The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Stephen Parry) took the chair at 09:00, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2016
(1) Schedule 2, page 10 (after line 14), after item 32, insert:
32A At the end of section 104.28 of the Criminal Code
Add:
Young person ' s right to legal representation
(4) If an issuing court is satisfied, in proceedings relating to a control order, that:
(a) the person to whom the control order relates, or the person in relation to whom the control order is requested, is at least 14 but under 18; and
(b) the person does not have a lawyer acting in relation to the proceedings;
the court must appoint a lawyer to act for the person in relation to the proceedings.
(5) However, the issuing court is not required to appoint a lawyer if:
(a) the proceedings are ex parte proceedings relating to a request for an interim control order; or
(b) the person refused a lawyer previously appointed under subsection (4) during proceedings relating to:
(i) the control order; or
(ii) if the control order is a confirmed control order—the interim control order that was confirmed.
(6) The regulations may provide in relation to the appointing of lawyers under subsection (4) (including in relation to lawyers appointed under that subsection).
(1) Amendment (1), item 32A, at the end of subsection (5), add:
; or (c) there is evidence that at least one parent or guardian of the person has means to appoint a lawyer to act for the person.
In determining what is in the best interests of a person for the purposes of paragraph (2)(b), the court must take into account the following—
… the benefit to the person of having a meaningful relationship with his or her family and friends …
As soon as practicable after a confirmed control order in relation to a person is—
(a) serve the revocation or variation personally on the person; and
(b) if the person is 14 to 17 years of age—take reasonable steps to serve a copy of the revocation or variation personally on at least one parent or guardian of the person.
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 5), omit the table item, substitute:
(2) Page 142 (after line 30), at the end of the Bill, add:
Schedule 19—Sunset of amendments
1 Repeal of amendments
(1) The amendments made by Schedules 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15 to the Counter ‑Terrorism Legislation Amendment Act (No. 1) 2016 are repealed 10 years after the commencement of this Schedule.
(2) The Governor‑General may make regulations prescribing matters of a transitional nature (including prescribing any saving or application provisions) relating to the repeal of the amendments made by the Schedules mentioned in subitem (1).
… if a controlee is only given 'sufficient information' about the allegations against them after restrictions are placed on communication with the special advocate, there will be limited opportunity for proper instructions to be given to the special advocate.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Television and Radio Licence Fees) Bill 2016
… Australian media companies are now competing directly against the foreign internet companies that are exempt from local media regulation, don't pay television licence fees, pay minimal corporate tax despite taking billions in advertising revenue in this market …
PwC forecasts that by 2020 internet advertising will dominate the advertising sector, reaching $10 billion, or approximately 50 per cent of the sector.
Unfortunately, local journalism and local production will not benefit from this growth, with an estimated 70 to 80 per cent of total Australian digital advertising revenue going overwhelmingly to two foreign technology companies, Google and Facebook …
Broadcasters have a unique role in preserving our national culture and the commercial television sector invests hundreds of millions of dollars each year in the production of local content.
What we're seeing around the world is firstly that there is a long-term structural decline in commercial TV's business model. That's acknowledged around the world.
In the UK in response to that a couple of years ago, they slashed licence fees. In Canada licence fees are around 1 per cent. So Australian commercial TVs are still paying the highest in the world even after this cut.
What we're seeing is the advent of IPTV that's coming on-stream as part of the national broadband network, but it's arriving on existing networks today. Enormous competition is coming to the commercial TV sector.
At the same time, the Government has taken from them an enormous amount of spectrum which we we'll be auctioning in the next few years which will be of enormous benefit both in a straight-dollar return from the auction, but more importantly, the productivity-enhancing boost that will come from allowing this spectrum to be used far more efficiently than it has been used in the last few years.
At the end of the motion, add:
", but the Senate notes the savings for the commercial free-to-air television broadcasters resulting from the reduced licence fees and is of the opinion that those savings should be reinvested into Australian produced drama and children's television and increased audio description services for the visually impaired, including trial programs by each channel.".
[Licence fees] were, if you like, the original super profits tax. There was no other broadcast media so TV and radio were in a very strong and dominant position there. Obviously things have changed a lot since then. There are a larger range of options for people.
The Senate divided. [12:45]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Gallacher)
Social Services Minister Christian Porter said the new data showed that taxpayer-funded benefits could be providing a disincentive to work—a systemic flaw that required government attention. "Among the many areas that require attention to system design is the fact that the broad generosity of the Australian welfare system manifests more often than people might expect in circumstances where the money people receive in welfare payments is comparable to being employed,"…
"It appears to be a deliberate strategy to generate a story which creates this impression that we've got a social security system which is 'bloated and too generous' when the facts will show it's completely to the contrary," …
"The point being made is simply that a person receiving the single parenting welfare payment, plus family tax benefits and other welfare payments, gets an amount equivalent to what another person might earn working full-time."
… has misled the Parliament by stating in the Explanatory Statement that consultation with the Solicitor-General had in fact taken place.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less."
High Court of Australia
Senator CULLETON (Western Australia) (14:24): Mr President, I have just one question for Senator the Hon. George Brandis-
Honourable senators interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Order on both sides. Senator Culleton, start again.
Senator CULLETON: Thank you, Mr President. One question for Senator the Hon. George Brandis QC Attorney-General and Leader of the Government in the Senate. Since Senate school, it has come to my attention that there is a discrepancy between section 33 of the High Court Act 1979—which states that all process shall, which means must, be issued in the name of the Queen—and the High Court Rules 2004. If this appears to be the case, why has the High Court felt free to defy the parliament for 12 years?
Senator BRANDIS (Queensland—Attorney-General, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:25): Thank you, Senator Culleton. Congratulations on your inaugural question in this chamber. I must confess, Senator Culleton, I was not expecting to be asked about the High Court rules, an object of some fascination to me, I might say. I will have a look at section 33 of the High Court Act and whether or not it is apparent that there is an inconsistency, as you say, between section 33 of the act and the rules made under the High Court Act.
As you would be aware, Senator Culleton, the rules of the court are procedural rules. They attach forms, usually, that are used in the process of the court and the various procedural steps in proceedings before the court. I must confess it has never been drawn to my attention before that there may be an issue about the consistency between the High Court rules and section 33 of the act, but, as I say, I will look at the matter.
An exposure draft of the High Court Rules 2004 was circulated in April 2004. The exposure draft was the subject of detailed comments by the Law Council of Australia, the Australian Bar Association and the Special Committee of Solicitors-General. After considering those comments, the Justices made the High Court Rules 2004 on 5 October 2004. They were tabled in the Parliament on 16 November 2004 and came into effect on 1 January 2005.
No issue was raised in the process of drafting or consultation concerning the consistency of the Rules with s 33 of the High Court of Australia Act 1979 (Cth).
The Rules Committee of the High Court considered that issue on 12 October 2016. The Committee proposes a number of amendments to the Rules to address the issue. The proposed amendments will be drafted by the Office of Parliamentary Counsel and will be the subject of consultation with professional bodies before being finalised by the Court.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Attorney General (Senator Brandis) to a question without notice asked by Senator Pratt today relating to the extent of consultations surrounding the making of a direction concerning the Solicitor-General.
If one has a duty to consult over the issue of a legislative instrument, the first thing you have to do is tell the person affected or the person with expertise that you are thinking of issuing a legislative instrument. If you do not tell them that they cannot provide you with meaningful comments on either the legality or the wisdom of what you are doing. The second thing you have to do is tell them the substance of what you propose to put in the instrument. Now, if the Attorney had done both those things, the issues that we now have before us would have played out in a very different fashion.
… it is also important to observe what that Explanatory Statement did not say. It didnot say that the Attorney-General had consulted the Solicitor-General in some specific fashion. It didnot say, for instance, that he had consulted the Solicitor-General about whether he thought a Direction in some precise form should be issued. It didnot say that the Attorney-General had consulted the Solicitor-General by providing him with an exposure draft of the instrument. It didnot say that the Attorney-General had secured the agreement of the Solicitor-General to the form of the Direction. What the Explanatory Statement actually said was:
… the Attorney-General has consulted the Solicitor-General.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Special Minister of State (Senator Ryan) to a question without notice asked by Senator Siewert today relating to government data concerning income support payments.
Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the law relating to telecommunications and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 will amend the Telecommunications Act 1997 and related legislation to strengthen the security of Australia's telecommunications networks.
National security threats to the telecommunications sector
Australia's telecommunications networks are the critical infrastructure that enables all of us to conduct business and to go about our everyday lives online. Australia's economic prosperity and wellbeing are increasingly dependent on telecommunications networks and the data that flows across them.
Cyber threats to Australia are persistent, whether they arise from sabotage, espionage, serious and organised crime, or other technology-enabled crime. Espionage and clandestine foreign interference activity against Australian interests is extensive.
The Australian Cyber Security Centre's Threat Report 2016 demonstrates the scale of the cyber threat to Australian organisations. Telecommunications networks are a key pathway for unauthorised interference by malicious actors. The Report identifies that diverse state-based adversaries are attempting cyber espionage against Australian systems to satisfy strategic, operational and commercial intelligence requirements. It also acknowledges that the ongoing theft of intellectual property from Australian companies continues to pose significant challenges to the future competitiveness of Australia's economy.
The number, type and sophistication of cyber security threats to Australia and Australians are increasing. Australian businesses and organisations face a range of serious threats, from foreign state-sponsored adversaries to serious and organised criminals.
Compromise is expensive. It can include financial losses, damage to reputation, loss of intellectual property and disruption to business.
Indeed, the former director of the United States National Security Agency, General Keith Alexander, argued that "ongoing cyber-thefts from the networks of public and private organisations…represent the greatest transfer of wealth in human history."
This is why it is so vital that the security and resilience of our telecommunications networks are maintained.
It is also why, after a broad public consultation, the bipartisan Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security recommended in 2013 that the Government create a security framework for the telecommunications sector.
This Committee also recommended establishing this security framework again in 2015 in the context of data retention legislation. The reforms proposed in this Bill will complement the data retention regime by improving the security of networks as a whole and provide an additional layer of protection for retained data.
The reforms are referenced in the Australian Cyber Security Strategy, launched by the Prime Minister in April 2016. This reflects the particular importance of secure telecommunications networks to the functioning and well-being of Australian communities.
This is an issue being considered by a number of governments across the globe. Similar regimes are already in place in the United Kingdom, Germany, Singapore and New Zealand.
Policy objectives of this Bill
This Bill builds on existing obligations in the Telecommunications Act 1997.
These reforms have been subject to extensive consultation processes over the past four years. Industry feedback through these processes has shaped the detail of the proposed reforms. In particular, a number of key amendments have been made to the Bill following the release of two exposure drafts for public consultation in mid and late 2015.
Strong industry‑government partnerships are critical to managing these threats and securing our most important systems. This Bill will formalise the relationship between industry and government and ensure consistency, transparency and proper accountability for all parts of the telecommunications industry.
It will provide clarity around government's expectations on how national security risks to telecommunications networks are to be managed and provide more proportionate mechanisms for managing these risks.
The Bill will not introduce a prescriptive legislative approach. Rapid changes in technology and service delivery mean a prescriptive approach would simply not be possible.
Overview of key measures
Amendments to the Telecommunications Act 1997proposed in this Bill will place an obligation on all carriers, carriage service providers and carriage service intermediaries to do their best to protect telecommunications networks and facilities from unauthorised interference and unauthorised access for the purpose of security.
This obligation will encourage companies to consider national security risks, such as espionage, sabotage and foreign interference risks to the confidentiality of information and communications, as well as the availability and integrity of telecommunications networks and facilities.
This obligation will be supported by new notification obligations, which are modelled on the existing notification regime in the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979.Carriers and nominated carriage service providers will be required to notify changes to systems and services if the carrier or nominated carriage service provider becomes aware that a proposed change is likely to have a material adverse effect on their ability to meet the security obligation to protect networks and facilities from unauthorised access and interference.
Companies will also be given the opportunity to forecast changes to telecommunications systems in annual security capability plans.
Early notification to security agencies will allow them to provide advice at the planning stage and ensure security considerations are factored into the proposal design as early as possible in a cost effective manner.
In line with the risk-based nature of these reforms, the notification regime includes an exemptions process. This will reduce the regulatory burden on some companies and ensure that the resources of security agencies are targeted.
Establishment of a broader security framework
The regulatory model will be supported by a comprehensive administrative framework. The scheme relies on a 'light touch' approach to regulation to allow for meaningful collaboration and cooperation with industry to manage risks in a way that is satisfactory to both industry and government, without the government being too prescriptive and retaining flexibility for industry.
The Government recognises that telecommunications companies already make significant investments in security and have considerable technical expertise in mitigating and responding to threats.
This administrative framework is premised on a collaborative partnership with industry, involving increased engagement and information sharing with government agencies. Implementation will be based on a regime of industry consultation, advice and guidance.
The reforms recognise that security is a joint responsibility and this is why enhanced engagement between government and industry is at the heart of these reforms.
Safeguards built into the regulatory powers
New information gathering and directions powers provided for in this Bill will only be used as a last resort.
Importantly, a number of safeguards are built into these regulatory powers to ensure their use is reasonably necessary.
For example, the Attorney-General can only issue a direction to a company after he or she has received an adverse security assessment from the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation recommending action and has considered the costs of the direction on the company, as well as broader market and competition effects.
In addition, a direction can only be made after consultation with the affected company and after the Attorney-General is satisfied that reasonable steps have been taken to negotiate an outcome in good faith.
A range of review rights will be available for companies to ensure proper accountability for decision making.
Conclusion
This Bill will ensure that businesses, individuals and the public sector can continue to rely on telecommunications networks to store and transmit their data safely and securely. It will promote informed risk management of national security concerns by providing industry with clarity and certainty of government expectations.
Importantly, it will not be prescriptive. It will allow industry the necessary flexibility to find the best and most innovative solutions. This will ensure the security and resilience of Australia's telecommunications infrastructure, as well as the competitiveness of the sector in a rapidly changing global market.
That consideration of the business before the Senate on Wednesday, 9 November 2016, be interrupted at approximately 5 pm, but not so as to interrupt a senator speaking, to enable Senator Kitching to make her first speech without any question before the chair.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services, on 16 November 2016, all information (including documents and statistics) used in the preparation of the report entitled Cashless Debit Card Trial Progress Report, authored by the Department of Social Services and released publicly on 31 October 2016.
That the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories be authorised to hold private meetings otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) during the sittings of the Senate, from 10 am, as follows:
(a) Thursday, 10 November 2016;
(b) Thursday, 24 November 2016, followed by a public meeting; and
(c) Thursday, 1 December 2016.
That the Joint Standing Committee on Migration be authorised to hold private meetings otherwise than in accordance with standing order 33(1) during the sittings of the Senate, from 10 am, as follows:
(a) Wednesday, 23 November 2016; and
(b) Wednesday, 30 November 2016.
That the Senate recognises the work of the Welcome to Eltham community campaign in Victoria, which has strongly demonstrated the values of generosity and inclusion in their efforts to welcome 120 Syrian refugees who will be resettled in the area in the coming weeks.
That there be laid on the table by the Attorney-General, by no later than 9.30 am on Wednesday, 9 November 2016, the legal advice provided to the Government in relation to the eligibility of former Senator Day to be elected as a senator for South Australia, as referred to in the Senate on Monday, 7 November 2016 by the Special Minister of State (Senator Ryan) and the Minister for Finance (Senator Cormann), and provided by David Jackson QC, and any related documents that have not already been laid on the table.
The Senate divided. [15:51]
(The President—Senator Parry)
That the Senate—
(a) notes former Senator Day, in his 35 years as a builder:
(i) built over 10,000 homes,
(ii) directly employed over 1,000 people and indirectly over 5,000 trade contractors,
(iii) donated millions to charities, becoming known in Adelaide as "the man who gives away houses" because of all the houses he built for charity groups,
(iv) sponsored hundreds of sporting clubs, individuals and community groups,
(v) was appointed an officer of the Order of Australia in 2003 for services to the housing industry and to social welfare, particularly housing the homeless, and to the community,
(vi) later in 2003, was awarded the Centenary of Federation medal for service to housing and charity, and
(vii) in 2005, was awarded the inaugural Pride of Australia medal for 'Community Spirit' for restoring the village of Houghton and creating the Soldiers Memorial Walk and Remembrance Wall;
(b) notes, in relation to the failure of former Senator Day's business that :
(i) all homes under construction are covered by Home Owners warranty insurance, which means any costs to complete the homes will be covered by insurance, not taxpayers,
(ii) many suppliers and trade contractors have credit insurance which will cover much of their losses, and
(iii) former Senator Day has always agreed to sign personal guarantees, which means he will lose his house as a consequence of the failure of his business;
(c) congratulates former Senator Day on his commitment to assisting those who have been impacted by the company's closure; and
(d) thanks him for his service in the Senate.
The Senate divided. [15:56]
(The President—Senator Parry)
That the Senate—
(a) acknowledges the importance of the aquaculture industry to the State of Tasmania, which is an important source of employment and economic activity in regional Tasmania, employing 5,200 people;
(b) expresses support for the aquaculture industry which is a world-leading and sustainable industry, adding to the state's premium brand; and
(c) calls on all political parties to support this vital industry which is important, not only for Tasmania, but the entire nation.
That—
(a) the Senate notes that:
(i) the SEA 1000 Future Submarine project, a project that aims to deliver Australia a regionally superior future submarine capability, is likely to be the most expensive and complex project ever undertaken by the Commonwealth of Australia,
(ii) failures that occur in complex projects are often attributed to decisions made in the commencement phase of the project, and
(iii) there is an accepted need for transparency in Government contracts; and
(b) there be laid on the table by the Minister for Defence, by the start of business on 24 November 2016, the Design and Mobilisation Contract signed between the Commonwealth of Australia and DCNS on 30 September 2016.
That the following matter be referred to the Finance and Public Administration References Committee for inquiry and report by 30 March 2017:
Gender segregation in the workplace and its impact on women's economic equality, with particular reference to:
(a) the nature and extent of industrial and occupational gender segregation in Australian workplaces relative to comparable jurisdictions, including gender segregation in tertiary education courses;
(b) factors driving industrial and occupational gender segregation in the Australian context;
(c) economic consequences of gender segregation for women, including the contribution of industrial and occupational gender segregation to the gender pay gap;
(d) approaches to addressing gender segregation as it relates to economic inequality and the gender pay gap in comparable jurisdictions; and
(e) remedies appropriate for Australia, including but not limited to:
(i) measures to encourage women's participation in male-dominated occupations and industries,
(ii) measures to professionalise and improve conditions in female-dominated occupations and industries, and
(iii) measures to promote pay equity.
At the end of the motion, add:
(iv) measures to value presently unpaid domestic labour; and
(f) economic consequences of the gendered division of unpaid labour.
The Senate divided. [16:05]
(The President—Senator Parry)
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
The Prime Minister's lack of authority and lack of agenda.
In fact, speaking of blowing things up, the South Australian government deliberately detonated a coal-fired power plant, and Senator Back was correct in talking about the energy security that is being destroyed—the Taliban is at work in the government of South Australia.
… the most successful and unique economic and policy arrangement of the late 20th and early 21st century—the proof is in the pudding. A low tax nation with high quality, public funded institutions. A low debt nation with world leading human development and infrastructure.
It is so extraordinary that this disgusting publication should place me in a position where I effectively have to prove my innocence—
However, so ludicrous and misconceived are the allegations that my innocence is easily established.
That the Senate take note of the report.
Australian Government response to the Senate - Community Affairs References Committee interim report:
Inquiry into the growing evidence of an emerging tick-borne disease that causes a Lyme-like illness for many Australian patients
Introduction
The Australian Government has taken an interest in, and is concerned for, Australian patients who are sharing their stories about suffering with multiple chronic debilitating symptoms. The Government, through the Australian Government Department of Health, began engaging with patients and advocacy groups in early 2013 to discuss the concerns about Lyme borreliosis, also known as Lyme disease. Prof. Baggoley, established a short-term advisory committee (Chief Medical Officer's Advisory Committee on Lyme Disease in March 2013 [CACLD]) to consider the evidence for a Borrelia species causing illness in Australians, looking at diagnostic algorithms for borreliosis in Australians and treatments for borreliosis, awareness-raising and education, plus research into borreliosis.
Through regular communication and correspondence, the Government has gained a deeper appreciation and real concern for those Australians experiencing these chronic debilitating symptoms, which they associate with a tick bite. The Government remains engaged with the patient and medical community to continue to find, share and understand the evidence associated with this medical conundrum. The Government hopes our work with diagnostic pathology and research communities will result in answers and relief for patients and their families.
The inquiry into Growing evidence of an emerging tick-borne disease that causes a Lyme-like illness for many Australian patients conducted by the Senate - Community Affairs References Committee culminated in the Committee's interim report (the Report). The Report is an important document and the Government thanks the Committee and the various stakeholders for their valuable and thoughtful input to the Inquiry.
This response addresses the recommendations raised in the Report, and has been coordinated and prepared by the Department of Health.
Recommendations and Australian Government responses
Recommendation 1
4.52 The committee recommends that the Community Affairs References Committee continue its inquiry into this matter in the 45th Parliament.
This is a matter for the Senate. The Government, through the Australian Government Department of Health, welcomes the possible continuation of the inquiry into the forty-fifth Parliament to ensure affected patients, their families and their healthcare providers are supported while biomedical research continues and the medical profession develops further strategies to diagnose and treat the illness of the affected patients.
Recommendation 2
4.56 The committee recommends that the Department of Health further develop education and awareness strategies for:
- the public about the prevention of tick bites and seeking medical attention; and
- the medical profession about how to diagnose and treat classical Lyme disease acquired overseas and known tick-borne illnesses acquired in Australia.
The Government, through the Australian Government Department of Health, will augment the material on tick bite prevention and first aid it has already published1 with regular review and revision in consultation with experts.
The Australian Guidelines for the diagnosis of overseas acquired Lyme disease/borreliosis are included on the NHMRC managed clinical portal. The guideline has also been published in Communicable Diseases Intelligence Vol 39 No. 4 December 20152.
The department will consider developing an additional guidance document focussing on treatment of classical Lyme disease in consultation with medical experts.
Recommendation 3
4.58 The committee recommends that the Chief Medical Officer continue to consult with the medical and patient communities through mechanisms such as the Clinical Advisory Committee on Lyme Disease, and for the Department of Health to continue to facilitate meetings with medical and patient representatives.
The Government, through the Australian Government Department of Health, will renew its engagement with the clinical reference group established by the Lyme Disease Association of Australia which works to join all the advocacy groups concerned about this chronic debilitating illness.
The department will also seek to participate in relevant medical education meetings and conferences to inform relevant sectors of the medical profession on progress being made in Australian research and where forums exist to encourage the exchange of ideas and information relevant to the medical profession and patients.
1 http://www.health.gov.au/lyme-disease#preventing-treating
2 http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-cdi3904d.htm
That the Senate take note of the document.
The committee recommends that the Department of Health further develop education and awareness strategies …
… about how to diagnose and treat classical Lyme disease acquired overseas and known tick-borne illnesses acquired in Australia.
The Australian Guidelines for the diagnosis of overseas acquired Lyme disease/borreliosis are included on the NHMRC managed clinical portal. The guideline has also been published in Communicable Diseases Intelligence Vol 39 No. 4 December 2015.
The department will consider developing an additional guidance document focussing on treatment of classical Lyme disease in consultation with medical experts.
The committee recommends that the Chief Medical Officer continue to consult with the medical and patient communities through mechanisms such as the Clinical Advisory Committee on Lyme Disease, and for the Department of Health to continue to facilitate meetings with medical and patient representatives.
Customs Tariff Amendment (2017 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2016
Customs Amendment (2017 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2016
That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
That these bills be now read a second time.
CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (2017 HARMONIZED SYSTEM CHANGES) BILL 2016
Second Reading Speech
The Customs Tariff Amendment (2017 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2016 contains approximately 950 amendments to create, change and clarify tariff classifications in the Customs Tariff Act 1995 .
These amendments give effect to changes resulting from the World Customs Organization's fifth review of the International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, commonly referred to as the Harmonized System. Australia provided significant input into the fifth review, relevant Australian Government agencies and industry groups were consulted during this review process.
Australia is a signatory to the Harmonized System, which has formed the basis of Australia's classifications for traded goods, both imports and exports, since 1988.
The Harmonized System is a hierarchical system that uniquely identifies all traded goods. Over 175 customs administrations use the Harmonized System.
Australia has implemented the Harmonized System domestically through the Customs Tariff Act 1995 for imports and the Australian Harmonized Export Commodity Classification for exports.
As a signatory to the Harmonized System, Australia is required by 1 January 2017 to give effect to the changes resulting from the fifth review.
Changes to the Harmonized System address new and emerging technologies, provide a clearer picture of trade patterns, facilitate the collection and comparison of trade data, and assist the monitoring of trade in certain goods.
The 2017 Harmonized System amendments address environmental and social issues of global concern. This includes, for example, further enhancing the monitoring of trade in certain fish and tropical woods by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. This will support food security objectives and management of endangered species.
The 2017 Harmonized System changes will create new tariff subheadings for specific chemicals. This will further enhance the monitoring, collection and comparison of data on the international movement of these chemicals, which are controlled under international conventions to which Australia is a signatory.
The Bill will insert new subheadings, at the request of the International Narcotics Control Board, to monitor and control pharmaceutical preparations containing ephedrine, pseudoephedrine or norephedrine. This will enhance the monitoring and control of certain narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.
The Bill also clarifies texts to support the uniform application of the Harmonized System internationally.
The Bill will amend Schedules 5 to 12 of the Customs Tariff Act. These schedules give effect to the application of customs duty on certain imported goods in accordance with Australia's bilateral trade agreements with the United States of America, Thailand, Chile, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Japan and China; and with Australia's regional agreement with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and New Zealand.
Existing levels of industry protection and margins of tariff preference that apply to imported goods, including goods imported under free trade agreements, will be preserved.
One exception to this, however, is the classification of electronic integrated circuits which will be expanded to include multi-component integrated circuits, commonly known as MCOs. This means that a subset of these goods will have their duty rates reduced to 'Free' when imported into Australia.
Reducing the rate of duty to 'Free' for all MCOs is consistent with the Expanded Information Technology Agreement, to which Australia is a signatory.
This Bill will provide certainty for Australia's importers by ensuring that Australia classifies its goods and commodities in accordance with the Harmonized System – and in a manner consistent with its major trading partners. The Bill will also provide a more effective way of identifying goods as they come across the border.
To give effect to the Harmonized System changes complementary amendments will also be made to the Customs Act 1901 by the Customs Amendment (2017 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2016.
CUSTOMS AMENDMENT (2017 HARMONIZED SYSTEM CHANGES) BILL 2016
Second Reading Speech
The Customs Amendment (2017 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2016 contains amendments to the Customs Act 1901 .
These amendments will give effect to changes resulting from the fifth review of the International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, commonly referred to as the Harmonized System by the World Customs Organization.
The Bill will also make minor amendments to the Customs Act 1901 to provide for the collection of appropriate import duties for biofuels and biofuel blends imported under the
China-Australia Free Trade Agreement.
To give effect to the Harmonized System changes complementary amendments will also be made to the Customs Tariff Act 1995 by the Customs Tariff Amendment (2017 Harmonized System Changes) Bill 2016.
Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (2016 Measures No. 1) Bill 2016
That this bill may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
Today I introduce the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (2016 Measures No.1) Bill 2016 which has two distinct purposes. Firstly, the Bill aims to improve the way we assist Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students to participate in and graduate from university. Secondly, the Bill makes an administrative amendment to ensure the Department of Education and Training can collect Tax File Numbers to improve the administration of the VET FEE-HELP scheme and improve data management arrangements for the HELP scheme as a whole.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are enrolling in universities in greater numbers than ever before, with enrolment rates growing faster than those for other Australian students. Unfortunately, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students are not progressing through university and completing degrees at anywhere near the rate of other Australian students.
The Government has worked with universities to reform arrangements so students are not only enrolling, but also progressing through their courses and completing university degrees in greater numbers.
These new arrangements were included in the Indigenous Student Success in Higher Education measure announced by the Government in the 2016-17 Budget.
The amendments that I introduce today will mean that existing support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander university students can be administered through a single Part of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 and importantly, through a single set of guidelines.
The Bill proposes the establishment of a new special appropriation under the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to consolidate the existing Commonwealth Scholarships Programme and the Indigenous Support Programme, administered under separate divisions of theHigher Education Support Act 2003 , with tutorial assistance administered under the Indigenous Advancement Strategy.
Consequential amendments to the social security law and to the Veterans ' Entitlements Act 1986 ensure that grants under the new Part are subject to current arrangements for other grants under theHigher Education Support Act 2003 and do not disrupt checks and balances that are currently in place.
Should Parliament pass this Bill, I will issue guidelines that ensure universities continue to offer scholarships, tutorial support and safe cultural spaces for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students to learn. However, these new guidelines will improve the capacity of universities to design and implement the best services for each circumstance, drawing on the knowledge and expertise of Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander staff or advisers.
The Government appreciates the assistance of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff from many universities across the country in developing these reforms. The Government also appreciates the support offered by the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Higher Education Consortium, Universities Australia and the Innovative Research Universities for the reforms to Indigenous student assistance.
Together we have developed reforms that shift the focus from simply getting students in the door, to also helping students to achieve and succeed at university.
This Government recognises that our richest capital is our human capital. At the heart of building the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander professional workforce, is increasing the number of successful university graduates. Improving completion outcomes will lead to more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people taking up professional careers in medicine, education, engineering, law and management, to name a few.
The Turnbull Coalition is committed to delivering better outcomes for our First Australians and the Government will continue to ensure that every dollar invested delivers the best outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
With the support of this Parliament, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander university students will be able to benefit from this legislation as they enter the 2017 academic year.
The Bill also introduces administrative amendments to the Higher Education Support Act 2003 and theIncome Tax Assessment Act 1936 to allow the Department of Education and Training to access the Tax File Numbers of VET FEE‑HELP students in order to improve the efficiency of data exchange with the Australian Taxation Office, and to improve data quality. This element of the Bill does not relate specifically to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, but all HELP debtors.
These amendments build on existing administrative processes already in place for Trade Support Loans and for the other four Higher Education Loan Programmes.
The amendments provide consistency across all five loan schemes. They will enable more efficient and effective administration of the Higher Education Loan Programme and, importantly, improved HELP data. The amendments will also make it possible for VET FEE‑HELP students to use, from 2017, a new digital Commonwealth Assistance Form. That form contains valuable enhancements that are designed to protect VET students from the unscrupulous enrolment practices of a few unethical providers.
The amendments will allow the Department of Education and Training and the Australian Taxation Office to efficiently exchange loan data using the common identifier that is a student's tax file number. Student loan debts that were incurred in an unconscionable way can be removed with speed and certainty, reducing stress on people who had never intended to incur a debt. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students were among those targeted by providers that did not have the best interests of these, often vulnerable, students at heart.
This Government recognises it is vital that the HELP scheme remains sustainable so that it can continue to be accessed by future generations of students. These amendments authorise use and disclosure of tax file numbers between Commonwealth officers specifically to improve available data on the HELP scheme and assist in its future administration.
These amendments are consistent with the VET Student Loans and related Bills and will contribute to arrangements that are robust, sustainable and focused on the interests of students.
I commend this Bill to the Chamber.
Water Legislation Amendment (Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2016
That the Classification Amendment (CHC Domain Scores) Principles 2016, made under the Aged Care Act 1997, be disallowed.
Thirteen sitting days remain, including today, to resolve the motion or the instrument will be deemed to have been disallowed.
The changes will put increased pressure on the public hospital system if the viability of residential aged care service providers is threatened …
At my facility, when those cuts came we lost three hours a day of nursing hours . For the 98 residents that we are required to oversee on every shift—one RN per 98 residents, every shift—we now have 15 minutes to hand over—
we used to have additional time—for two RNs to get together for complex problem solving. I am not aware of the exact figures on how many hours for enrolled nurses were lost but there were a few as well as the ECA. The whole roster has recently been restructured so that the care workers' hours have gone down quite a lot. At the end of the day, this impacts on the time that the registered nurses have for doing wound care and, as mentioned previously, residents waiting for the bells to be answered and things like that from the ECAs.
These challenges to providers and Government reflect the change in the physical demands of residents in residential aged care settings and the advancement of home care services in Australia. It is also a reflection of the maturity of ACFI which was introduced over 8 years ago. In combination, the aged care sector is managing an unsustainable system in which:
1. The ACFI mechanism does not accurately allocate resources based on contemporary resident need. This may result in core activities not being funded and creates potential wastage of resources directed towards lower priority activities that do attract funding; and
2. Increasing frailty among the resident population is creating an escalating burden on the taxpayer because of the funding regime which is heavily subsidised by Government.
The Living Longer, Living Better legislation has provided some scope to address inequities within the system and facilitate greater levels of contributions from consumers toward their care. However, the increasing resident dependency levels makes it difficult to achieve balance under the current system.
The result is that the 2016 Budget cuts will fall directly upon providers of the care, with no avenues to recover the losses from residents, other than cutting their services.
Obviously, decreasing clinical support for residents with escalating complex care needs in not going to be sustainable. The funding instrument and the wider system must now change.
The Senate divided. [18:42]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator O'Sullivan)
Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Television and Radio Licence Fees) Bill 2016
(1) Schedule 1, item 3, page 3 (line 11) omit "75%", substitute "0%".
(2) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 14) omit "75%", substitute "0%".
That this bill be now read a third time.
VET Student Loans Bill 2016
VET Student Loans (Charges) Bill 2016
VET Student Loans (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2016
… particularly during 2014 … we started to receive a spike in complaints related to the marketing of VET products …
We started to see complaints in mid-2014 … They started to come out as a bit of a trend in that mid- to late 2014 period—