town, but it was a wonderful celebration of everything that makes the Ballan community so special. Congratulations to the festival president, Kevin Harper, and the entire committee on this extraordinary milestone. I also want to acknowledge the 35th anniversary of the Ballan and District Chamber of Commerce, a remarkable contribution to local business and community life over more than three decades. I was delighted to visit the brand new Murrum early learning centre in Weir Views recently with the Minister for Early Childhood Education. During the election we promised to deliver a new childcare centre for the Weir Views community, and it was fantastic to see this commitment had come to life. It shows what happens when you invest in the future of young families in our growing community. I also joined the Cobblebank Community Services Hub topping-out ceremony in March, which is the result of a $15 million investment by the Albanese government through the Thriving Suburbs Program. This hub will bring essential health, disability, employment and rehabilitation services under one roof for the community of Cobblebank and surrounding areas. This is a direct result of our commitment to ensuring that growth areas get the services and infrastructure that they need and that they deserve. I'm also pleased to report that more than 80 per cent of clinics in Hawke are now bulk-billing, reflecting the real impact of the Albanese Labor government's Medicare reforms on our community. I'm pleased to do so in the presence of the Minister for Health and Ageing, Mark Butler, who's done extraordinary work across government to make this a reality for people across our community—thank you, Mark. More families in Melton, Bacchus Marsh, Diggers Rest, Sunbury and across my electorate can now see a GP without worrying about the costs. Finally, I want to give a big shout-out to Jacinta Guirguis from Bacchus Marsh, who made it to the top six on Australian Idol just this week. Australian Sikh Games 87 10:35 Mr WOOD E0F La Trobe I rise today to acknowledge the upcoming 38th Australian Sikh Games to be held in Melbourne from 3 to 5 April 2026 at Parkville. I've been to a number of these games in the past and they are absolutely fantastic. The Australian Sikh Games are a premier sporting and cultural event for our fantastic Sikh community right across Australia. Each year the games bring together athletes' families and spectators not only from across Australia but also from overseas, including New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, Canada and the United Kingdom. The event includes a total of 17 different sporting games, and a total of 9,500 players have registered so far. A blood donation drive is being organised in partnership with Red Cross, which is absolutely fantastic, and the fundraiser will aim to raise $125,000 for the Royal Children's Hospital. The event is expected to attract around an incredible 300,000 people over three days, with over 8,000 athletes and performers. Free food will be provided to all attendees during the event. When it comes to gurdwaras, they always provide free food for anyone who visits; they provide so much support for the community. Around 120 non-profit sporting and cultural clubs will be taking part, making the games a powerful example of community participation. Congratulations to the Melbourne Sikh Games organising committee for all the incredible hard work and effort you put in making the games a success year after year in Melbourne, including President Jagjit Singh Chugha; Senior Vice President Rupinder Brar, Vice President Arashdeep Singh, Kulwant Singh—a good friend of mine; Gurpreet Shokar and Muskan Soraya; secretary Udesh Virdi and all the other committee members and all those who will be supporting. I was very proud, prior to the last election, that an elected Liberal government would commit $450,000 to support the Sikh games, and I was very glad to see the government match that funding. They're desperate for funding because they have so many volunteers. The success of the games relies on hundreds of those volunteers I spoke about, along with support from local businesses, sponsors and community fundraising. I'm especially proud to acknowledge a local club from my electorate of La Trobe, the Baba Buddha Ji sporting club in Pakenham—otherwise known as BBJSC—will be representing our community volleyball, and I wish them every success in the competition. I congratulate BBJSC's executive team Onkar Sekhon, Jagdev Singh and Charan Singh for their friendship over the years and also for their leadership and hard work, efforts to support young athletes and help in promoting healthy lifestyles, discipline and unity. I wish all the competitors, volunteers and families a safe, successful and memorable games in Melbourne next month. Medicare 87 10:38 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh Today I want to talk about the government's agenda for strengthening Medicare. It won't be any surprise to Australians to know at the core of that agenda is turning around the bulk-billing rates that were in absolute freefall when we came to government in 2022. For Labor, bulk-billing—being able to see a doctor whenever you need to rather than when you can afford to—has been the beating heart of Medicare, and we've been fighting that fight for four decades. I am sitting next to the member for Macarthur, who started practice on the first day of Medicare's introduction, and, even back then, we had to fight for bulk-billing, fight against a Liberal Party who, in John Howard's words, said it was 'an absolute rort' and, frankly, fight against doctors groups at the time as well. But our Strengthening Medicare agenda is more than just bulk-billing. It's also about implementing new models of care that respond to the needs of Australian patients today. I'm really proud of the 137 urgent care clinics that we've promised to Australians. About 134 of them are already operating seven days a week, extended hours, providing high-quality urgent care to people for non-life-threatening emergencies. The other three will be opening in coming weeks. We also, on 1 January, kicked off 1800MEDICARE, which ensures that Australians have a qualified nurse at the end of the phone to give them high-quality health advice 24/7, 365 days a year. And, if the nurse thinks that it's appropriate, the patient can be referred for a free GP telehealth consult between 6 pm and 6 am seven days a week. Today I'm really delighted to announce that we're rolling out an equivalent program for mental health distress. When we talked to mental health experts on coming to government, and when we've read reports like the Productivity Commission report, it's been clear that Australia has had, for some time, a significant gap in the mental health supports available to Australians. That gap is for relatively low-intensity support for moderate levels of distress. This can often be as a result of one of those life events we all go through: relationship breakdowns, job losses, bereavements and such. Sometimes people can get through those periods with the support of their family and friends. At other times they need some professional help. Today we're moving to the next level of our Medicare Mental Health Check In program. This provides, again, around-the-clock support for people who want access to information that will help them deal with that level of distress. From this week they will also have access to low-intensity therapy delivered by qualified professionals—without a GP referral, without any out-of-pocket costs and backed by the Medicare system. That is what a stronger Medicare plan looks like. Wannon Electorate: Environmental Conservation 88 10:41 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon One of the great sights you'll see in western Victoria happens when two brolgas are courting and start dancing in a paddock. It is magic to witness and watch. But the sad reality is that the brolga is now a threatened species and this lovely ritual, and other sightings of the brolgas in western Victoria, is getting harder and harder to see. That's why, on behalf of the community, I've taken action. I have written to the government to ensure that the brolga gets recognised as a protected species. This could not be more important. The government talks a huge game about protecting our environment and protecting our nature. Well, now they have a test. I have written to the director of the species listing, information and policy section of the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. I've said this: 'In light of the information now regarding the status of the brolga, I ask the Threatened Species Scientific Committee to list the southern brolga as endangered or critically endangered; conduct an urgent review into current projects posing an unacceptable risk to the viability of the southern brolga and its critical habitat; and undertake urgent and integrated conservation action, as outlined in the enclosed threatened species nomination form, to conserve the species.' Let's hope the government acts. Otherwise, that beautiful courting ritual could be something which, sadly, disappears in western Victoria. I had the great honour of participating in the fun run at Coleraine a week ago. This wasn't a normal fun run. This was a fun run about making sure that we can conserve and protect one of the greatest native eucalyptus collections in the world. This has been under the management of the Victorian state government, and, sadly, they have neglected it. The Coleraine community have taken back the Points arboretum and are now doing everything they can to get it back to the pristine condition it should be in. They've updated the tracks again. They're putting signs on all the different eucalyptus species and making this a world famous location again. I can't thank the Coleraine community enough for all their efforts in doing this. National Disability Insurance Scheme 88 10:45 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur The NDIS is a fantastic Labor initiative. I have spent my working life dealing with kids—many with severe disability—and I remember Trent very, very well. Trent is now in his 40s. I looked after him when he was born. He has Down syndrome. He had congenital heart disease. He had a number of difficulties associated with Down syndrome, including bowel obstruction in the neonatal period, but he survived. He survived well with the efforts of his family, in particular—a working-class Campbelltown family who loved him as they loved their other three children and who looked after him beautifully. Unfortunately, Trent's father died suddenly some years ago, and, only fairly recently, Trent's mother passed away. Trent's mother's one wish for him was that he would be cared for for the rest of his life. She always worried about what would happen once she and her husband had passed away. Trent's three siblings were involved with his care and love him deeply, but the family really wanted to make sure that Trent could be looked after in an appropriate way for the rest of his life. He's still going strong, and, thanks to the NDIS, he's getting fantastic care. He loves his carers, interacts well with his siblings and lives in his own little supported unit in Melbourne. The family moved to Melbourne about 10 years ago, but I've kept in contact with them. The NDIS is giving Trent a life of fulfilment thanks to the support he gets from all those around him, including his family, and will do so for the rest of his life. That's what the NDIS means. Unfortunately, what's happened with the NDIS is that it has now exploded to caring for almost 800,000 people rather than the around 100,000 it was projected to care for. Many people are getting NDIS access whom the scheme was never designed for. I want people like Trent with severe disability to be cared for as part of the community's efforts through the NDIS. It's very important that we preserve the scheme for people like Trent and the many other kids with severe disabilities that I've looked after. Senator Jenny McAllister, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, is doing a fantastic job in making sure the system is fit for purpose for the future. That means giving people messages about who the scheme was designed to support. It's very important that we make sure people with severe disability do get the care that they deserve. That means some hard answers need to happen. It is very important that we do this as a government because, after 10 years of coalition neglect, the scheme was not fit for purpose. I thank Jenny McAllister and Health Minister Mark Butler for all their efforts for the NDIS. O'Connor Electorate: Sport 89 10:48 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor I rise today to give a big shout-out to three local sporting champions from the electorate of O'Connor—Jethro Wright, Bailey Cronin and Aylah Chadwick—all of whom I caught up with recently. Their sporting achievements reflect not only their individual talent but also the commitment of their families, their coaches and their communities, who support them every step of the way. In regional Australia, participation in sport at an elite level comes with unique challenges. Long distances to competition venues, the rising costs of travel and accommodation, and time away from school and work all place significant pressures on young sporting champions' families. It's why the Local Sporting Champions grant program, delivered by the Australian Sports Commission, is so important. It provides grants of up to $750 for young athletes aged 12 to 18 competing at state, national or international championships. That's valuable support for those living in regional electorates like mine. For me, as a hockey dad myself, it was a pleasure to meet accomplished hockey players Jethro Wright and Bailey Cronin at the Wagin Woolorama recently. Jethro Wright of Mount Barker represented Western Australia at the State Schoolboys Under 15s National Hockey Championships held at the National Hockey Centre in Canberra last August. I also acknowledge Bailey Cronin, an even younger champion hockey player from Nippering. Bailey represented Western Australia at the School Sport Australia 12 Years and Under boys championship in Bendigo in Victoria last August. Finally, I commend Aylah Chadwick, who I recently caught up with in Bridgetown, Aylah's achievements in athletics are truly impressive, as she placed sixth in the under-17 girls individual javelin at the Australian Athletics All Schools Championships held in Melbourne in December. Aylah has since won bronze medals in both javelin and shotput at the WA State Junior Track and Field Championships, qualifying her for the 2026 Australian Athletics Junior (Under Age) Championships in Brisbane. I close by noting that none of these local sporting champions' achievements occur in isolation. They reflect the determined commitment of not only the athletes but also the parents, who incur significant out-of-pocket costs so their kids can pursue their sporting dreams. That's why the Local Sporting Champions grant program is often so oversubscribed in O'Connor. I take this opportunity to advise that round 4 is now open, with applications closing on 30 April. I strongly encourage eligible families and young athletes to apply. These grants make a tangible difference for regional families and help ensure that a young person's postcode does not limit their potential. I congratulate Jethro, Bailey and Aylah on their sporting achievements to date and look forward to following their sporting careers into the future. Prangnell, Mr Brian Charles, OAM, McGarry, Mr Michael, Anderson, Mr Sid 89 10:51 Ms ROBERTS 157125 Pearce () (): The incorporated speech read as follows— It is with deep respect and affection as the federal member for Pearce that I honour the life and legacy of Mr Brian Charles Prangnell OAM. I have witnessed firsthand the impact Brian has had on our local community and our state. He was a man who never sought the spotlight yet whose quiet, steadfast service illuminated the lives of so many. Brian's story is woven into the fabric of Western Australia. From his early days in the Baptist Church through to his later years as a community and veterans leader, he devoted himself to serving others with humility and faith. His commitment to the Baptist Church spanned more than 70 years, serving as deacon, church secretary, organist, Boys' Brigade captain and chaplain, seniors coordinator and librarian, and helping to establish the seniors fellowship at Woodvale Baptist Church. For generations of young people, Brian will always be 'Mr Prangnell from the Boys' Brigade'. As state president, secretary and executive officer of the Boys' Brigade in WA, and as a longstanding company captain and chaplain, he shaped countless boys into young men of character, discipline and faith. Many in our community can trace their values and resilience back to time spent under Brian's calm, caring leadership. To our veteran community, Brian was a rock. As a life member and long-serving state secretary of the National Servicemen's Association of Australia in WA, and through his involvement with the RSL, he worked tirelessly to ensure those who served were recognised, supported and never forgotten. His role as a sub-warden of the WA State War Memorial in Kings Park reflected a deep respect for the service and sacrifice of others. Brian's Medal of the Order of Australia was richly deserved, yet he wore it with characteristic humility—always choosing to talk about those he served rather than his own achievements. That quiet strength, reliability, and kindness endeared him to all who knew him. We also remember with respect two other outstanding Pearce community members and ex-servicemen—Michael McGarry and Sid Anderson—whose recent passing leaves a great void in the Pearce community. Michael, former president of the Quinns Rocks Junior Football Club and West Perth Ambassador for Junior Football, was a passionate supporter of every local game from Yanchep to Joondalup. Sid, vice president of the Quinns Rocks RSL, was much loved and lived a life of community service and devotion to his wife and family. Brian Prangnell, Michael McGarry and Sid Anderson each lived lives of service—to their country, their communities, and the people they loved. Their contributions strengthened the social fabric of Pearce and inspired others to serve. May they rest in peace, and may their families find comfort in the legacy they leave behind. Fuel 90 10:51 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith The conflict in the Middle East is having real consequences here at home. It's pushing up global fuel prices and putting pressure on Australian families, farmers and small businesses. I want families and businesses in the community I represent to know that I hear them and the government is acting to provide them with as much support as possible. We're acting to ensure that we can continue to supply fuel to the Australian market and that prices are as low as possible. We're keeping fuel flowing and helping shield household budgets from the worst of the global uncertainty. We're working to get more fuel into the country and to get it where it needs to go. An essential part of the response is direct cost-of-living relief. From today, we've halved the fuel excise on petrol and diesel for the next three months. That's cutting the price of fuel by 26.3c per litre. It's immediate practical support for Australians under pressure. We've also cut the heavy vehicle road user charge to zero for three months, helping truckies continue their vital work keeping shelves stocked and supply chains running. We've been clear that producers and importers must pass these savings on. The Treasurer has written to the ACCC, which is now ramping up monitoring, issuing on-the-spot fines and launching enforcement investigations into major suppliers. If fuel companies think that they can take Australians for mugs, they'll have the book thrown at them. National Cabinet has agreed to a National Fuel Security Plan to coordinate a consistent response across the Commonwealth, states and territories. Australia is currently at level 2, 'Keeping Australia moving', and we'll continue to adjust our response as needed. This plan ensures that governments and industry are working together to keep our economy open and our communities supplied. We've released 20 per cent of the nation's fuel reserves, targeted at regional areas. That's about 760 million litres. We've temporarily changed petrol and diesel standards to get more fuel flowing, and we've appointed a Fuel Supply Taskforce Coordinator, Anthea Harris, to strengthen coordination across government sectors. We're engaging closely with international partners, including Singapore, Korea, Malaysia and Japan, to keep supply lines open. We've spent every day since we came to office working to strengthen our international relationships, particularly in the region. We're confronting this challenge from a position of strength—low unemployment, solid economic growth and a budget in far better shape than the one we inherited. But we're not complacent. The Treasury is modelling different scenarios, and we're preparing for anything that may come. Our message is simple: Australians should buy the fuel that they need and no more than that. Every Australian can play their part, and the Albanese government will continue working around the clock to protect families, support regional communities and keep Australia moving. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265980 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS 91 STATEMENTS ON SIGNIFICANT MATTERS Mason, Hon. Sir Anthony Frank, AC, KBE, GBM, KC 91 10:54 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Today we remember and honour the life of Sir Anthony Mason, a man whose lasting contributions to the High Court of Australia continue to shape our legal landscape. Sir Anthony passed away just shy of his 101st birthday, leaving behind a legacy that will endure for generations to come. Sir Anthony was a former Chief Justice of Australia and one of Australia's greatest and most influential jurists. Throughout his remarkable career, Sir Anthony guided the High Court through some of the most significant legal reforms in Australian history. His judgements not only reshaped Australian law but also deeply influenced the social and political fabric of our nation. His work will continue to inspire and guide generations of lawyers, judges and citizens who seek a just and fair legal system. Sir Anthony's career is marked by numerous landmark judgements and decisions that have shaped the Australian legal system, influencing the development of constitutional law, human rights and native title. As Chief Justice of the High Court, he was at the helm of some of the most significant legal reforms in Australian history, but perhaps he will most be known by the decision of Mabo v Queensland (No. 2) case, heard in 1992. This landmark judgement, which recognised native title for the first time, overturned the doctrine of terra nullius, or 'land belonging to no-one'. Under Sir Anthony's stewardship, the High Court recognised the rights of Indigenous Australians on this land, a legal shift that not only reshaped property law but had profound cultural and social implications for this country. But Sir Anthony's influence extended far beyond Mabo. He was also instrumental in recognising the implied freedom of political communication in the Constitution through the Australian Capital Television case in 1992. This decision was instrumental in helping to safeguard political speech and preventing excessive government interference in legitimate public discourse. It was a judgement that has ensured that free expression on political matters remains protected and that the right to communicate freely is enshrined in our Constitution. Sir Anthony also made a landmark judgement in the Franklin dam case in 1983. This case expanded the Commonwealth's legislative power, particularly in relation to environmental law. His judgement broadly interpreted the Commonwealth's external affairs power, allowing the federal government to legislate on matters relating to international treaties. It was a pivotal moment in Australian legal history that highlighted Sir Anthony's capacity to interpret the Constitution in a way that addressed contemporary concerns, balancing legal principles with national priorities. Additionally, Sir Anthony's judgement in Cole v Whitfield in 1988 helped bring much-needed clarification to section 92 of the Australian Constitution, which deals with the free movement of goods across state boundaries. Sir Anthony's ruling in this case helped to end decades of inconsistent rulings and brought much-needed certainty to Australian commercial law, reinforcing the importance of clarity and fairness in legal interpretation. It was a decision that enhanced Australia's economic integration, ensuring that trade between the states was not hindered by unnecessary legal complexities. Sir Anthony's legacy is not just in the decisions he delivered, but also in the way he shaped the High Court's approach to constitutional interpretation. His ability to adapt, to evolve and to interpret the law with a deep sense of justice and fairness is what set him apart as a truly visionary jurist. To Sir Anthony's family, friends and colleagues, I offer my deepest condolences. The legal profession, our country and the world have lost a giant, but his legacy will live on in the decisions that he brought down, the principles he upheld and the justice that he sought. While we mourn his passing, we also celebrate his extraordinary life and the immense contribution he made to the law of our nation. Sir Anthony's work shaped not only the course of Australian law but also the future of our country. His legacy will continue to guide us and his commitment to justice will remain an inspiration to us all. May we honour his memory by continuing to strive for the principles of fairness and justice that he held so dear. Sitting suspended from 11:00 to 11:15 11:15 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner It is a pleasure to rise to pay tribute to Sir Anthony Mason, one of the most distinguished jurists Australia has ever produced. As an associate on the High Court of Australia to Justice Michael Kirby, I had the privilege of coming to know Sir Anthony Mason somewhat. He turned up as a surprise guest to a book launch we did in 2004 and was as gracious then as he was throughout his career. Sir Anthony Mason served as an aircraftman in World War II, and his career began in the black-letter realm of the Sydney bar. Many at that stage would not have expected him to be the innovative jurist that he became later in his career. He served on the Supreme Court until 1972, when he was appointed to the bench of the High Court of Australia and was one of the last Australians to receive a knighthood. He served for 15 years as a puisne judge and then in 1987 was appointed Chief Justice. He retired in 1995 after reaching the constitutionally mandatory retirement age of 70. As I said, his career began as a conservative judge, but he moved the court away from the strict legalism that had characterised the chief justiceship of Owen Dixon towards a more flexible approach, epitomised in cases such as Cole v Whitfield, Polyukhovich v Commonwealth and most notably during Mabo v Queensland (No. 2). The Mabo decision shook Australia. It got rid of that outdated falsehood of terra nullius, the idea that there was nothing here when European settlers arrived. Terra nullius is a doctrine to which no-one in the House or the Senate would today subscribe; not even our most extreme members of parliament would suggest that terra nullius is true, and yet, remarkably, that was the law of the land. With Mabo the notion of native title was introduced. There were critiques that it was overly activist, but, ultimately, native title has become a firm part of the Australian property law system. In other decisions such as Dietrich v The Queen, the High Court under Sir Anthony Mason established that an accused was entitled to publicly funded legal representation. And there were important decisions on constitutionally implied freedom of political communication through Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth and Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Wills. These decisions, though not unanimous, were important in shaping the notion of rights in Australia. Sir Anthony Mason enjoyed a relatively quiet retirement. He served on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, but he just popped up in interesting places, as he did in a pub in Sydney when four young Australians launched a book called Imagining Australia: Ideas for Our Future. A couple of us had served as High Court associates, but really I'm not quite sure why it was worth his time, except that he was always interested in big ideas and in the future of the country. Sir Anthony Mason shaped Australia for the better and he shaped the Australian legal fabric for the better. He has left an indelible mark on law students, lawyers, judges and presidents alike and will be justly mourned and rightly recognised. Sitting suspended from 11:19 to 11:35 BILLS 92 BILLS Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026 92

Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026

Second Reading 92 11:36 Mr HOLZBERGER 88411 Forde I rise in support of the Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026 and, in doing so, congratulate the Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs, who has done a lot of work to make this bill happen—a lot of work that is typical of this government's approach to getting on with the job and fixing up the mess that we were left with after so many years of the former government's neglect. This government is, in many ways, dealing with stuff, and in this case it is dealing with something which industry and stakeholders have been calling on for years. It is only this government that has been able to do it. That's because of two things. We have a philosophy in this government that is about lifting up the living standards of people and making it easy for business to operate, but I think we also have a very sharp managerial edge to our team, where we are just methodical, calm and deliberate in that approach. Here we are dealing with what is really an insidious problem for small business but also an insidious problem for consumers, who have every right to expect that the product that they buy is genuine, quality, warrantable—they can take it back if the product needs repairing or is faulty in any way—and, most importantly, safe. This is not just about products which you might typically expect to be counterfeited. This is about medical devices. This is about children's toys, where the bits can break off in a baby's mouth. This bill very much deals with a commercial problem for business, but it also deals with a safety problem for consumers, as part of that philosophy that this government brings and part of that skilled management as well. I'd like to remind people that I came to this place after spending quite a lot of time in small business myself, having a contract mustering business, where I had a pack of dogs and a ute and a motorbike and the will to win. I would go around and help farmers muster their sheep and cattle. But, when we moved to the city 20 years ago, I ran a construction company in Beenleigh. When working in business—and that's why something like this is so important—people really put their heart and soul into creating a product and creating intellectual property. The thing that I really learned about business is that quite often the business person is not doing it for the money. As somebody put it to me once, the money is a way of keeping score. They do it because they've got this idea, they've got this passion for something which generally solves a problem in other people's lives or brings joy to other people. In many ways business is so fulfilling because the most fulfilling thing that you can do is make a contribution to your community. That's what good business people do. That's what good entrepreneurs do. So it was that that I ran a construction company in Beenleigh. When I say I ran the construction company, I didn't own it, so I regarded myself as chief lackey. There was one family in particular, the McDonalds, whom I would very much like to give a shout out to here today. Ian Macdonald and Grant MacDonald took me under their wing and really showed me the ropes but then let me run the company as if it were my own. When I first met Ian, who was affectionately known as 'Macca', he was in many ways the quintessential Gold Coast entrepreneur—not the one that you might think of in the white shoe brigade, or the flashy type. This guy was really somebody that embodied small business. He was somebody that didn't holiday overseas, didn't eat out, drove the late-model car. When I met him, he was 70 and well and truly a character and a half. He was so passionate about this system that he had developed of sheet-piling—and, Deputy Speaker Boyce, with your engineering background you may have come across what sheet-piling is. Essentially, the idea is that if you need to dig a hole—say, to build a basement in a high-rise building—it's the shoring which is designed to stop the hole from falling in on itself. That's the theory—it doesn't always necessarily work in practice. Ian's son was Grant MacDonald—who I'd also like to give a shout out to. He was somebody who really understood the business. When you're working underground, the really good people get this sense about when the ground is moving, and Grant had that sense. Grant was so skilled in business and in construction that he took me under his wing and taught me so many things about business. They had actually developed this product which was designed by them, which had been tested at Griffith University and by a local engineering firm, Howl Engineering. They had this Australian designed, Australian-made, Australian installed product, which they had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars patenting and trademarking. By the time I came along, their business had been running for 20 years or so, and one of my jobs was to sit in the meetings with the patent attorneys and with the lawyers to try to work out how to stop the competition from ripping them off. They had the sheet-piling and, without going into too much engineering, they also had an anchoring system where they had this 20-centimetre-diameter screw head, which would tie into the sheets and pull them back into the ground as an anchor. They had these cowboys ripping them off and copying their exact design, but not only was it poorly counterfeited but it was also poorly installed. I remember the consequences of their competitors doing exactly that. There was a job in Sydney where they were digging a hole next to a post office, and the wall collapsed. The post office started to move and the customers and the workers in the post office were fleeing for their lives as the glass was breaking all around them. That was an example of what happened when their product was poorly counterfeited and poorly installed. My job was to sit in those meetings with patent attorneys and with the lawyers to work out how to stop the competition. Because the only way to do it was through civil action, it would have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to take that action, with no guarantee of there being success. That is the sort of example of what companies in Australia that have a trademark have to do under the current system. They have to take the civil action themselves—something which the estimate from the legal stakeholders who took part in this quite extensive consultation process estimated at somewhere between $200,000 and $500,000. And so this government is doing the right thing by relieving that burden, and we'll be able to fine the companies which are caught importing counterfeits, which is, as I say, something that industry and stakeholders have been calling for for years, but it is only this government that has been able to deliver it. As I say, it is typical of this government's philosophy and its managerial skills that we're able to do this. The one thing that I learned by running a business, which I don't think the member for Goldstein has ever done, is that there are two—in fact, I love the saying that you run a country like you run a company, because there are two ways to run a company. One is to invest in your plant and your people, and the other is to delay the maintenance, to strip out the profits and to run it into the ground. The latter is exactly what the opposition does. That's why, on detail like this, it was just left to go. It's not just on detail like this. It's their opposition to free TAFE. It's their opposition to bulk-billing. It's the fact that they don't want to invest in the people or the infrastructure of this country that has created the problem that we're dealing with now. And so it is that, through this sort of work, the government is really getting on with the job that was left to us to do. The first point to make about this legislation is that it is not about somebody getting off the plane in Bali with a fake Hermes bag. That's not what this legislation is going to capture. Some of the examples are where organised crime and, effectively, illegal operators have brought in something—for example, Ozempic. There's one case study here where the TGA and Border Force intercepted fake Ozempic pens, believe it or not. They were stopped before they could reach consumers. But there was one case, reportedly, where an individual had used this Ozempic and almost died because it was full of insulin. There was another example last year where counterfeit Labubu dolls—anybody who has a child would probably know exactly what a Labubu doll is. I'm not sure why anybody would want to counterfeit them, but they're attractive. Attractive may be looking like Labubu dolls perhaps, but when the child imagined—because of the poor stitching and because of the poor construction of these dolls, they broke apart. They would break apart literally in a child's mouth and become a choking hazard. There were examples where these dolls also contained harmful chemicals because of the way that they were constructed. There's another example where, amazingly, somebody thought about counterfeiting a STIHL chainsaw. You've got to hand it to organised crime to even come up with these things. I've often also said that, if criminals spent as much time being imaginative in a legitimate pursuit, then they would probably make more money than they would be in illegitimate pursuits. They made these counterfeit chainsaws, believe it or not, which were sold online for just a little bit cheaper than what you'd buy the genuine article for, to make it even more convincing. When they found one of these counterfeit chainsaws and unwrapped it, the safety handle actually snapped off as they were unwrapping the chainsaw. Extraordinarily, somebody almost got this into the country, and people would have been able to buy it. As I say, it's not just that gut-wrenching feeling that you would get when you realise that the Hermes bag you bought is not actually Hermes. This is not only something that you can't take back when it breaks; it is something which literally could kill you. This government is to be commended for doing the work that the previous government didn't do. It is part of an overall strategy to lift the living standards of all Australians and to do it in a methodical and deliberate way, which stands in stark contrast to the utterly chaotic way the government was run under the now opposition. As I say, because of the philosophy that we have of investing in our people and in systems and our philosophy of managing properly—just as I would have learned in a construction company—it is important to get those details right. That sort of approach, through consultation and through listening to what industry and stakeholders want and making it happen and delivering, is a hallmark of this government. The assistant minister is to be congratulated for his work. I commend the bill to the House. 11:51 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein Deputy Speaker, can I clarify which bill we speaking on. Is it the trademarks one? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 298800 The Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026. Mr TIM WILSON IMW Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak on the Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026. Of course, we all fundamentally believe in making sure that we have the legislative arrangements in place so that Australia's intellectual property framework continues to operate confidently and works to respect the property rights of rights holders. I was fascinated by the delusional speech by the member for Forde, where he reflected on the state of trademarks and the operational problems around organised crime taking advantage of illicit products imported into this country, in particular when the Labor Party has been central to financing, through government, organised crime for things like illicit tobacco. I believe very strongly in trademark protection, but the solution from the Labor Party in these areas has been to strip products of their trademarks so that they can create a generic product so that they can increase the chances of not just extracting record profits for organised crime but, in addition to that, fuelling and building out the infrastructure necessary for organised crime to thrive. I've said previously that, legislatively, there has never been a better time for organised crime than under the Albanese government. They're securing record profits. They're securing them in the black market, and there are direct incentives because of government policy to do so. Normally the response from a government would be to snuff out those pathways for people to secure record profits through organised crime. We have a slightly different situation under the Albanese government. Mr Holzberger 88411 I raise a point of order, Deputy Speaker. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 298800 What is your point of order? Mr Holzberger 88411 On relevance, I think we're witnessing what happens when a member turns up to speak on the wrong legislation. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 298800 I will ask the member to make sure that he's being relevant to the bill, which is the Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026. Mr TIM WILSON IMW I'm sorry, Deputy Speaker, but— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 298800 So I would suggest not talking about tobacco. Mr TIM WILSON IMW With the greatest respect, trademarks are branding. Labor governments removed branding from tobacco, creating a pathway for organised crime to thrive. The Labor Party talks about this all the time. It's part of customs legislation. It's entirely reasonable and, if the chair wants to challenge me on that, we can do so. When you have trademarks, it creates differentiation between products. This is about false trademark infringement. When you have trademarks, it creates differentiation between products so that consumers can make decisions based on different ways products are branded. That's the nature of a trademark. As a consequence, when you strip trademarks from products, as previous Labor governments have explicitly done by law and then patted themselves on the back and thrown parties to themselves—the former minister Nicola Roxon said she was the world first—you create a generic product. A consequence of creating that generic product, plus a substantial increase in the excise, is that it has led to the greatest windfall for organised crime, because the government doesn't understand customs regulation, customs legislation, trademark law, the practice of trademarks, trademark infringement, tax law and the intersection that leads to the profiting of organised crime. As the previous speaker spoke about organised crime, I will speak about organised crime in the context of trademarks, because one of the problems that we have is we have a government that doesn't understand how trademarks practically work. The consequence of failing to understand the importance of intellectual property, the role it plays, what happens when you strip it from products, is it creates an environment where you have a low actual production value good sold at a disproportionate premium. When that happens, as happens with illicit products which have false trademarks, organised crime steps into the breach and profits from it, as the previous Labor speaker referred. What happens? They build the distribution networks to do so. Through the process of building those distribution networks, organised crime has never had a better time than under the Albanese government explicitly because of false trademarks or the government removing trademarks and then increasing excise on certain products. So when the previous speaker spoke about how I didn't understand how these things practically work, I can assure you I have a very clear understanding about how these things work and about the consequences of poor government legislation and the flow-on effects. We have seen, because of the approach of the Albanese government deliberately stripping trademarks, particularly in the area of things like tobacco, violent bombing of small businesses, dramatic increases in small-business insurance, significant profiteering for organised crime that then goes on to do things like finance terrorism, particularly antisemitic terrorism, including with a country that, last I checked, was currently being bombed by the United States because of its exporting of terrorism and the threat of nuclear weapons. So it highlights how important (1) having a conversation about this legislation is and (2) what happens when bad Labor governments successively get this area of law wrong. But as I made the point, when bad Labor governments get the law wrong, it enables an environment for organised crime to profiteer. When that happens under the protection of false or legitimate trademarks, as has occurred—according to former minister Bill Shorten—organised crime moves into government funded distribution networks through the NDIS, which is a brand to help people understand what it is trying to achieve but, in practice, has become a honeypot for organised crime. The key thing we have to do is stop organised crime, and one of the most important ways to do that is to actually respect the private property of trademark holders, and that is what Labor governments have a terrible track record of doing. In fact, they have an explicit history of stripping trademarks from products, and they were explicitly warned by industry at the time that this will lead to a proliferation of organised crime and profiteering that will subvert tax revenue and Australian law—explicitly warned by industry, explicitly warned by trademark experts, explicitly warned by law and order professionals. And, of course, where are those products coming from? They are coming through Australian ports in containers, and we are not seeing tax being paid. Consumers are buying these products unbranded, knowingly or unknowingly. So the government doesn't understand what it is doing. It doesn't understand our trademark law; it doesn't understand legislatively. And, as sure as hell, the previous speaker has no idea; this was clear from in his interjections and points of relevance. This is a reflection of what happens when a government simply doesn't understand what it's doing. Sitting suspended from 12:00 to 12:06 12:06 Ms PENFOLD 248895 Lyne I rise to speak on the Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026. At its core, this bill is about protecting Australians from dangerous counterfeit goods and defending the rights of genuine businesses from fraud and intellectual property theft. That is a goal we support, because counterfeit goods are not a harmless imitation. They are a direct threat to consumer safety, business integrity and the rule of law. As outlined in the minister's second reading speech, we know the scale of the problem. In just one financial year, over 700,000 counterfeit items with an estimated value of more than $35 million, if those goods had been genuine, were seized at the border. That is not a small issue. That is a systemic problem, one that demands a strong and effective response. Counterfeit goods can include everything from phone chargers to pharmaceuticals, from beauty products to vehicle parts. These are not trivial items. These are products that Australians use every day—products that, if counterfeit, can cause real harm. A faulty charger can start a fire, a counterfeit pharmaceutical can fail to treat illness, and a fake vehicle part can put lives at risk. When people talk about counterfeit items they often think of fake handbags, but we're talking about items that are far more serious and have significant consequences. And when we talk about intellectual property, we're not just talking about legal rights; we're talking about consumer safety. This bill creates a new strict liability offence for importing goods with false trademarks—that is, counterfeit goods. This brings those offences within the Infringement Notice Scheme under the Customs Act, allowing Australian Border Force to issue penalties without the need for lengthy court proceedings. This is intended to strengthen enforcement, but the use of strict liability offence where fault is not required to be proved is a very serious legal tool. This requires further examination and consideration, and I'm pleased that there has been agreement for this bill to be considered by a Senate committee. While I understand the problem that this legislation is seeking to address, we must also be honest about the broader environment in which Australian businesses are operating. Right now, businesses are under immense pressure, and that pressure is undermining their ability to compete—not just against counterfeits, but in the economy more broadly. According to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, more than 11,000 companies entered external administration in 2023-24, and insolvencies are now running at over 13,000 annually—the highest level in more than a decade. Entire sectors are struggling. Construction firms are collapsing under rising costs, hospitality businesses are closing their doors, retailers are facing declining demand and there are far too many empty shops on our high streets. At the same time, businesses are facing escalating costs. Energy prices remain high, insurance premiums are rising and borrowing costs have surged. The Reserve Bank of Australia has made it clear that inflation has remained persistent, forcing interest rates to stay higher for longer, and businesses are carrying that burden. This matters in the context of this bill, because when legitimate businesses are weakened, counterfeiters gain ground; when margins are thin, unfair competition hits harder; when confidence is low, investment in innovation declines; and when businesses fail, the very intellectual property we're seeking to protect disappears with them. While the government says this bill supports a prosperous and reputable retail sector, the reality is that its broader economic policies are doing the opposite. We've seen rising insolvencies, weak business investment, declining confidence and increasing cost pressures. You cannot separate those outcomes from policy choices. This government has failed to get inflation under control early, presided over spending that has added to demand pressures, introduced workplace changes that increased complexity for employers and delivered energy policies that are driving up costs rather than bringing them down. You cannot claim to protect Australian business from counterfeit goods while making it harder for those businesses to survive. You cannot claim to support intellectual property while presiding over conditions that are forcing businesses to close, and you cannot claim to strengthen the economy while confidence continues to fall. Protecting intellectual property is not just about stopping counterfeit goods at the border; it's about ensuring that Australian businesses are strong enough to innovate, to invest and to grow. In closing, I'm pleased, as I said, that the bill will go to a committee for further consideration and, hopefully, consultation with the business sector. The intent of the bill is certainly something that I support, because those who create value, who build brands, who invest in quality and who employ Australians deserve to have their work protected. They deserve protection from fraud; they deserve protection from intellectual theft, and they certainly deserve a level playing field. But they also deserve an economic environment that allows them to succeed. Right now, too many businesses are not just fighting counterfeiters; they're fighting to stay afloat. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026 97

Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026

Second Reading 97 12:13 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I'm speaking today in my capacity as assistant minister for charities about schedule 1 of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026. It is a measure which removes the $2 threshold for deductions of gifts or contributions. This threshold has a long and strange history. It goes back to 1915, when a minimum income tax deduction for giving was introduced. It was at that time relatively high—five pounds for donations to the war effort and 20 pounds for other charitable donations. In 2022 dollars, those figures are $578 and $2,313, respectively. In 1927, the threshold was reduced to one pound, which is $100 in today's money, and it hasn't changed in nominal terms since then. In 1966, of course, one pound became $2, and the $2 deduction threshold remained. But even in 1966 it was worth $30 in today's money, and today, of course, it has been eroded. Entities with deductible gift recipient status are not required to provide receipts for donations, which means that there is a challenge for people who are claiming small-threshold donations. The Future foundations for giving report from the Productivity Commission notes that there have been past recommendations. The Henry tax review thought the threshold should be taken up from $2 to $25, and the Not-for-profit Sector Tax Concession Working Group recommended removing it for simplicity, as did the Industry Commission report in 1995. Consultations by the Productivity Commission produced varied responses, with many supporting the removal of the $2 donation threshold. One of the things that we have seen, however, is a growth in round-up donations. Round up donations are a simple way in which people can support a cause that they care about through providing spare change to support that cause. Woolworths allowed customers at the till to round up for charity and, in a single month, raised $770,000 for Foodbank. Myer often partners with local community organisations such as The Family Co, an organisation which helps people escape family violence. Some platforms are set up to encourage round-up for charity. Rounda is a microdonation app that lets you choose your charity and securely link cards to contribute. The difference allows users to automatically donate change from everyday purchases and includes a 'round-up for change' approach. GoGive is a tool that charities can add to their websites, allowing supporters to set up round-up deductions. ING's Everyday Round Up allows customers to round up purchases to the nearest $1 or $5, with the amount going to charity. The challenge at the moment, though, is that round-up for charity isn't tax deductible, even though, over the course of a year, people may find themselves giving quite a considerable amount to charity. That's the advantage of what the government is doing today. Organisations that consolidate somebody's giving would be able to produce an end-of-year tax-deductible statement which would allow people to claim all of those 19c, 37c and 57c donations they'd made through the course of the year, which might, by the end of the year, add up to hundreds or even thousands of dollars. By encouraging microdonations, we're helping to achieve the government's goal of making it easier to give. My three principles for giving are that we need to have evidence, we need to have enthusiasm and we need to make it easy to donate, and this is one way, alongside simplifying donations through workplace giving and simplifying bequests, that the government is supporting the charity sector. It is a recommendation of the Productivity Commission's Future foundations for giving report that the government remove the $2 threshold for tax-deductible donations to entities with deductible gift recipient status, and this will help form part of the government's response to that report and to the blueprint report. We have set a goal of doubling philanthropy by 2030, not because we believe government should step back but because we believe that many of Australia's biggest challenges can only be dealt with through the collaboration of the government and the community sector working together. We've put in place a host of positive reforms to support charities: ensuring that we don't have gag clauses and that we celebrate the role of charities in public advocacy; creating a new community charity category; streamlining the deductible gift recipient system by returning four key categories to the tax office; putting in place a charities commissioner widely respected across the sector and an expanded and more representative ACNC Advisory Board; and lifting distributions from giving funds to six per cent to get more philanthropic funds to existing charities sooner. This government is a fast friend to charities, and we will continue to support the charity sector and the important work that they do to build social capital and build a stronger and more connected Australian community. 12:19 Dr RYAN 297660 Kooyong Tax incentives for research and development activities are designed to back businesses to test new ideas and to innovate. These concessions encourage investment, help Australian companies to compete internationally and foster the kind of innovation that drives much-needed productivity growth throughout our economy. At their best, R&D incentives support breakthroughs—in medicine, technology and advanced manufacturing—that can improve lives and strengthen our national capacity. As a medical researcher, I know the value of research and development, particularly R&D that improves the health and wellbeing of all Australians. That's what research and development should do, but supporting innovation should never be confused with subsidising harm. Taxpayer dollars should not ever be used to promote industries or activities that exacerbate addiction, create public harm and pose serious health risks. The Australian Taxation Office's R&D tax incentive transparency report 2021-22, published in October 2024, revealed the scale of R&D support received by an industry whose products and services cause significant harm—the gambling industry. In 2021-2022, slot machine makers Aristocrat and Ainsworth claimed $22 million and $15 million in R&D expenses, respectively. PointsBet, BetTube and Betting Technologies Australia all claimed more than $1 million, and Tabcorp claimed nearly $40 million. In 2022-2023, that grew to nearly $44 million. So, under our R&D tax incentives, these predatory gambling companies are being permitted—encouraged, even—to deduct at least 38.5c for every dollar that they spend on eligible activities. That's a pretty substantial incentive. In a cost-of-living crisis, with Australia's gross debt at about $1 trillion, we have to ask ourselves why the government is subsidising predatory industries which are causing harm to Australians. Why are we, as a country, supporting the gambling industry to develop ever more sophisticated tactics to target our young people and to cause them harm through more harmful products and more effective ways to keep people addicted to gambling? Because that's what R&D in the gambling industry aims to do. It aims to increase engagement, to increase losses and, as a direct result, to increase harm. This is why, in the 2024-2025 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, the government announced that activities relating to gambling and to tobacco would be excluded from R&D tax incentive eligibility after 1 July 2025. Schedule 4 of this bill delivers on that commitment. Specifically, it amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 to exclude activities related to gambling services, gambling and gambling-like practices and activities related to tobacco, nicotine products and vaping goods. That exclusion extends also to nicotine products to capture new and emerging nicotine devices. However, the legislation still provides for a narrow exemption. Where activities are solely for the purpose of harm reduction, such as reducing addiction, these activities remain eligible to receive support. It is my position that this exemption should be removed. There's no reason why taxpayers should be subsidising research and development that exacerbates serious health risks, addiction and associated harms. In developing these reforms, the Treasurer himself conceded that it is problematic that gambling companies are still receiving these incentives. That is a pretty significant admission from a government which has, for far too long, looked the other way when it comes to this country's addiction to gambling. If we are acknowledging the harm caused by gambling, and we are legislating the removal of subsidies to the industry, why is the government still refusing to act on gambling advertising? Advertising works to normalise gambling behaviour. It is constant, it is pervasive and it is designed to influence. Every TV ad, every online promotion and every push notification from a betting app on a young person's phone reinforces the harm that this legislation purports to seek to reduce. The public health evidence is clear. Gambling advertising increases participation. Gambling advertising encourages risk-taking. Gambling advertising normalises betting as entertainment, particularly for young Australians. If the government is actually serious about coherent evidence based reform, it shouldn't be stopping at R&D subsidies. It should urgently confront the harms of gambling head-on. Not doing so is virtue-signalling without substance—words without weight from the Albanese government. The gambling industry has long had a powerful lobbying influence in Australia. It seeks to shape policy and it seeks to protect its profits. Its reach extends into political donations, sponsorships and lobbying activity—tools that continue to influence government decision-making at the very highest levels. Gambling related industries have made more than $80 million in political donations over the last two decades alone. In 2023-24, gambling companies donated $1.5 million to political parties. Most of that went to the Australian Labor Party. It's been more than a thousand days now since the Murphy report into gambling harm was released, and the government is still to act, still to adopt even one of the report's 31 recommendations. If anyone is wondering why, let me be clear: the influence of the gambling industry over the government is the reason. Gambling is not just a public health issue; it's a deeply entrenched political lobbying issue. So, while I support this legislation, this is what the government should do: the government should immediately ensure that all regulatory loopholes open to the predatory gambling industry are firmly and immediately closed; the government should act immediately to address the profound health and financial harms caused by the toxic gambling industry by demonstrating, through its legislative actions, that gambling is a public health crisis that Australians can no longer afford; and the government should immediately implement the 31 reforms recommended by the Murphy report into gambling harm, starting with its cornerstone proposal for a comprehensive phased ban on all online gambling advertising. 12:27 Ms BRISKEY 263427 Maribyrnong This legislation is about productivity—not productivity as a slogan but productivity as Australians experience it every day in how easy it is to comply with the tax system, to run a small business, to support a local charity or to innovate and invest for the future. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026 does not pretend to be a single sweeping reform. Indeed, it does something far more important than that. It tackles the everyday frictions that quietly hold our economy back. That is how productivity is built: step by step, across the system. Productivity doesn't turn around because of one announcement or one big reform. It improves when government makes sensible decisions that save people time and effort, when it removes friction from the system and when it focuses on making things work better in practice, not just in theory. When Labor came to government in 2022, Australia's productivity growth had stalled. Under those opposite and their nearly 10 years of economic vandalism, wages stagnated, investment slowed— An opposition member interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 298800 The member deserves to be heard in silence. Ms BRISKEY 263427 and complexity crept into too many of the systems Australians rely on. This Labor government was elected with a mandate to turn that around. As the Treasurer has said, productivity is too often treated as a cold or technical concept, when in reality it's 'the best way of making people better off over the long-term, creating more opportunities and making our economy and our society more dynamic'. That is exactly what this bill is about. It is far from headline grabbing, but it does the job of significantly improving our economy. Schedule 1 seeks to remove the $2 minimum threshold for tax-deductible donations. Two dollars doesn't sound like much—in fact, a cup of coffee and a chocolate bar cost more. But, in practice, it reflects a very modern understanding of how Australians give. The $2 threshold has been in place since 1927. It was designed for a time when donations were made in coins, recorded by hand and processed manually. That world no longer exists. In my community, the changes in schedule 1 will have a big impact. At local sporting clubs, community festivals and charity fundraisers, people increasingly give in small amounts. They round up at the checkout. They tap their phone. They donate $1 at a time, regularly and willingly. These are not insignificant contributions. Over time, they add up. But, under current law, they are treated as if they don't matter. This reform fixes that. By removing the $2 threshold. We are recognising that every contribution counts. We are encouraging microgiving. We are supporting innovation in fundraising, including digital platforms and round-up donation systems, and we are making it easier for Australians to support the causes they care about. This helps with productivity because the not-for-profit sector is a productive part of our economy. It delivers social outcomes efficiently, it mobilises private capital for public good, and it strengthens the social fabric that underpins economic participation. This reform is also a part of the government's broader goal of doubling philanthropic giving by 2030. It builds on the work already done to streamline the deductible gift recipient system to create new community charity categories and to strengthen the regulatory framework that supports trust and transparency in the sector. This is sensible reform. It is modern, and it reflects how Australians actually live and give today. Much of the work done by charities and community organisations depends on small donations made regularly by ordinary Australians. Making it easier for people to give supports the organisations that do so much of the heavy lifting in our communities. Schedule 2 focuses more on tax administration, specifically for closely held trusts. Again, this is practical reform. Under the current system, trustees must report beneficiary tax file numbers on a separate form, in addition to the trust tax return. That duplication is creating unnecessary compliance costs, and not to mention it increases the risk of error, simply adding complexity for trustees, beneficiaries and their agents. Schedule 2 aims to fix this. It allows beneficiary TFNs to be reported at the same time as the trust tax return is lodged, where the beneficiary has already provided that information. That's one form instead of two. That's one process that isn't weighed down by duplication. That's exactly the kind of change that Aussie businesses are asking for. They aren't asking for less integrity, just less red tape. Throughout Australia, there are thousands of small-business owners and family enterprises who use these trust structures. They are not multinational corporations with teams of accountants; they are locals trying to get on with the job. They are not looking for loopholes; they are just looking for clarity. They want to spend less time navigating the forms and spend more time growing their business and employing more people, all the while contributing to our economy. This Labor government is backing them in with this reform because we know that by helping businesses we are strengthening the tax system at the same time. Schedule 3 is a little bit more broad in nature. It deals with minor and technical amendments across Treasury legislation. No matter how small they are, they are still essential. Good economic management requires legislation that is clear, coherent and fit for purpose in a modern economy. Over time, drafting errors emerge, unintended consequences arise and language becomes outdated. If we were to leave these unaddressed, these issues would then go on to undermine confidence in the system. That is why successive governments have supported regular technical amendment processes. They are about care and maintenance. They ensure the law works as it was intended, and they reduce uncertainty for those who rely on it. This schedule continues that work—the work of so many governments before us and no doubt those in the future. It's quiet, responsible work and in the public interest. Schedule 4 addresses eligibility for the research and development tax incentive. The R&D tax incentive is an important program. It supports innovation, it encourages investment, and it helps Australian businesses develop new products and technologies, but, like any public program, it must be well targeted. This schedule seeks to exclude tobacco and gambling related activities from eligibility for the incentive. These industries are associated with significant health and social harms. Taxpayers should not be subsidising research and development that entrenches addiction or undermines the long-term wellbeing of our fellow Australians. This schedule is about aligning innovation with national priorities. Importantly, the exclusion is carefully designed, because research that is undertaken solely for harm minimisation, such as helping people quit smoking or gambling, remains eligible. This is the right balance. We are ensuring public support is directed towards innovation that builds Australia's future, not activities that work against it. Once again, this is what responsible economic stewardship looks like. Taken together, these measures reflect Labor's broader economic agenda, an agenda focused on productivity, participation and fairness that recognises that strong public finances and a strong social fabric go hand in hand. As the Assistant Treasurer has noted, productivity growth does not come from slogans; it comes from systems that work, from regulation that is proportionate and from policy settings that reward effort and innovation. This bill sits alongside the government's wider economic reforms: tax cuts for every taxpayer, the thousand-dollar deduction to simplify tax returns, stronger integrity measures to ensure multinational corporations are paying their fair share, and reforms to ensure Australians receive a fair return from our natural resources. This is a coherent agenda, not a collection of one-off measures. In my community, the impact of Labor's measured and responsible economic management is clear. It shows up when local charities can raise funds more easily, when small businesses spend less time on paperwork, when investment is directed towards industries that create long-term good jobs, and when Australians feel the system is fair and works for them. Labor's approach supports this. Productivity is ultimately about how we use our collective resources—time, capital, talent. When we reduce unnecessary complexity, we free those resources up. When we align incentives with long-term outcomes, we invest more wisely. And when we make it easier for Australians to participate, whether as workers, donors or innovators, we strengthen the economy as a whole. This is the fundamental difference between this Labor government and those opposite. This bill is what good economic management looks like. Labor has never believed that productivity comes from making life harder for working people. It comes from building systems that are fair, straightforward and easy to deal with. When people trust the system and can navigate it more easily, the whole economy works better. We've seen the alternative—the belief in a trickle-down economy—that far too often ends up leaving people to fend for themselves. But for Labor, our economic mission is simple: to build an economy that rewards work, values contribution and leaves no-one behind, an economy that works not just on a spreadsheet but in working people's lives. I commend the bill. 12:37 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's wonderful to be speaking on this legislation, which we are not opposing, but I say so in the context that it's always amusing to hear Labor members of parliament get up and speak about the relevance of legislation to their electorate, while they repeat the same talking points that every other Labor member of parliament repeats, but it rarely operates in reality. We just heard about how productivity has been tickety boo under this government, which is why the Treasurer called a crisis conference on productivity and a roundtable to bring together Australia's leading business minds, plus the ACTU, to come up with a solution to the productivity crisis that apparently doesn't exist because productivity is tickety boo. We're told about how, under the Albanese government, small businesses have never done it better and how everything's tickety boo with them too. It's not really what the data shows. In fact, a paper by e61 Institute a couple of weeks ago showed a long-term decline in the number of self-employed and small-business people, including people who have small businesses who employ others. We've seen this cascading decline over time, but it's been particularly bad under the Albanese government, sufficient that you literally now have record small-business insolvencies. That doesn't say to me that things are tickety boo under the Albanese government for small business. In fact, yesterday was, I think, one of the most challenging days for small business in this country's history. In addition to the challenges of the Iran conflict and the impact that's having on supply chain and prices, not just in the context of fuels but also in accessing other goods and services in the economy where prices continue to rise, which is putting huge pressure on small businesses—large businesses have the logistics and capacity to be able to adjust around that, but that doesn't mean they don't carry those costs, too—we had the Reserve Bank turn around and say, 'Well, business can basically now absorb all the costs they've been passing on to consumers.' We're all happy that we've seen a ban on surcharging, but let's just remind ourselves that someone picks up the bill and that supermarkets get a disproportionate favour in comparison to small businesses under this plan. Supermarkets, as an example—large retailers, supermarkets particularly—do things on scale, so they have preferential terms with banking. They get very favourable terms in comparison to small businesses, who have to absorb all the costs. So, against a global backdrop of challenges and a domestic backdrop of small business insolvencies, we now have a situation where businesses are being told they need to absorb more costs. Then, on top of that, we had the Fair Work Commission say yesterday that they're going to, over the next four years, increase the wages of 18- to 20-year-olds by 42 per cent. I have no doubt that everyone who's a beneficiary of that is happy about that; that's not in contest. But there's someone who has to pick up the bill associated with that, and that is, of course, small businesses. So I imagine a lot of them are looking at yesterday—between the global context and rising prices, the domestic context and record insolvencies, and the challenges of the lowest consumer confidence on record plus increased costs for surcharging, skills and labour—and going, 'This is pretty tough.' But clearly that's falling on deaf ears in at least some of the corridors of Canberra, because I was just told by the member for Maribyrnong that everything's tickety-boo. I actually think we have a responsibility in this parliament to speak plainly and honestly about the state of challenges, particularly in times of crisis, and we're in a time of crisis. Do you remember, Member for Mitchell, a few weeks ago when the Minister for Climate Change and Energy said that there was no problem and that everybody in the House of Representatives was overegging the situation about fuel? Three days later he went, 'Okay, yes, we're in a national crisis.' I don't say that with any glee. That is the state of denial that has permeated this government. They have a denial on the fuel crisis, a denial on the productivity crisis and now a denial on the small business crisis, as well. This is why Australians are losing faith. We need people to come in here, speak plainly and honestly about the challenges and the realities that Australians—and small businesses, in particular—are facing, and then they need to turn to the government and ask whether they're taking steps and measures to improve the situation. What we do is come up to the Federation Chamber and see the member for Maribyrnong—and I have no doubt it's in the talking points of others, as well—doing a kind of happy dance on the spot like they're Snoopy, thinking that they're the great heroes saving productivity, fuel and small business. Australians don't feel that way. Instead, they're looking at it and going: 'Well, what's next? If this is the delusion of the government that's supposed to be standing up for me, then I have lost faith in the government.' And that, of course, is where we are right now. Now is the time where we need a government that's going to stand up and fight for the future of this country. More important than that, we need the measures to back-in Australians to be enterprising and to take command of their own destiny. We need Australians to be respected to take control of their own lives, and we need their hard work to pay off. We need a policy framework which focuses clearly on how we empower Australians to be able to back themselves—not simply to live with the consequences, slavishly, of factors outside of their control or of a government that's in a state of delusion and that doesn't understand the challenges confronting us. What we need is a government of strength, of confidence and of hope so that, by working together, we can take our nation forward. But that is not what we have. What we've got is a government that is in a state of denial. When you look at this legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026—Orwellian as it is called—it's about whether or not there are tax incentives that can be taken advantage of by tobacco and gambling companies. Let's be fair: why would a tobacco company need to take advantage of R&D investments when all of the innovation has been taken care of for them by organised crime gangs? They're the ones investing in the supply chains to profiteer out of the consequences of both the stripping of trademarks from tobacco products and the excise. Why would gambling companies need to do the same when, in practice, gambling companies are the ones that are profiteering off a febrile environment in terms of incentives? What we have is this delusional approach from government, a state of denial about the full consequences of the measures it's introduced. People are profiting, and it is all the wrong people; it's the corrupt entities. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 299964 I'm going to suspend the Federation Chamber as we don't have a quorum. The chair will be resumed when a quorum is present. Sitting suspended from 12:45 to 12:51 (Quorum formed) 12:51 Ms COFFEY 312323 Griffith One of the strengths of our national life is the quiet, steady work done every day by charities and not-for-profits in communities right across Australia. They are there in the local service helping a family get back on its feet; in the organisation supporting someone to navigate housing, legal support or mental health care; in the volunteer-run group creating connection and belonging; and in the community organisation stepping in early to provide practical help before problems deepen. These organisations are woven into the life of our communities in ways that can be easy to overlook if we focus only on formal institutions or headline economic indicators, yet they make an enormous contribution to the strength, resilience and generosity of Australian society. They provide practical assistance, but they also build trust, dignity and a sense that people are not facing life's challenges alone. Seen in that light, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026 takes on real significance. It contains a number of measures, but for me the most significant are the reforms that support charities, not-for-profits and philanthropy. If we want a more generous, connected and resilient Australia, we need a framework that makes it easier for people to give, easier for good organisations to attract support and easier for the sector to keep doing the work that it does so well. This is an area I speak about with a deep personal connection. Before coming into this place, I spent around 20 years working across the not-for-profit sector alongside another seven years grounded in the public service, and that experience has shaped how I understand the role which charities and community organisations play in Australian life. My work in this space has taken different forms but has always been driven by a commitment to fairness, opportunity and, really importantly, community. I was most recently the CEO of the Australian Kookaburra Kids Foundation, supporting young people impacted by family mental illness. I've also led Reconciliation South Australia, and I worked for more than 13 years with the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation. Just prior to coming into this place, I also served on the board of directors for the Fundraising Institute Australia. The FIA, as the national peak body for professional fundraising, sets the standards that ensure integrity, transparency and accountability across the sector. Their training, accreditation and advocacy support thousands of fundraisers to do their work ethically and effectively, building confidence among donors and strengthening the impact of every dollar raised. I want to acknowledge their important work in this sector. Working across these organisations gave me a close understanding of what purpose-driven leadership looks like in practice—balancing mission and management every day, stretching every dollar while keeping sight of the people behind the numbers, and building trust with communities, team members, volunteers and supporters. Charities and not-for-profits are part of how Australia works at its best. They support people in moments of vulnerability, create opportunity, advocate for fairness and strengthen social cohesion, all with remarkable creativity and commitment. I also want to express my sincere thanks to the workers, volunteers, leaders and board members across our charity and not-for-profit sector. I say to you all: the work you do is valuable, demanding and deeply community minded. You support people through crisis, build stronger foundations long before crisis arrives, and create connection, trust and possibility. Thank you. When we talk about productivity and the strength of the economy, we should remember that a healthy society depends on more than markets and institutions alone. It depends on participation, social trust and people being able to contribute, connect and find support when they need it. Charities and not-for-profits mobilise volunteers, attract private giving, deliver trusted local services, innovate in response to need, identify gaps early and connect government with communities and lived experience, often while working under intense pressure with very limited resources. They really do a lot of the heavy lifting. So, when systems make it easier for Australians to give, easier for charities to raise support and easier for not-for-profits to navigate the rules around them, that strengthens not only the sector itself but the broader social economy. It helps direct time, effort and resources to where they can do the most good. In Griffith, I had the great pleasure of hosting a charity and not-for-profit roundtable last month alongside the Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury, the member for Fenner. The roundtable brought together representatives from dozens of organisations and around 80 participants in total, all working within Griffith. I want to sincerely thank each of those organisations for taking the time to be part of the conversation and for the work they do in our community every day. These organisations covered a wide range of sectors, including health, arts and culture, multicultural affairs, environment, legal and community services. It was a great opportunity where we talked about delivering frontline services, building sustainable funding models and working through administration, compliance and workforce pressures while continuing to meet the rising need in our community. I want to thank the assistant minister for joining me and the Griffith community for this event and for the consultative way that he has engaged in this area. His work has helped ensure that policy conversations about charities, philanthropy and civil society are informed by evidence, experience and genuine respect for this sector. Schedule 1 of this bill is a clear example of practical support for the charity and not-for-profit sector. It removes the requirement that a gift to a deductible gift recipient must be valued at $2 or more before a taxpayer can claim a deduction. That threshold has been in place since 1927, reflecting a very different era, when issuing receipts and keeping records was a manual process and the mechanics of giving looked nothing like they do today. That world has changed, and these changes enable our laws to catch up with that reality. They treat donations equally regardless of size, support innovation in fundraising and remove a threshold that no longer reflects how Australians contribute. It also forms part of the government's response to the Productivity Commission's Future foundations for giving review, which examined the opportunities and barriers in Australia's philanthropy system. One of the ambitions flowing from that work is to double giving by 2030, a goal that I have been a very passionate supporter of for a very long time. Reaching that goal will not come from one dramatic change alone. It will come from a series of practical reforms that make giving easier, more accessible and more suited to the way Australians live now. Removing the $2 threshold is one of those measures. It is sensible, contemporary and overdue. There is something important in recognising the small acts of generosity. Philanthropy is sometimes spoken about in terms of large donations and major foundations, both of which I have been incredibly grateful to be on the receiving end of in charities. They can be absolutely transformational gifts. Those contributions absolutely matter, and they should be encouraged. But a strong culture of giving also depends on everyday participation and on a system that recognises how people actually give now: in the small moments woven through ordinary life. Today, charitable giving often takes place while we are in the middle of something else. It happens when the cashier at the checkout asks whether we would like to round up our groceries by 80c for a local charity. It happens when a parent is booking tickets online for a community event and sees the option to add a small donation before checking out. It happens when someone, buying a coffee, paying for school raffle tickets, registering a local fundraiser or finalising an online order, chooses to add a dollar or two to support a cause that they really care about. These are not grand gestures. They're quick, quiet choices made in the rhythm of everyday life. But across a community, across thousands of transactions and across thousands of Australians, these choices add up to real support for organisations doing important work. By removing the $2 threshold, the law catches up with today's healthy culture of giving. It also broadens participation, reaffirming that giving is not reserved only for those with really substantial means. And in a time when many households are feeling pressure, it recognises that small contributions are still meaningful contributions. Since coming to government, there has been a clear commitment to supporting charities and not-for-profits through practical reform. That includes streamlining the deductible gift recipient system by returning four key categories to the Australian Taxation Office. It includes creating the new community charity category to encourage more local and place based giving and broaden the pool of regular Australian donors. It includes giving the charities commissioner greater discretion to comment on compliance activity. It includes expanding the ACNC Advisory Board so it is more representative of the sector and strengthens the network of charity regulators across the Commonwealth and the states and territories. It includes lifting distributions from giving funds so more philanthropic money reaches existing deductible gift recipients sooner. Each of these steps reflects a consistent approach to making systems easier to navigate, more responsive to the sector and better aligned with how organisations actually operate. Complexity carries a real cost. It can divert time and energy away from service delivery, slow down fundraising, create confusion for donors and administrators alike, and place additional pressures on organisations that are already managing lean budgets and growing demand. Reducing unnecessary complexity is part of building a stronger social economy. It allows charities to focus more of their time on what they do best, which is supporting people, strengthening communities and delivering meaningful change. The broader frame for this bill is productivity, and that is worth speaking to directly. These reforms are not isolated technical fixes but part of a broader effort to lift productivity across the economy after a wasted decade of stagnation under those opposite. One of the clear lessons from that period is that excessive complexity drags down productivity. Complexity consumes time, raises compliance costs and slows down good ideas, and it affects not only businesses and investors but also communities and community organisations. Productivity growth depends on broad participation across the economy, including in the not-for-profit sector. A stronger social economy contributes to national wellbeing. It helps communities function better, helps people stay connected to support and opportunity, brings private capital into areas of social need and often delivers outcomes that are preventive as well as responsive. Removing the $2 donation threshold is one small but meaningful example of that broader principle. It encourages microgiving with digital donations, supports modern fundraising tools such as round-up systems, helps mobilise private generosity towards social outcomes, and recognises that building a more productive nation also involves building a more connected and more generous one. This bill complements wider work the government is doing, including broader regulatory reform measures, tariff reductions and financial sector data streamlining. The common thread is simple: good systems should be fit for purpose, reflect how people and organisations operate now, reduce needless friction and support effort where it can deliver the greatest value. That same principle is present in other sections of this bill. Schedule 2 modernises tax administration by streamlining how trustees of closely held trusts report the tax file numbers of beneficiaries so that this occurs at the same time the trust tax return is lodged. Schedule 3 makes minor and technical amendments to Treasury legislation. These kinds of changes rarely attract headlines, but they matter. Good government is not only about large reforms. Schedule 4 excludes activities related to gambling and tobacco from the research and development tax incentive from 1 July 2025. That's a sensible reform. Productivity is not just about supporting any activity that can be labelled 'research and development'; it's also about directing public support where it delivers the greatest long-term value. Tobacco- and gambling-related activities are associated with serious harm, including addiction and poorer health outcomes. Public resources should not be subsidising research and development in those areas through this program. These changes modernise patterns of generosity, support a broader and more inclusive culture of philanthropy and back charities and not-for-profits by making it easier for Australians to give in the ways that Australians give now. They sit within a broader commitment of this government to support a stronger, more responsive and more confident sector. For the charities, not-for-profits, workers and volunteers across Griffith and across Australia, this is a practical step towards a system that better reflects and supports the work that you do. I would just remark that we recently heard from the member for Goldstein saying that he believes—and it is encouraging that he believes—that government should stand up and fight for the future of this country and that we need a government of strength, confidence and hope. I'm really proud to say that is exactly what we have here in the Albanese Labor government. We have a government of confidence, of real heart and of commitment to ensuring that Australians can receive the assistance that they need where they need it and that we're able to have a thriving philanthropic sector in the Australian community that is supported by government to do the important work that only they can do. I give a big thank you to all of the volunteers, workers and organisations in Griffith. Thank you for everything that you do to support Australia. 13:06 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes that: (a) Australians lost $31.5 billion from gambling in 2022-23, making us the 'biggest losers' globally; (b) the total estimated cost in Australia of smoking was estimated at $136.9 billion in 2015-16 through healthcare, ill health, premature mortality and other costs of smoking; and (c) while the 2022-23 Australian Taxation Office Research and Development Tax Incentive Transparency Report reported no claims in relation to tobacco companies, 18 companies which identified as part of the gambling industry collectively claimed more than $101,000,000 in tax breaks through this Tax Incentive, which comprises the single largest component of government support for business research and development in Australia; and (2) calls on the Government to completely exclude all research and development activities conducted by gambling and tobacco companies and entities such as research organisations which obtain any funding from such companies from eligibility for the Research and Development Tax Incentive because their profits result from harm caused to our community, and their research and development activities should be entirely self-funded". I very much support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026. There are four schedules to this bill. Schedule 1 makes it easier for taxpayers to donate low-value gifts under $2 in value through, for example, supermarket round-up donations. This is a Productivity Commission recommendation. Schedule 2 provides that trustees are to report in a trust income tax return the tax file numbers of any beneficiaries with an entitlement, and it also enables the Australian Taxation Office to streamline reporting and improve accuracy—sounds very reasonable. Schedule 3 is for minor technical amendments and corrections, and schedule 4 excludes tobacco and gambling related research and development from eligibility for the Australian government's research and development tax incentive. The research and development tax incentive represents the single largest component of government support for business research and development in Australia. It provides tax offsets to companies for eligible research and development expenditure and aims to boost research and development by encouraging investment in R&D that might not otherwise be undertaken. It fosters groundbreaking research and Australia's research and development ecosystem. Annual report data about R&D tax incentives in entities is a source of information on companies that have claimed R&D tax incentives for each income year, and this encourages voluntary compliance with the program's requirements and raises public awareness of companies' claims against this tax incentive. The 2022-23 R&D tax incentive report, which is the most recent, is based on 30 June 2025 data. There was $16.2 billion in R&D expenditure claims for 2022-23 by almost 13,000 companies, mostly public and multinational businesses. There was a total of $8.7 billion for the multinationals. Ninety-three per cent of claimants were Australian owned. There were no claims in relation to tobacco company research and development in that 2022-23 year. However—and this is really important—the same report indicates that 18 companies which identified as part of the gambling industry collectively claimed expenditure of more than $100 million in research and development tax incentives in that year. We know gambling costs and impacts Australians. Financially, there was a loss of over $31 billion from gambling in 2022-23, making us the biggest losers globally on a per capita basis. Managing the harms caused by gambling costs Australians billions of dollars each year, and, of course, those billions of dollars don't equate to lives lost. In Victoria alone, gambling reportedly cost $14.1 billion in 2023 through financial impacts, emotional and psychological harm including depression and suicide, lost productivity, crime, relationship and family impacts including domestic violence, and other costs. I don't believe that Australian taxpayers should also be subsidising gambling companies through tax incentives. In 2022-23 the following companies were reported to have claimed the following expenditure for research and development activities under the research and development tax incentive: Tabcorp Holdings, $43 million; Aristocrat Leisure, almost $19 million; the Lottery Corporation Ltd, over $10 million; Unibet Australia, over $9 million; and Ainsworth Games Technology, almost $8 million. And there are many, many more: Player Elite Pty Ltd, Betting Technologies Australia Pty Ltd, Advanced Gaming Pty Ltd, Gamurs Pty Ltd, BetTube Corporation Ltd, BetCloud Pty Ltd and PointsBet Holding Ltd. I've mentioned Ainsworth and Unibet Australia—the list goes on. Schedule 4 of this bill will exclude research and development activities by gambling and tobacco companies from eligibility—unless those activities are solely for the purpose of harm minimisation. Well, I still think that's a free ride and a tax incentive for gambling and tobacco. I do commend the minister for his work on this bill, and research should not be used to exacerbate serious health risks, addiction and associated problems. As I said, I support this bill—it's a good start—but I don't believe that it is appropriate for the Australian taxpayer to in any way subsidise any research and development by gambling or tobacco entities. They already cost our community so much; they already make such obscene profits. Theoretically, a tobacco and gambling company could, under this legislation, undertake research related to harm minimisation. But there would be no obligation for the company to then apply the findings of that research to actually benefit the community. Rather, such research findings may help companies or sectors avoid detriment to their business models through how they choose to implement any purported harm minimisation research outcomes. You really couldn't make this stuff up. My second reading amendment, therefore, calls on the government to exclude all research and development activities conducted by gambling and tax companies from eligibility for the research and development tax incentive. It's very, very simple; it's a carve-out. It recognises that gambling harm and harm from tobacco are effectively the same harm to Australian people. The profits made by these companies result from harm caused to our community, and their research and development activities should be entirely self-funded. I also call on the government to exclude from eligibility entities such as research organisations which obtain part or all of their funding from tobacco and gambling companies. Researchers in gambling harm research should not accept money from the gambling industry so that no actual bias influences their research and no perceived bias lessens the value of their research. I've been made aware, by gambling harm lived experience experts known as GHLEE, of a $20 million budget submission from OurFutures institute seeking funding to deliver a gambling prevention education program aimed at 15- to-20-year-olds. GHLEE have expressed concerns regarding the proposed program, and it's also been covered in some detail by the Guardian Australia. The OurFutures institute budget submission states that it's gambling education program would be led by experienced leaders, including University of Sydney Centre of Excellence in Gambling Research leader Professor Sally Gainsbury. It must be noted that Professor Sally Gainsbury receives direct and indirect funding from the gambling industry, and on the university's website she refers to the Centre of Excellence in Gambling Research as an 'unprecedented collaboration with gambling operators'. Honestly, I don't understand how ethically this university could get into bed with the gambling industry. I seriously don't get it. Further, the university states that the centre's creation was 'made possible through $600,000 funding from the International Centre for Responsible Gambling', whose own website states that its research program is funded primarily by companies involved in the gambling industry. I and many others would be gravely concerned to see any tax breaks extended to any entities funded by the gambling interests. I and many others will be watching the May federal budget carefully for this budget bid. I plead with the Treasurer: do not provide this $20 million. The gall to even seek that funding is just extraordinary. Now is a timely opportunity to talk about the Murphy report delays. It's been more than a thousand days since the Murphy report on the inquiry into online gambling and its impacts on those experiencing gambling harm, You win some, you lose more, was handed down. The report's unanimous bipartisan recommendations to reduce harm caused by gambling online include a gambling ad ban; a minister for reducing gambling harm, not a minister that's juggling the current conflicts of communications and sport; and a national regulator with a mission to reduce gambling. For a thousand days this government has really done very little to address the impacts of gambling—poor mental health; financial hardship; crimes such as domestic violence, elder abuse and stealing; homelessness; and even suicide. The government has not responded. There was a ban on credit cards for online gambling, which was a recommendation of a separate 2021 inquiry, but they have not acted on this Murphy report. My second reading amendment actually looks to do some good. It looks to stem some of the taxpayer funding—because it's us as taxpayers that would be funding the tax breaks for the gambling industries. It's money that doesn't come into the general pool, because it's going back into the pockets of the gambling industry. So I have moved my second reading amendment, and I commend my amendment to the House. It is my great hope that in the other place the government seeks to amend this bill to make what is a good bill an even better bill. The government needs to show courage and stop predatory gambling companies from causing Australian gambling harm, and pay the price to try and prevent, manage and cure those harms. I support this bill and my amendment. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 299964 Is the amendment seconded? Mr Wilkie C2T I second the amendment moved by the eminent member for Mayo and reserve my right to speak. 13:18 Mr HOLZBERGER 88411 Forde Debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026 gives me an opportunity to talk about the importance of charities in a working-class community like Forde, like the communities that we on this side of the House represent particularly. There are two groups of individuals I really want to give a shout out to. The first is Charlie and Jenny Bennett. They met each other at the age of 19, 40 years ago—I think that probably gives away their age! Four years before they met, Jenny was diagnosed with MS. It must have been a devastating diagnosis for a little girl to get. But that didn't get in the way for them, as it does not get in the way for many MS sufferers, who just get on with it, and they built a life together and contributed massively to their community. But, in 2013, Charlie had to leave work to become a full-time carer for Jenny. I've got to say that Charlie is that sort of guy. I actually can't remember when I met him. He's just always been there, and he's always been an absolute inspiration to me. In those years that he's been looking after and caring for Jenny, it hasn't stopped him from participating fully in the community. In fact, he rides in the MS Brissie to the Bay fundraising ride every year and has now fundraised a cumulative total of about $100,000. This is one absolute legend from Logan. He's doing it again this year, and he's raised $16,384 out of an $18,000 goal. It is a phenomenal amount of money. It is truly a measure of an effort and a measure of a man and a measure of a couple that just were not going to be beaten by a debilitating disease. Something like one in four Australians live with a neurological condition, and I think something like only 66 per cent are supported through the NDIS. There are another a couple of guys, Josh Steel and Dan, who are riding in the—I don't think I can say this word in here, but it is the S-box rally. It's an Australian colloquialism for a car that is not of a high standard. Forgive me for that allusion, but they're riding from Port Douglas down all the way to Melbourne in this dodgy VW that they've done up to raise money for cancer. Again, it's a personal story that motivates people, and Josh was motivated by his mum, who was a survivor of breast cancer. Dan is motivated by his father-in-law, who was not a survivor of prostate cancer, but they have turned tragedy into purpose. I think they've now got up to $22,780 of a $10,000 goal. This legislation provides practical support to the government's goal of doubling that giving amount by the year 2030. As the member for Griffith talked about, it's those small little round-up donations that end up adding up to a lot of money, so this legislation is going to really supercharge the efforts which are exemplified by people like Charlie and Jenny and Josh and Dan. The other thing that this legislation does which is notable apart from the technical, which is really the methodical and careful and deliberate way that this government goes about doing things, is make our tax system fairer, simpler and more sustainable. It is really gobsmacking that, in 2026, industries which can cause people harm are able to access research and development incentives at the same time. Again, the former government let all this happen while they brought in unfair tax cuts and then opposed our tax cuts. And so this sits within the government's broader strategy of a fairer, simpler and more sustainable tax system, a strategy which has delivered one tax cut in our first term and is going to deliver a tax cut this year and another one next year. That is on top of a broader strategy such as the LISTO, which is not an acronym which rolls readily off the tongues of our voters, but that lower income superannuation tax offset is going to mean a better retirement for 11,353 people in Forde, 7,688 of whom being women. About 68 per cent of these low-income earners are women. We can only do that because we are prioritising our tax system so that it is fair, simple and sustainable. This government really has got on with the job of fixing up many years of neglect, underinvestment and bad management across so many realms. The Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services should be congratulated for his work. People within the Labor caucus who made this happen should be congratulated for their methodical work that today recognises the hard work that people like Charlie and Jenny, Josh and Dan selflessly put into our community to make Australia a better place. Debate adjourned. Federation Chamber adjourned at 13:25