The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Scott Ryan) took the chair at 09:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
Aged Care Legislation Amendment (New Commissioner Functions) Bill 2019
We have heard evidence which suggests that the regulatory regime that is intended to ensure safety and quality of services is unfit for purpose and does not adequately deter poor practices. Indeed, it often fails to detect them. When it does so, remedial action is frequently ineffective.
The regulatory regime appears to do little to encourage better practice beyond a minimum standard.
… at best temporarily stave off the worst problems and, at worst, produce another set of unintended outcomes requiring further inquiries and reviews and further injections of public funds, without addressing the underlying causal factors.
(1) Schedule 2, page 31 (after line 19), after item 19, insert:
19A Paragraphs 56 ‑1(k) and (l)
Repeal the paragraphs, substitute:
(k) to do the following:
(i) allow people acting for care recipients to have such access to the service as is specified in the User Rights Principles;
(ii) provide such people information relating to the residential care being provided by the service;
(l) to do the following:
(i) allow people acting for bodies that have been paid *advocacy grants under Part 5.5, or *community visitors grants under Part 5.6, to have such access to the service as is specified in the User Rights Principles;
(ii) provide such people information relating to the residential care being provided by the service;
19B Paragraph 56 ‑2(j)
Repeal the paragraph, substitute:
(j) to do the following:
(i) allow people acting for bodies that have been paid *advocacy grants under Part 5.5 to have such access to the service as is specified in the User Rights Principles;
(ii) provide such people information relating to the home care being provided by the service;
19C Paragraphs 56 ‑3(j) and (k)
Repeal the paragraphs, substitute:
(j) to do the following:
(i) allow people acting for care recipients to have such access to the service as is specified in the User Rights Principles;
(ii) provide such people information relating to the flexible care being provided by the service;
(k) to do the following:
(i) allow people acting for bodies that have been paid *advocacy grants under Part 5.5 to have such access to the service as is specified in the User Rights Principles;
(ii) provide such people information relating to the flexible care being provided by the service;
(2) Schedule 2, page 49 (after line 14), after item 47, insert:
47A At the end of section 18
Add:
; (c) the performance of any assessment (however described) conducted, in accordance with the rules, for the purposes of accrediting an aged care service referred to in paragraph 19(a);
(d) the performance of any quality review conducted, in accordance with the rules, of a service referred to in paragraph 19(b);
(e) the performance of any monitoring, in accordance with the rules, of the quality of care and services provided by:
(i) approved providers of an aged care service referred to in paragraph 19(c); or
(ii) service providers of Commonwealth‑funded aged care services;
(f) the performance of any electronic platform established by the Commonwealth to provide information relating to the provision of aged care services or Commonwealth‑funded aged care service.
47B At the end of subsection 21(2)
Add:
; (c) the performance of any assessment (however described) conducted, in accordance with the rules, for the purposes of accrediting an aged care service referred to in paragraph 19(a);
(d) the performance of any quality review conducted, in accordance with the rules, of a service referred to in paragraph 19(b);
(e) the performance of any monitoring, in accordance with the rules, of the quality of care and services provided by:
(i) approved providers of an aged care service referred to in paragraph 19(c); or
(ii) service providers of Commonwealth‑funded aged care services;
(f) the performance of any electronic platform established by the Commonwealth to provide information relating to the provision of aged care services or Commonwealth‑funded aged care service.
(3) Schedule 2, page 49 (after line 19), after item 48, insert:
48A At the end of Division 3 of Part 7
Add:
59B Publicly available report on complaints etc. relating to approved providers and service providers
(1) As soon as reasonably practicable after the end of each calendar month, the Commissioner must:
(a) prepare a report setting out the matters mentioned in subsections (2) and (3); and
(b) make the report publicly available.
(2) For approved providers the Commissioner received complaints or information about, the report must set out:
(a) the number of complaints or information received about each approved provider during the calendar month; and
(b) the number of complaints or information received about each approved provider during a previous calendar month that were not resolved or dealt with by the end of the calendar month;
(c) for each aged care responsibility that the complaints or information relates to—the number of complaints or information received relating to the responsibility; and
(d) both:
(i) the type of actions taken by the Commissioner to address the complaints, or to deal with the information, and
(ii) the number of those types of actions taken.
(3) For service providers of Commonwealth‑funded aged care services the Commissioner received a complaint or information about, the report must set out:
(a) the number of complaints or information received about each service provider during the calendar month; and
(b) the number of complaints or information received about each service provider during a previous calendar month that were not resolved or dealt with by the end of the calendar month; and
(c) for each responsibility under the funding agreement that relates to the service that the complaints or information relates to—the number of complaints or information received relating to the responsibility; and
(d) both:
(i) the type of actions taken by the Commissioner to address the complaints, or to deal with the information, and
(ii) the number of those types of actions taken.
(4) The report must not include personal information unless the inclusion of the personal information is necessary to identify the approved provider or service provider (as the case may be).
The committee divided. [10:19]
(The Temporary Chair—Senator Sterle)
(1) Page 82 (after line 21), after Schedule 3, insert:
Schedule 3A—Transparency of approved providers
Aged Care Act 1997
1 After section 9‑2
Insert:
9‑2A Obligation to provide Commissioner a report
(1) As soon as practicable within 3 months after the end of a financial year, an approved provider must provide the *Quality and Safety Commissioner with a written report for each facility operated by the provider that provided residential care in the financial year.
(2) The report must include the following information:
(a) the total income received by the provider from the facility;
(b) the sources of that income;
(c) the total amount spent in the financial year;
(d) the total cost of care expenditure which includes the itemised cost of the following:
(i) food and food supplements;
(ii) medical products;
(iii) continence aids;
(e) the total cost of accommodation;
(f) the total cost of staff members for each category of staff member referred to in subsection (3);
(g) the total cost of staff member training;
(h) the total amount of other operational expenditure itemised by category;
(i) any amount paid to a related body corporate within the meaning of section 50 of the Corporations Act 2011 .
Note: Approved providers have a responsibility under Part 4.3 to comply with this obligation. Failure to comply with a responsibility can result in a sanction being imposed under Part 7A of the *Quality and Safety Commission Act. The expenditure report provided under this section is made publicly available (see section 96‑11).
(3) For the purposes of paragraph (2) (f), the categories of staff member are the following:
(a) registered nurses;
(b) enrolled nurses;
(c) personal care attendants;
(d) allied health staff;
(e) administrative staff;
(f) other staff members.
Note: The category of other staff members should be further broken down into appropriate categories.
(4) In this section:
staff member of an approved provider has the same meaning as in section 63‑1AA.
2 After section 96‑10
Insert:
96‑11 Publication of reports by Commissioner
The *Quality and Safety Commissioner must make publicly available the report provided to the Commissioner under section 9‑2A.
(2) Page 82 (after line 21), after Schedule 3, insert:
Schedule 3B—Staff to care recipient ratios
The committee divided. [10:28]
(The Chair—Senator Lines)
Aged Care Act 1997
1 After section 9‑2
Insert:
9‑2B Obligation to notify Commissioner about staff to care recipient ratios
(1) An approved provider must notify the *Quality and Safety Commissioner in relation to each facility operated by the provider that provided residential care, on each notification day for each rostered shift, ratios of:
(a) care recipients to whom residential care is being provided through that facility; to
(b) each category of staff member of the provider that provides a service connected with that facility.
Note: Approved providers have a responsibility under Part 4.3 to comply with this obligation. Failure to comply with a responsibility can result in a sanction being imposed under Part 7A of the *Quality and Safety Commission Act. Information notified under this section is made publicly available (see section 96‑12).
(2) In counting staff members for the purposes of this section, part‑time staff members are to be taken into account as an appropriate fraction of a full‑time equivalent.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (1), a notification day is:
(a) the 4 days, in each year, specified in the regulations; or
(b) if no days are specified in the regulations for the purposes of paragraph (a)—each 1 January, 1 April, 1 July and 1 October.
(4) For the purposes of subsection (1), the categories of staff member are the following:
(a) registered nurses;
(b) enrolled nurses;
(c) personal care attendants;
(d) allied health staff;
(e) other staff members involved in the delivery of care.
(5) A notification under subsection (1) must be made:
(a) as soon as practicable after the day to which the notification relates; and
(b) no later than 21 days after that day.
(6) The notification must be in the form approved by the Commissioner.
(7) The notification may include an explanation by the approved provider in relation to any ratio notified. The explanation must not exceed 250 words in total.
Note: If an explanation is provided, the explanation will be made publicly available: see section 96‑12.
(8) The Commissioner must cause a review of the operation of this section to be undertaken as soon as possible after the first anniversary of the commencement of this section.
(9) The review must include a review of:
(a) the operation of subsection (3) and whether the ratios referred to in subsection (1) should include a measure of care recipient acuity levels, and whether the ratios should capture other days or times including Saturdays and Sundays; and
(b) whether there should be a requirement for providers to notify the Commissioner of significant changes between notification days of the ratios referred to in subsection (1) and whether such a requirement would create an unnecessary reporting burden on small providers.
(10) The Commissioner must give the Minister a written report of the review.
(11) The Minister must cause a copy of the report of the review to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the report is given to the Minister.
(12) In this section:
staff member of an approved provider has the same meaning as in section 63‑1AA.
2 After section 96‑10
Insert:
96‑12 Publication of staff to care recipient ratio notifications
The *Quality and Safety Commissioner must make publicly available any information about staff to care recipient ratios of residential care services notified to the Commissioner under section 9‑2B.
The committee divided. [10:36]
(The Temporary Chair—Senator Faruqi)
That this bill be now read a third time.
Protection of the Sea (Prevention of Pollution from Ships) Amendment (Air Pollution) Bill 2019
At the end of the motion, add:
", but the Senate:
(1) notes that:
(a) shipping could produce as much as 17 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 if not mitigated;
(b) open-loop exhaust gas cleaning systems or scrubbers have been described as 'cheat devices' that enable compliance with sulphur-emission requirements while discharging contaminated washwater overboard;
(c) a range of jurisdictions including Belgium, China, Germany, Ireland, the United Arab Emirates and the United States have implemented restrictions on open-loop scrubbers; and
(d) without sulphur limits, ship pollution causes approximately 400 000 premature deaths from lung cancer and cardiovascular disease, and 14 million cases of childhood asthma each year; and
(2) calls on the Government to:
(a) implement strict discharge standards, including appropriate independent monitoring, for any exhaust gas cleaning systems; and
(b) advocate through the International Maritime Organization for stronger standards to protect our marine environment."
… was always a frontier area, almost a virgin area; we sometimes forget that there was high … risk on—
The Senate divided. [11:04]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That this bill be now read a third time.
Education Legislation Amendment (Tuition Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2019
VET Student Loans (VSL Tuition Protection Levy) Bill 2019
Higher Education Support (HELP Tuition Protection Levy) Bill 2019
It is partly setting up a scheme that only covers 14 000 students at a significant cost to the public sector, when in fact the public sector is already insuring its students by being state owned. So the question in some ways is around the economics of just having a scheme for 14 000 VET student loan students, when probably the greater risk is for those full-fee-38 paying students who are outside it, except full-fee-paying with TAFEs, who are actually guaranteed by their state government anyway.
… students taking out loans to undertake vocational education should be protected and assisted in the case of provider or course closure, but TAFEs should not be punished for the failures of the mass privatisation of vocational education in Australia nor for the lack of quality and rigor of some private RTOs.
Current members with education background, apart from the chair, are not experienced in tertiary education, especially vocational education and would not be alert to the inherent risks in the sector’s schemes and volatility around closures.
Sheet RQ109
(1) Clause 5, page 3 (line 2), at the end of the definition of leviable provider , add "but does not include a provider covered by subsection (1A)".
(2) Clause 5, page 3 (after line 16), after subclause (1), insert:
(1A) An approved course provider is covered by this subsection if the provider is a registered training organisation that is:
(a) owned by the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory; or
(b) established to provide vocational education or training under one of the following:
(i) the Technical and Further Education Commission Act 1990 (NSW);
(ii) the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 (Vic.);
(iii) the TAFE Queensland Act 2013 (Qld);
(iv) the Vocational Education and Training Act 1996 (WA);
(v) the TAFE SA Act 2012 (SA);
(vi) the Training and Workforce Development Act 2013 (Tas.);
(vii) the Canberra Institute of Technology Act 1987 (ACT).
(3) Clause 7, page 4 (line 8), omit "(1) Unless the leviable provider is covered by subsection (3), the", substitute "The".
(4) Clause 7, page 4 (line 19) to page 5 (line 4), omit subclauses (2) and (3).
Parliamentary Counsel
VET Student Loans (VSL Tuition Protection Levy) Bill 2019
Statement of reasons: why certain amendments should be moved as requests
Section 53 of the Constitution is as follows:
Powers of the Houses in respect of legislation
53. Proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys, or imposing taxation, shall not originate in the Senate. But a proposed law shall not be taken to appropriate revenue or moneys, or to impose taxation, by reason only of its containing provisions for the imposition or appropriation of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand or payment or appropriation of fees for licences, or fees for services under the proposed law.
The Senate may not amend proposed laws imposing taxation, or proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government.
The Senate may not amend any proposed law so as to increase any proposed charge or burden on the people.
The Senate may at any stage return to the House of Representatives any proposed law which the Senate may not amend, requesting, by message, the omission or amendment of any items or provisions therein. And the House of Representatives may, if it thinks fit, make any of such omissions or amendments, with or without modifications.
Except as provided in this section, the Senate shall have equal power with the House of Representatives in respect of all proposed laws.
Amendment ( 1 )
The effect of this amendment is to exclude TAFEs from liability to pay VSL tuition protection levy. It is covered by section 53 because it amends a Bill that imposes taxation.
Amendment ( 2 )
The effect of this amendment is to exclude TAFEs from liability to pay VSL tuition protection levy. It is covered by section 53 because it amends a Bill that imposes taxation.
Consequential amendments
Amendments (3) and (4) are consequential on the amendments mentioned above.
-----
Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000
Amendments ( 1 ) to ( 4 )
As this is a bill imposing taxation within the meaning of section 53 of the Constitution, any Senate amendments to the bill must be moved as requests. This is in accordance with the precedents of the Senate.
Sheet RQ108
(1) Clause 5, page 3 (line 3), at the end of the definition of leviable provider , add "but does not include a provider covered by subsection (1A)".
(2) Clause 5, page 3 (after line 18), after subclause (1), insert:
(1A) A higher education provider is covered by this subsection if the provider is:
(a) owned by the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory; or
(b) established under one of the following:
(i) the Technical and Further Education Commission Act 1990 (NSW);
(ii) the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 (Vic.);
(iii) the TAFE Queensland Act 2013 (Qld);
(iv) the Vocational Education and Training Act 1996 (WA);
(v) the TAFE SA Act 2012 (SA);
(vi) the Training and Workforce Development Act 2013 (Tas.);
(vii) the Canberra Institute of Technology Act 1987 (ACT).
(3) Clause 7, page 4 (line 8), omit "(1) Unless the leviable provider is covered by subsection (3), the", substitute "The".
(4) Clause 7, page 4 (line 19) to page 5 (line 3), omit subclauses (2) and (3).
-----
Parliamentary Counsel
Higher Education Support (HELP Tuition Protection Levy) Bill 2019
Statement of reasons: why certain amendments should be moved as requests
Section 53 of the Constitution is as follows:
Powers of the Houses in respect of legislation
53. Proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys, or imposing taxation, shall not originate in the Senate. But a proposed law shall not be taken to appropriate revenue or moneys, or to impose taxation, by reason only of its containing provisions for the imposition or appropriation of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand or payment or appropriation of fees for licences, or fees for services under the proposed law.
The Senate may not amend proposed laws imposing taxation, or proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government.
The Senate may not amend any proposed law so as to increase any proposed charge or burden on the people.
The Senate may at any stage return to the House of Representatives any proposed law which the Senate may not amend, requesting, by message, the omission or amendment of any items or provisions therein. And the House of Representatives may, if it thinks fit, make any of such omissions or amendments, with or without modifications.
Except as provided in this section, the Senate shall have equal power with the House of Representatives in respect of all proposed laws.
Amendment ( 1 )
The effect of this amendment is to exclude TAFEs from liability to pay HELP tuition protection levy. It is covered by section 53 because it amends a Bill that imposes taxation.
Amendment ( 2 )
The effect of this amendment is to exclude TAFEs from liability to pay HELP tuition protection levy. It is covered by section 53 because it amends a Bill that imposes taxation.
Consequential amendments
Amendments (3) and (4) are consequential on the amendments mentioned above.
-----
Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000
Amendments ( 1 ) to ( 4 )
As this is a bill imposing taxation within the meaning of section 53 of the Constitution, any Senate amendments to the bill must be moved as requests. This is in accordance with the precedents of the Senate.
(1) Schedule 1, page 31 (after line 28), after item 48, insert:
48A After paragraph 55C(1)(a)
Insert:
(aa) a representative from the relevant vocational education or training bodies;
48B After subsection 55C(1)
Insert:
Requirement for Board members appointed under paragraph (1)(aa)
(1A) A person is not eligible for appointment as a Board member under paragraph (1)(aa) unless:
(a) the Minister has given a notice in writing to each head of a relevant vocational education or training body:
(i) specifying the person the Minister is proposing to appoint; and
(ii) stating the reasons the Minister is proposing to appoint the person; and
(iii) inviting the head to make submissions, in writing, to the Minister within 28 days after receiving the notice; and
(b) the Minister has considered any submissions received within that period and is reasonably satisfied the person has the support of a majority of the heads of the relevant vocational education or training bodies.
(1B) A body established under the following to provide vocational education or training is a relevant vocational education or training body :
(a) the Technical and Further Education Commission Act 1990 (NSW);
(b) the Education and Training Reform Act 2006 (Vic.);
(c) the TAFE Queensland Act 2013 (Qld);
(d) the Vocational Education and Training Act 1996 (WA);
(e) the TAFE SA Act 2012 (SA);
(f) the Training and Workforce Development Act 2013 (Tas.);
(g) the Canberra Institute of Technology Act 1987 (ACT).
That these bills be now read a third time.
Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Building on the Child Care Package) Bill 2019
SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE
REPORT NO. 10 OF 2019
1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 4 December 2019 at 7.25pm.
2. The committee recommends that—
(a) the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Combatting Corporate Crime) Bill 2019 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 19 February 2020 (see appendix 2 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(b) the provisions of the Export Control Bill 2019, the Export Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2019, the Export Charges (Imposition—General) Amendment Bill 2019, the Export Charges (Imposition—Excise) Amendment Bill 2019 and the Export Charges (Imposition—Customs) Amendment Bill 2019 bereferred immediately to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendix 3 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(c) the provisions of the Family Law Amendment (Western Australia De Facto Superannuation Splitting and Bankruptcy) Bill 2019 bereferred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 13 March 2020 (see appendix 4 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(d) contingent upon introduction in the House of Representatives, the provisions of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019 and the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2019 bereferred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendix 5 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(e) the National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Small Amount Credit Contract and Consumer Lease Reforms) Bill 2019 (No. 2) be referred immediately to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 6 April 2020 (see appendix 6 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(f) the National Integrity (Parliamentary Standards) Bill 2019 be referred immediately to the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 16 April 2020 (see appendix 7 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(g) the provisions of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Cross-boundary Greenhouse Gas Titles and Other Measures) Bill 2019 and the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2019 bereferred immediately to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 7 February 2020 (see appendix 8 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(h) the Saving Australian Dairy Bill 2019 be referred immediately to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 20 March 2020 (see appendix 9 for a statement of reasons for referral);
(i) the provisions of the Student Identifiers Amendment (Enhanced Student Permissions) Bill 2019 bereferred immediately to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 19 February 2020 (see appendix 10 for a statement of reasons for referral); and
(j) the Transport Security Amendment (Testing and Training) Bill 2019 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendix 11 for a statement of reasons for referral).
3. The committee recommends that the following bills not be referred to committees:
Treasury Laws Amendment (Registries Modernisation and Other Measures) Bill 2019
Business Names Registration (Fees) Amendment (Registries Modernisation) Bill 2019
Corporations (Fees) Amendment (Registries Modernisation) Bill 2019
National Consumer Credit Protection (Fees) Amendment (Registries Modernisation) Bill 2019
4. The committee deferred consideration of the following bills to its next meeting:
5. The committee considered the following bill but was unable to reach agreement:
(Dean Smith)
Chair
5 December 2019
That the report be adopted.
At the end of the motion, add:
"and the Australian Crime Commission Amendment (Special Operations and Special Investigations) Bill 2019 not be referred to a committee."
The Senate divided. [11:50]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
At the end of the motion, add:
", but in respect of the provisions of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019 and the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2019, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee report by 20 November 2020".
The Senate divided. [12:05]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That government business orders of the day as shown on today's order of business be considered from 12.45 pm today, and that government business be called on after consideration of the bills listed at paragraph (a) and considered until not later than 2 pm.
That the orders of general business for consideration today be as follows:
(a) general business notice of motion No. 353, standing in the name of Senator Waters, relating to climate change;
(b) general business notice of motion No. 363, standing in the name of Senator Gallagher, relating to ministerial standards; and
(c) orders of the day relating to documents.
That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (8) of standing order 111 not apply to the following bills, allowing them to be considered during this period of sittings:
(1) Australian Crime Commission Amendment (Special Operations and Special Investigations) Bill 2019
(2) Farm Household Support Amendment (Relief Measures) Bill (No. 2) 2019
(3) Interactive Gambling Amendment (National Self-exclusion Register) Bill 2019
(4) National Self-exclusion Register (Cost Recovery Levy) Bill 2019
(5) Special Recreational Vessels Bill 2019.
The Senate divided. [12:11]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) notes the importance of ensuring that Australian Parliament House is a safe place to visit and work;
(b) notes longstanding security arrangements in Parliament House have evolved in recent years and that further changes are proposed, in particular, the operation of closed circuit television systems (CCTV) and the new Electronic Access Pass System;
(c) notes that these systems, like other security and information systems, are managed by the Department of Parliamentary Services, under the authority of the Presiding Officers, on behalf of the Parliament;
(d) notes that, under the Parliamentary Precincts Act 1988 , the powers of the Presiding Officers to manage and control the precincts apply subject to relevant orders of the Houses, which means that the administration of these security and information systems is constrained by the powers, privileges and immunities of the Houses and their members;
(e) affirms that the collection, management and dissemination of information through the CCTV and Electronic Access Control System (EACS) is to be managed such that parliamentary privilege is protected;
(f) pursuant to paragraph (e), requests the Presiding Officers expedite protocols for the collection, management and dissemination of information through the EACS for adoption by the commencement of Parliament in 2020;
(g) notes the President's advice, that as an interim arrangement, pending finalisation of the protocols referred to in paragraph (f), when the President is required to make a determination in relation to the release of CCTV footage or EACS data to an external agency, and in consultation with the Clerk considers that the release of such data may involve matters of privilege in relation to the functions or authority of the Senate or its committees or in relation to the free performance of a senators' duties, the President will consult the Deputy President prior to agreeing to the release of any CCTV footage or EACS data; and
(h) further notes the Senate's previous resolution in December 2018, calling for an update on the MOU between the Attorney-General and the Presiding Officers, requests that this be expedited, and affirms this as a priority for 2020.
(1) That a select committee, to be known as the Select Committee on Foreign Interference through Social Media, be established to inquire into and report on the risk posed to Australia's democracy by foreign interference through social media, with particular reference to:
(a) use of social media for purposes that undermine Australia's democracy and values, including the spread of misinformation;
(b) responses to mitigate the risk posed to Australia's democracy and values, including by the Australian Government and social media platforms;
(c) international policy responses to cyber-enabled foreign interference and misinformation;
(d) the extent of compliance with Australian laws; and
(e) any related matters.
(2) That the committee present its final report on or before the second sitting day of May 2022.
(3) That the committee consist of five senators, as follows:
(a) two nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate;
(b) two nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate; and
(c) one nominated by minor party and independent senators.
(4) That:
(a) participating members may be appointed to the committee on the nomination of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate or any minority party or independent senator; and
(b) participating members may participate in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee, and have all the rights of members of the committee, but may not vote on any questions before the committee.
(5) That the committee may proceed to the dispatch of business notwithstanding that not all members have been duly nominated and appointed and notwithstanding any vacancy.
(6) That the committee elect as chair one of the members nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and as deputy chair one of the members nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate.
(7) That the deputy chair shall as act chair when the chair is absent from a meeting of the committee or the position of chair is temporarily vacant.
(8) That, in the event of an equality of voting, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.
(9) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit.
(10) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members, and to refer to any such subcommittee any of the matters which the committee is empowered to consider.
(11) That the committee be provided with all necessary staff, facilities and resources and be empowered to appoint persons with specialist knowledge for the purposes of the committee with the approval of the President of the Senate.
(12) That the committee be empowered to print from day to day such papers and evidence as may be ordered by it, and a daily Hansard be published of such proceedings as take place in public.
(1) That the Senate notes:
(a) that Australia has the second-largest migrant workforce in the world;
(b) that, according to Australian Population Research Institute, almost a fifth of the nation's cleaners, store packers, and food and hospitality workers are on temporary migrant visas, and the number of migrants on the visas has jumped from 1.8 million to 2.2 million in the past four years;
(c) that due to their temporary status and threats of deportation, migrant workers are more often subject to exploitation, wage theft and even physical and sexual abuse; and
(d) as the Chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Migration, Mr Wood, stated 'Organised crime and illegitimate labour hire companies are using this loophole to bring out illegal workers who are often vulnerable and open to exploitation. This represents an orchestrated scam that enables these criminal elements to exploit foreign workers in Australia until their claims are finalised'.
(2) That a select committee, to be known as the Select Committee on Temporary Migration, be established to inquire into and report on the impact temporary migration has on the Australia's economy, wages and jobs, social cohesion and workplace rights and conditions, with particular reference to:
(a) government policy settings, including their impact on the employment prospects and social cohesion of Australians;
(b) the impact of temporary skilled and unskilled migration on Australia's labour market;
(c) policy responses to challenges posed by temporary migration;
(d) whether permanent migration offers better long-term benefits for Australia's economy, Australian workers and social cohesion;
(e) the impact of wage theft, breaches of workplace rights and conditions, modern slavery and human trafficking on temporary migrants; and
(f) any related matters.
(3) That the committee present its final report on or before 2 December 2020.
(4) That the committee consist of five senators, as follows:
(a) two nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate;
(b) two nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate; and
(c) one nominated by minor party and independent senators.
(5) That:
(a) participating members may be appointed to the committee on the nomination of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate or any minority party or independent senator; and
(b) participating members may participate in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee, and have all the rights of members of the committee, but may not vote on any questions before the committee.
(6) That the committee may proceed to the dispatch of business notwithstanding that not all members have been duly nominated and appointed and notwithstanding any vacancy.
(7) That the committee elect as chair one of the members nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and as deputy chair one of the members nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate.
(8) That the deputy chair shall act chair when the chair is absent from a meeting of the committee or the position of chair is temporarily vacant.
(9) That, in the event of an equality of voting, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.
(10) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament or dissolution of the House of Representatives, and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit.
(11) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members, and to refer to any such subcommittee any of the matters which the committee is empowered to consider.
(12) That the committee be provided with all necessary staff, facilities and resources and be empowered to appoint persons with specialist knowledge for the purposes of the committee with the approval of the President of the Senate.
(13) That the committee be empowered to print from day to day such papers and evidence as may be ordered by it, and a daily Hansard be published of such proceedings as take place in public.
Marine Safety (Domestic Commercial Vessel) National Law Amendment (Improving Safety) Bill 2019
That the following bill be introduced: A Bill for an Act to amend the Marine Safety (Domestic Commercial Vessel) National Law Act 2012 , 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.
As lawmakers, we have a duty to introduce legislation or amend existing laws when it is clear that regulations need to be improved. If we don't do this, we are failing the very people who elected us to represent them in this place. The sole purpose of the bill that I am proposing is to improve safety for passengers on domestic commercial vessels. The legislation that currently exists and that applies to domestic commercial vessels is not sufficient and if this bill was in place in 2014, the Mills family of Perth, Western Australia would not have tragically lost a husband, a father, a son, a brother, a mate and a beloved family member.
Damien Mills, aged 35, tragically died when he fell overboard while on a charter vessel between Rottnest Island and Fremantle on October 31, 2014. After her husband didn't come home that night or answer any of her calls, Damien's wife Nicole contacted police the next morning. His body was found soon after by a family on a fishing trip several kilometres off the coast of Fremantle.
In her report of the incident surrounding Damien's death, the state coroner found that had a proper head count of passengers been conducted by the crew, Damien would be alive today. Evidence provided to the Senate's Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee by WA Water Police also argued that had the crew of the vessel conducted a headcount when they got back to Fremantle, there was a good chance that Damien would have been saved.
It is an absolute travesty that proper headcounts were not conducted on that day, that no one realised that Damien was missing when the vessel got back or that the Water Police were not notified upon arrival that Damien was missing.
This is totally unacceptable.
I want to take a short moment to pay tribute to Damien's wife Nicole and his father Richard who have been tireless advocates for regulatory change to ensure that what happened to their Damien never happens again.
They are not asking for much—only that headcounts are conducted in an appropriate manner that will ensure that everyone who gets on a boat at the beginning of a journey gets off safely at the end.
That is not too much to ask.
At the moment, the legislation that exists and that is enforced by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA), says that only one headcount of passengers must be conducted by the master of the vessel as part of their safety management system and that that headcount can be done at any time during a voyage. How does that possibly guarantee passenger safety?
This bill seeks to amend the existing legislation so that at a minimum, two headcounts are conducted on domestic commercial vessels other than those used for the purpose of public transport and that are more than 24 metres long. This bill proposes that one count occur at the commencement of a voyage and another at the end.
This will mean that if a headcount is conducted at the commencement of a journey and later someone goes missing throughout the duration, like in the unfortunate case of Damien Mills, the missing person will be detected by a count once the vessel docks.
A Senate Inquiry into the performance of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority was established in February 2019 after the family of Damien Mills raised serious concerns about the authorities' management of their case and AMSA's continued refusal to strengthen safety regulations for domestic commercial vessels.
The Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee has conducted a number of public hearings with AMSA, other law enforcement agencies and the Mills family throughout the course of the inquiry and remains concerned at the relaxed attitude of AMSA when queried about how safety for passengers on vessels can be improved.
I must also note my personal disappointment in the relevant Minister, Mr Michael McCormack who has been missing in action on this matter. The pleas of the committee and myself have continually fallen on deaf ears with Minister McCormack who still to this day refuses to engage and act.
AMSA have committed to look into how headcounts are conducted, however, they have in no way committed to enforcing a regulation of two headcounts and remain of the view that one is sufficient.
In lieu of this and the continued refusal of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority to enforce two mandatory headcounts for vessels other than those used for the purpose of public transport and that are more than 24 metres long. This Private Senators' Bill aims to amend the existing legislation to ensure that two mandatory headcounts are conducted therefore minimising the chance of this terrible incident happening again.
This bill isn't about more regulation. An extra head count will not impose any additional cost to a master's operation.
This is about safety and to ensure that no other Australian family has to endure the pain and anguish that the Mills family experienced in 2014 when their beloved husband, father and son Damien, never came home.
This is about amending legislation to improve safety for passengers on commercial vessels.
This is Damien's Law.
I commend the bill to the Senate.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction, by no later than 3 pm on 5 December 2019, the following documents:
(a) written justification for why the Department of the Environment and Energy (the Department) is using the 5% target instead of the up to 15% 2020 target for the second Kyoto Protocol period to calculate the size of their 2030 Paris Nationally Determined Contributions abatement task, as reflected on page 2 of the Climate Solutions Package brochure, and on page 10 ofAustralia ' s emissions projections 2018 ;
(b) written justification for why the Department is using the 5% target instead of the up to 15% 2020 target for the second Kyoto Protocol period to calculate the size of Australia's Kyoto carryover credits, as reflected on page 2 of the Climate Solutions Package brochure, and on page 10 ofAustralia ' s emissions projections 2018 ;
(c) any correspondence, emails, meeting notes, memos or any other documentation relating to whether the conditions, as outlined in the Cancun Agreement and subsequent Doha Amendment, for a target of up to a 15% emissions reduction on 2000 emissions by 2020 have or have not been met; and
(d) any correspondence, emails, meeting notes, memos or any other documentation relating to the choice of 5% over up to 15% reductions by 2020 as the baseline for either the calculation of the 2021-2030 abatement task or the size of Australia's Kyoto Protocol period two carryover credits.
That the Senate—
(a) notes with deep concern that:
(i) over a hundred fires continue to burn across New South Wales,
(ii) data from the New South Wales Department of Environment shows harmful pollutants in Sydney's air are already over three times worse than at any moment in the past five years during bushfire season,
(iii) the toxicity of the air in some parts of Sydney is the equivalent of smoking between four and ten cigarettes a day,
(iv) particle pollution can trigger heart attacks, strokes, lung cancer and asthma attacks,
(v) New South Wales Health has stated that bushfires were to blame for an increase in people presenting to emergency departments with asthma and breathing difficulties, and
(vi) Mr Greg Mullins, the former chief of NSW Fire and Rescue, has stated that 'climate change has supercharged the bushfire problem' and that 'if anyone tells you this is part of a normal cycle or we've had fires like this before smile politely and walk away, because they don't know what they're talking about'; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to protect the health of the people of New South Wales and declare a climate emergency.
The Senate divided. [12:25]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
(a) acknowledges that:
(i) First Nations peoples are the Traditional Owners and Custodians of the land we call Australia,
(ii) 26 January marks over 230 years of on-going dispossession and oppression for First Nations peoples and is considered a day of mourning by many First Nations peoples,
(iii) by continuing to celebrate Australia Day on 26 January we deny the truth about our shared history, and
(iv) Australians come together and march on Invasion Day because they want to tell the truth about our shared history, and acknowledge the ongoing impacts of colonisation; and
(b) urges all Australians to:
(i) respectfully engage in conversations about what 26 January means to First Nations peoples, and
(ii) be in solidarity with First Nations people on this painful day by attending Invasion Day events in their regions.
That the Senate—
(a) recognises that a Tasmanian organisation, Loaves & Fishes, provides around 70% of emergency food relief in Tasmania, servicing over 200 community food programs and 38 school breakfast clubs;
(b) acknowledges that Loaves & Fishes applied for but were excluded from receiving emergency food relief funding from the Commonwealth Government on the basis they are a local Tasmanian organisation;
(c) recognises that Tasmania is the only State in the Commonwealth that does not have on-the-ground operations from all three emergency food relief providers that receive funding support from the Department of Social Services;
(d) notes that, without Commonwealth Government funding of $150,000 a year, Loaves & Fishes will have to close their Hobart operation which supports 134 community food programs in the region, and since July 2018, has distributed more than 300,000 kilograms of fresh produce and produced over 55,000 ready to eat meals;
(e) calls on the Federal Government to ensure that vulnerable Tasmanians and Tasmanian emergency food relief providers are not overlooked for Federal Government support; and
(f) requests that the Federal Government act swiftly to resolve this matter, and that funding to support Tasmanians in need flow immediately.
That the Senate—
(a) acknowledges all recent recipients of Australian Bravery Decorations;
(b) notes that the Bravery Medal is awarded for acts of bravery in hazardous circumstances;
(c) recognises the following Queensland recipients of the Bravery Medal: Miss Elizabeth Adams, Mr Craig Coleman, Sergeant Paul Cox, Mr Damond Gray, Mr Matthew Hassen, Mr Alan Lawry, and the late Mr Robert Pickersgill;
(d) notes that the Commendation for Brave Conduct is awarded for other acts of bravery which are considered worthy of recognition;
(e) recognises the following Queensland recipients of the Commendation for Brave Conduct: Mrs Vivienne Coleman, Warrant Officer Class Two James Cottle, Mr Robert Devlin, Mr Craig Hogarth, Mr Daniel McDonald, Mr Darryn Marshall, Sergeant Matthew O'Brien, Mr Roberto Serola, Mrs Kerry Seymour and Senior Constable Jay Shepherd;
(f) notes that the Group Bravery Citation is awarded for a collective act of bravery, by a group of persons in extraordinary circumstances that is considered worthy of recognition; and
(g) recognises the following Queensland recipients of the Group Bravery Citation: Constable Richard Adderley, Sergeant Agnelle Bagetti, Senior Constable Jason Banks, Mr Cyril Cairns, Mr John Collins, Senior Constable Dale Cook, Mr James Ferguson, Mr Samuel Fouras, Master Vishaak Gangasandra, Dr Ashok Gangasandra Basavaraj, the late Mr Geoffrey Grant, Mr Christopher Holloway, Mr David Jefferson, Mr Michael Kindness, Mr Roy Koplick, Senior Constable Brendan O'Brien, Mr Richard Staples, Senior Constable Ashley Thompson and Mr John Verbeek.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs, by no later than 12 pm on 9 December 2019, the detailed 2018-19 end of financial year reports for the migration, skilled temporary residents and visitors programs.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) Australian farmers are highly productive, with each farmer producing enough food to feed 600 people, 150 at home and 450 overseas—feeding approximately 50 million people across the world each year,
(ii) Australia's Free Trade Agreements (FTA) give our primary producers and exporters preferential access into the growing markets across Asia,
(iii) the Federal Government's work to deliver FTA means that Australian farmers are poised to take advantage of the projected growth in Asia,
(iv) there is a high demand for Australia's safe and nutritious agricultural products across our international markets,
(v) trade has lifted the real income of Australian households by over $8400 a year, and
(vi) in 2017-18, the Australian red meat and livestock industry created employment for around 404,800 people, of these, just over 172,400 people were directly employed in the industry—the industry was also responsible for the employment of a further 232,400 people in businesses servicing the red meat and livestock industry, and as this industry exports 60 % of product, six in every ten jobs relies on our ability to trade with the world;
(b) congratulates the Federal Government on the entry into force of major FTA across north Asia, including:
(i) the China FTA which has resulted in beef exports totalling $1.75 billion in 2018-19—a 75% increase from $1 billion in 2017-18; in November 2019 alone, Australia's chilled and frozen beef exports to China reached a new record high of 34,264 tonnes, 134% above November last year; dairy product exports totalling $1.7 billion in 2018-19—a 54% increase from $1.1 billion in 2017-18,
(ii) the Japan FTA which has resulted in beef exports totalling $2.3 billion in 2018—a 14% increase from $2 billion in 2017, cheese exports totalled $498 million in 2018—a 17% increase over 2017, and
(iii) the Korean FTA which has resulted in beef exports totalling $1.37 billion in 2018—a 25% increase from $1.1 billion in 2017;
(c) notes Indonesia's demand for Australia's quality clean, green produce will continue to be built on the back of demand from its increasingly affluent 260 million strong population—under IA-CEPA, over 99% of Australian goods exports to Indonesia will enter duty free or under significantly improved and preferential arrangements; and
(d) supports the growth of Australian agriculture through the negotiation of preferential market access in export markets of the world.
The Senate divided. [12:35]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Prime Minister, by the adjournment of the Senate on 5 December 2019, any communication, including attached documents, between ministers of the Government and Senator Lambie, or their staff, relating to negotiations between the aforementioned parties regarding the Migration Amendment (Repairing Medical Transfers) Bill 2019.
The Senate divided. [12:39]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate—
a. notes that mismanagement, water theft and allegations of corruption have undermined confidence in the Murray-Darling Basin Plan;
b. rejects the National Party’s and Mr Barnaby Joyce’s assault on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, the environment and South Australia; and
c. calls on the Federal Government to support the delivery of water to South Australia under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan which is necessary for the survival of the River and the Lower Murray, and the communities that rely upon it.
The Senate divided. [12:50]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
The Senate divided. [12:53]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That senators be discharged from and appointed to committees as set out in the document available in the chamber and listed on the Dynamic Red.
Community Affairs Legislation Committee—
Discharged—Senator O'Neill
Participating member: Senator Polley
Appointed—Senator Polley
Participating member: Senator O'Neill
Community Affairs References Committee—
Discharged—Senator O'Neill
Participating member: Senator Ciccone
Appointed—Senator Ciccone
Participating member: Senator O'Neill
Environment and Communications Legislation Committee—
Discharged—Senator Urquhart
Participating member: Senator Green
Appointed—Senator Green
Participating members: Urquhart
Foreign Interference through Social Media—Select Committee—
Appointed—Senators Molan and Van
Participating members: Senators Abetz, Antic, Askew, Bragg, Brockman, Chandler, Davey, Fawcett, Fierravanti-Wells, Henderson, Hughes, McDonald, McGrath, McMahon, O'Sullivan, Paterson, Rennick, Scarr, Dean Smith, and Stoker
Temporary Migration—Select Committee—
Appointed—Senators Chandler and Bragg
Participating members: Senators Abetz, Antic, Askew, Brockman, Davey, Fawcett, Fierravanti-Wells, Henderson, Hughes, McDonald, McGrath, McMahon, Molan, O'Sullivan, Paterson, Rennick, Scarr, Dean Smith, Stoker and Van
Treaties—Joint Standing Committee—
Discharged—Senator Bilyk
Appointed—Senator Ciccone.
Communications Legislation Amendment (Deregulation and Other Measures) Bill 2019
That this bill be now read a third time.
Health Legislation Amendment (Data-matching and Other Matters) Bill 2019
That this bill be now read a third time.
Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Single Treatment Pathway) Bill 2019
That the bill be now read a third time.
Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Assistance and Access Amendments Review) Bill 2019
That the bill be read a third time.
Interactive Gambling Amendment (National Self-exclusion Register) Bill 2019
National Self-exclusion Register (Cost Recovery Levy) Bill 2019
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.
INTERACTIVE GAMBLING AMENDMENT (NATIONAL SELF-EXCLUSION REGISTER) BILL 2019
This Bill will establish legislation for a National Self-Exclusion Register (Register) for online wagering. With this Bill, the Government introduces a critical consumer protection measure for Australians gambling online which will help reduce the harm of online wagering to consumers.
The Register responds to growing community concerns about the rapid growth and high rate of harm caused by online gambling and importantly, will allow people to quickly and easily exclude themselves from all interactive gambling sites and apps, through a single registration process.
The Register will be available for around a million consumers of online wagering, but will target approximately 240,000 Australians who are already experiencing harm.
This is crucial, as we know that usage of online wagering is rapidly growing, and the rate of problem gambling is three times higher online than for all other forms of gambling.
Gambling-related harm can adversely affect a person's life in many ways including damage to their financial wellbeing, self‑esteem, relationships, work performance, housing situation, and physical and mental health.
As part of the response into the 2015 Review of Illegal Offshore Wagering (the Review) , in November 2018 the Morrison Government announced the joint National Framework in response to this Review. The agreed implementation arrangements and policy principles that underpin each of the measures were set out in a National Policy Statement.
These principles were developed following an extensive two-year consultation process with stakeholders, including state and territory governments, community organisations, academia, the interactive wagering industry, and individuals affected by gambling harm.
To date, I am pleased to say this Government has successfully implemented six of the 10 measures of the National Framework in all jurisdictions.
Key stakeholders, including governments, the interactive wagering industry, academia, the community sector and most importantly people who gamble online, were consulted when developing the Bills, in order to ensure the Register scheme is workable and consumer outcomes are met. They have expressed strong support for the Register.
The Register will allow any ordinary resident of Australia to exclude themselves from all interactive wagering services licenced in Australia. All interactive wagering providers licensed are in scope for the Register, including on-course bookmakers' telephone-only services
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) will procure an independent third‑party technology provider to supply, operate and maintain the Register on their behalf.
To be added to the Register, an individual will complete a simple registration process. The individual will be able to choose how long they wish to self-exclude for, ranging from three months to permanent exclusion.
This will give individuals the flexibility to set an exclusion period that is appropriate to their circumstances, and will also encourage uptake of the Register. Individuals will be able to extend this period at any time, and mechanisms will be in-place to enable a simple process for re-registration.
Individuals will be bound by a minimum three-month exclusion for their first registration, and will be prompted 14 days before their exclusion period ends,
The individual will be given the option to nominate support persons, with their consent, such as friends or family members. A support person would be notified when the registered individual signs up for self-exclusion, and again 14 days before a self-exclusion period ends.
Allowing up to five support persons will ensure the registered individual will have the flexibility to nominate an adequate number of sponsors, should they choose to do so. These support persons can be updated as required.
Interactive wagering providers will be required to take steps to promote the Register to their customers, and ensure that individuals on the Register are not provided with any interactive wagering services. Additionally, interactive wagering providers must ensure that new interactive wagering accounts are not opened for registered individuals, and existing accounts are closed and funds returned to the individual after existing bets are settled.
Civil and criminal penalties will apply if an interactive wagering provider does not appropriately promote the Register in accordance with the Register rules and the Government will closely monitor the behaviour of interactive wagering providers and will strengthen provisions if needed.
The Register rules will outline more detail on this issue, as it will allow the ACMA to prescribe requirements based on evolving evidence on the effectiveness of responsible gambling messaging, and the ever-changing online wagering environment.
In summary, this Bill will establish a National Self-Exclusion Register, which will allow people to quickly and easily exclude themselves from all interactive wagering services licenced in Australia through a single registration process. This will ensure that a vital consumer protection tool is readily available for vulnerable individuals that are at-risk of, or already experiencing harm from online wagering.
The Register is a first in Australia, and I consider it an important step in achieving best‑practice for social responsibility in online wagering.
The Government will continue to work with stakeholders as we implement the Register, and will monitor the scheme to ensure it is meeting its consumer protection outcomes.
NATIONAL SELF-EXCLUSION REGISTER (COST RECOVERY LEVY) BILL 2019
This is a companion Bill to the Interactive Gambling Amendment (National Self-exclusion) Bill 2019, which will establish legislation for the National Self‑Exclusion Register (Register) for online wagering.
This Bill will enable the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to fully recover the costs associated with the Register, and related regulatory and compliance functions, from interactive wagering providers licensed in Australia through a cost‑recovery levy. This levy will only recover costs covered in the Bill, and is not a revenue raising measure.
This Bill is enabling and mechanistic in character. Details regarding the amount of charges and the method of charging will be determined before the Register is operational, and will be set in a subordinate legislative instrument.
Consistent with the Australian Government Charging Framework, costs will be apportioned to each interactive wagering provider, consistent with the regulatory effort they cause.
All charging will be reported annually in the Cost Recovery Implementation Statement, which will be published to ensure transparency and accountability.
In summary, this Bill will enable the ACMA to fully recover the costs associated with the Register from interactive wagering providers licensed in Australia through a cost‑recovery levy. The Government will consult with the interactive wagering industry when finalising the details of the cost recovery.
That these bills be now read a third time.
Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Building on the Child Care Package) Bill 2019
Under the Child Care Safety Net, low‑income families earning $66 958 or less per annum, who do not meet the activity test, are entitled to access 24 hours of subsidised care a fortnight. As most Long Day Care sessions are 12 hours, these families are able to access one day a week of subsidised Long Day Care. This is a substantial reduction in the amount of subsidised care available to these families.
Some interviewees pointed out that it could be difficult for these families to meet activity test requirements, such as looking for work or volunteering, particularly in areas where employment opportunities were very limited or non-existent or when families did not have the skills, social capital or resources to take up volunteering.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Treasury Laws Amendment (Reducing Pressure on Housing Affordability Measures) Bill 2019
Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment (Near-new Dwelling Interests) Bill 2019
That these bills be now read a third time.
Australian Crime Commission Amendment (Special Operations and Special Investigations) Bill 2019
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Government is committed to supporting the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and its critical role in working towards a safer Australia.
As Australia's national criminal intelligence agency, the ACIC undertakes essential and indispensable functions in gathering intelligence and undertaking investigations to inform a national picture of crime impacting Australia. In doing so, the ACIC is contributing to an Australia that is better connected, better informed and highly capable of responding to transnational, serious and organised crime, cybercrime, and national security threats.
The threat environment and risks to Australia's national security are constantly evolving, endangering the safety, security and prosperity of Australia and our Australian way of life. Organised crime syndicates are highly resilient to traditional investigative and intelligence gathering methodologies, and readily adapt to advances in technologies in their attempts to evade detection and disruption.
The Australian Crime Commission Amendment (Special Operations and Special Investigations) Bill will ensure that the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission can continue to effectively detect, prevent and disrupt the nefarious activities of serious and organised crime targets.
This Bill will make technical amendments to the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 to streamline the authorisation process for the ACIC Board to determine future special operations and special investigations, and will confirm the validity of existing special operation and special investigation determinations. The Bill does not expand or otherwise alter the powers available to the ACIC in the course of undertaking a special operation or special investigation.
The Bill also makes minor consequential amendments to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement Act 2010 and theTelecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 as a result of the technical amendments to the Australian Crime Commission Act.
The measures in this Bill are vital to safeguarding the ability of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission to fulfil its statutory functions and actively contribute to a safer and more secure Australia.
… you cannot be punished for something which was not criminal when you did it, and you cannot be punished more severely than you could have been punished at the time of the offence.
If there have been breaches of the law by government agencies, then it would be odd and inappropriate for Parliament to validate those breaches as there would not be any deterrent for government agencies in the future who breach laws passed by the very same Parliament.
The Senate divided. [13:55]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
(1) Page 2 (after line 11), after clause 3, insert:
4 Review of this Act
(1) The Minister must cause an independent review to be conducted of the operation of the amendments made by this Act.
(2) The review must be commenced as soon as practicable after the end of 12 months after this Act commences.
(3) The persons who conduct the review must give the Minister a written report of the review within 6 months of the commencement of the review.
(4) The Minister must cause a copy of the report to be tabled in each House of Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the report is given to the Minister.
[statutory review]
… small and medium-sized businesses are responsible for more than three-quarters of the output in agriculture and more than half the output in construction.
There’s a Shire expression … We have our own language and if we like something, this is what we say; ‘How good is …
Where's the passion? I haven't seen any passion from you. You're like a poker player. Get up there and say 'this is not f---ing good enough'. Get angry!
The National Party's not going to exist after the next election unless you grow some spine and stand up.
Barnaby Joyce was the only one who came out here yesterday; he had some spine …
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Senator Cormann moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to provide for a motion relating to consideration of legislation, may be moved immediately and determined without amendment or debate.
That the motion be now put.
The Senate divided. [15:12]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
The Senate divided. [15:15]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That a motion to provide for the consideration of legislation may be moved immediately and determined without amendment or debate.
That the question be now put.
That:
(a) the following bills be called on at 4.30 pm and the questions on all remaining stages shall be put:
(b) paragraph (a) of this order shall operate as a limitation of debate under standing order 142;
(c) divisions may take place after 4.30 pm for the purposes of the bills only; and
(d) after conclusion of consideration of the bills the routine of business shall be:
(i) ministerial statements,
(ii) end of 2019 sittings statements,
(iii) messages,
(iv) committee membership,
(v) a motion relating to the next meeting of the Senate and leave of absence for all senators,
(vi) adjournment proposed, and
(vii) the Senate shall adjourn not later than 40 minutes after the adjournment is proposed.
The Senate divided. [15:21]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That the Senate take note of answers given by the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann, to a question asked by Senator Ayres today relating to the Morrison government's failures.
Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment (Single Treatment Pathway) Bill 2019
That the Senate take note of the minister's statement.
Despite being Australia's third largest agricultural industry, the dairy industry faces a number of significant challenges which, if left unaddressed, have the potential to threaten the long term viability of dairy production.
The government does not support reregulation via an ACCC investigation, as reregulation is not supported by the industry. As recommended by the ACCC, we're implementing a mandatory code of conduct to increase fairness and transparency between dairy farmers and processors. The code has been developed in consultation with industry and will help to address the imbalance in bargaining power between farmers and processors. Progress has been made to expedite the code. An exposure draft will be released shortly for industry feedback, and it's expected to be in place by 1 January 2020.
In any event, wages should always be enough to meet basic needs and to provide some discretionary income.
In any event wages should always be enough to meet basic needs and to provide some discretionary income for workers and their families.
The Senate divided. [16:34]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
The Senate divided. [16:38]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
(3) Schedule 1, item 53, page 11 (lines 12 to 19), subitem (2) to be opposed.
(4) Schedule 1, items 54 to 56, page 11 (line 20) to page 13 (line 33), to be opposed.
The Senate divided. [16:42]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
The Senate divided. [16:45]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
Farm Household Support Amendment (Relief Measures) Bill (No. 2) 2019
That this bill be now read a first time.
(1) Page 10 (after line 5), at the end of the Bill, add:
Schedule 5—Inquiries by the Productivity Commission
Farm Household Support Act 2014
1 After section 104
Insert:
104A Effectiveness of measures to address drought—Inquiries by the Productivity Commission
(1) By the day after this section commences, and afterwards at intervals of no longer than 3 years, the Productivity Minister must, under Part 3 of the Productivity Commission Act 1998 , refer to the Productivity Commission for inquiry the following matters:
(a) the appropriateness, effectiveness and efficiency of business and income support measures, in particular the Farm Household Allowance, provided by Commonwealth, state and territory governments to help farmers, farm businesses and farm dependent rural small businesses manage drought;
(b) the extent to which the measures mentioned in paragraph (1) (a) assist farmers, farm businesses and farm dependent rural small businesses to respond to the impact of the climate emergency on drought;
(c) any impediments to farmers, farm businesses and farm dependent rural small businesses improving their preparedness for periods of financial difficulty;
(d) the most appropriate, effective and efficient measures to help build the self‑reliance and preparedness to manage drought of farmers, farm businesses and farm dependent rural small businesses;
(e) any related matters.
(2) In referring a matter to the Productivity Commission for inquiry under this section, the Productivity Minister must:
(a) under paragraph 11(1) (a) of the Productivity Commission Act 1998 , require the Productivity Commission to hold hearings for the purposes of the inquiry; and
(b) under paragraph 11(1) (b) of that Act, specify the period ending 12 months after the inquiry commences as the period within which the Productivity Commission must submit its report on the inquiry; and
(c) under paragraph 11(1) (d) of that Act, require the Productivity Commission to make recommendations in relation to the matters referred to in subsection (1).
Note: Under section 12 of the Productivity Commission Act 1998 , the Productivity Minister must cause a copy of the Productivity Commission's report to be tabled in each House of the Parliament.
(3) The Productivity Minister must not withdraw a reference under this section before the Productivity Minister has received the report.
(4) For the purposes of paragraph 6(1) (a) of the Productivity Commission Act 1998 , the matters mentioned in subsection (1) are taken to be matters relating to industry, industry development and productivity.
(5) In this section, Productivity Minister means the Minister administering theProductivity Commission Act 1998 .
Special Recreational Vessels Bill 2019
That the bill be now read a first time.
That the Senate take note of the documents.
Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Legislation Amendment (Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority Board and Other Improvements) Bill 2019
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment (Enhancing Australia's Anti-Doping Capability) Bill 2019
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment (Sport Integrity Australia) Bill 2019
Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Ensuring Integrity No. 2) Bill 2019
That these bills may proceed without formalities, be taken together and now be read a first time.
That these bills be now read a second time.
Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Legislation Amendment (Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority Board and Other Improvements) Bill 2019
Australians need access to safe and effective agricultural chemicals and veterinary medicines. They protect our crops, livestock and domestic pets; safeguard our environment from invasive weeds and pests; and meet consumer needs for things such as household insecticides.
Agvet chemicals, as these products are commonly known, have brought long term benefits to Australian agriculture, by supporting increased productivity, better quality produce and more competitive industries.
It is important that the regulation of agvet chemicals continues to be streamlined, to maximise the benefits for Australia. It is also imperative to ensure that the strong safeguards built into the regulation of agvet chemicals are not compromised.
Through a cooperative scheme with the states and territories, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority—the APVMA—is the national regulator of agvet chemicals up to, and including, the point of supply. The APVMA has an important role in ensuring that agvet chemicals supplied in Australia are safe for people, animals, plants and the environment, and don't adversely impact our trade market access.
The APVMA needs to be both efficient and effective in its regulation of agvet chemicals. The Bill supports these objectives by streamlining regulatory processes, while strengthening the vital protections for the health and safety of humans, animals and the environment. Given its vital role, the APVMA also requires robust governance arrangements that reflect modem practices for ensuring the accountability and performance of the regulator. The Bill supports this critical outcome by establishing the APVMA Board and ceasing the Advisory Board.
Legislation underpinning the APVMA and agvet chemical regulation was developed in the early 1990s. We have announced a comprehensive review of the whole legislative framework from first-principles. In the meantime, however, the chemical industry has made it clear that there are simple, non-controversial changes that could be done now that improve the efficiency of the agvet chemical regulatory framework, reduce some costs and increase the speed to which farmers can get access to safe and effective chemicals.
The Bill therefore includes measures to improve the administrative efficiency of the APVMA and promote quicker access to chemical products. The measures in the Bill reduce the regulatory burden for applications by increasing the APVMA's flexibility when dealing with minor errors in applications and for information that can be taken into account during an application. The Bill will also enable the APVMA to choose, where appropriate, to use computerised decision-making as part of its processes, thereby increasing efficiency while maintaining appropriate checks and balances. Computerised decision-making might be used, for example, for decisions involving an administrative check of an application.
The Bill also makes changes to enable the use of new, simpler processes for assessments based on risk. Specifically, the Bill provides for new prescribed approval and registration processes that will be quicker and less costly than those currently available, while ensuring the chemicals assessed are safe and effective. These new processes will apply for those active constituents, chemical products and labels that require minimal or no assessment of technical information and retain the requirement that the active or product meets the relevant statutory criteria, including in relation to the safety of humans, plants, animals and the environment. This measure has the potential to free up the time of the APVMA's assessors so they can focus on more complex assessments.
The Bill also removes the need for industry to undertake two unrelated reporting activities—one for levies, based on chemical product sales, and a more complex reporting activity on active constituent quantities. It simplifies and aligns these reporting processes based on the quantity and value of product sales. This significantly reduces reporting costs for industry without compromising the availability of information for our international reporting obligations and policy development needs. The chemical industry has been seeking changes to the burdensome reporting requirements and the Bill delivers these changes.
The Bill also provides for incentives for registration holders to include on product labels certain uses of chemical products that they would not ordinarily register. Similar to the approaches applied internationally, the incentives in the Bill operate by extending data protection periods on information for up to five years, if certain priority uses are included on labels. These extensions would be prescribed in the regulations. Based on the experience of these incentives overseas, this will encourage more priority uses on labels, including minor uses, where the costs of adding the use are not justified by the additional commercial returns to chemical manufacturers. This will significantly benefit Australian farmers.
Other measures in the Bill enable the holder of an approval or registration to vary the approval or registration while it is suspended. This will ensure that the issue identified that led to the suspension of the approval or registration can be appropriately rectified at the holder's request.
The Bill also makes changes to strengthen the integrity of the regulatory framework.
To perform its role as a regulator the APVMA has to rely on information provided to it by applicants. The Bill provides the APVMA with a broader suite of sanctions that will allow it to proportionately respond to any false or misleading information it receives. This includes both administrative sanctions and civil pecuniary penalties. Industry understands the importance of increasing the range of compliance options available to the APVMA.
The Bill further bolsters the integrity of the system by harmonising the need to inform the APVMA of new information—including information that shows the substance may no longer meet the safety criteria—across all holders and applicants.
The Bill also includes measures to improve risk communication about chemical products. This increases the integrity and transparency of voluntary recalls of agvet chemicals, and modernises the legislation so the reporting obligations are clear for persons recalling these chemicals.
Importantly, the Bill also introduces a five person, skills-based governance Board for the APVMA. This Board will provide the APVMA with additional skills and experience to deliver an increasingly accountable, efficient and effective organisation.
Currently all responsibility for the APVMA's strategic leadership, governance and day-to-day operations rests with the Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The CEO is therefore responsible for setting, implementing and monitoring the APVMA's policies without any other direct support. This is an unreasonable and unsustainable management burden on the CEO that is not effective or efficient for the APVMA's successful long-term operation and ongoing improvement.
The Board will be the accountable authority under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013. It will ensure the proper, efficient and effective performance of the APVMA's functions; and determine the policies, objectives and strategies that the APVMA follows.
In addition, the Board will play an important role in implementing the outcomes of the government's comprehensive review of the whole agvet legislative framework from first-principles.
The Board, appointed by the Minister for Agriculture, will consist of a Chair, the APVMA's CEO and three other members selected on the basis of their skills. Board members will be appointed on a part-time basis. The CEO is included as an ex officio Board member to support informed and collective decision making and ensure the Board's policies are effectively integrated into day-to-day operations.
The APVMA will continue to deliver independent and evidence-based decisions. The Board will oversee how the APVMA does its job by establishing and monitoring the framework under which it operates. Day-to-day administration and decision-making, such as registering individual chemical products and undertaking compliance and enforcement activities will remain the responsibility of the APVMA CEO.
The APVMA is one of the few corporate Commonwealth entities that does not have a governance Board to ensure corporate compliance and management accountability. All other Commonwealth regulatory entities with direct responsibility for protecting human life and/or health (such as Food Standards Australia New Zealand, the Australian Maritime Safety Authority and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority) have governance boards.
The Board model chosen by the government is comparable with other corporate Commonwealth entities and with private sector companies. Its proposed size, composition, role, functions, duties and powers conform to Commonwealth policy as well as modern best practice guidance on corporate governance. Board members will be required to have appropriate qualifications, skills or experience in financial management, law, risk management, public sector governance, science and/or public health.
The Board will be able to establish committees to assist it to perform its functions and exercise its powers. These committees will provide a mechanism to seek input from and engage directly with industry stakeholders and other experts as needed.
The Bill provides transparency around ministerial directions to the Board. Any written directions made to the Board by the minister will be notifiable instruments, with the particulars and effects of these directions reported in the APVMA's annual report.
The Bill additionally requires a review of the operation of the Board, after four years, to ensure it is effective and efficient.
The Bill also ceases the existing APVMA Advisory Board. The Advisory Board had no legislative powers to direct any particular course of action and has not been operational since 2015.
Further measures in the Bill clarify meanings, or address deficiencies or inconsistencies in relation to the regulation of agvet chemicals. These are largely minor issues. However, when considered together, they improve the operational efficiency of the APVMA.
The measures in the Bill represent a considered approach to improving agvet legislation and have been developed through a program of engagement with stakeholders. The Board measures have been developed through a process of detailed, targeted consultation with stakeholders directly affected by the APVMA's governance. Other measures in the Bill have also been consulted on publicly and this has confirmed that these measures will deliver benefits to industry, the regulator and our community.
The Bill will improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the national system for regulating agvet chemicals, while strengthening its integrity and positioning the APVMA to become a modern and sustainable regulator. It will ensure that safe and effective agvet chemicals continue to be available to our community now and into the future. A more efficient regulator will deliver flow-on benefits to the APVMA's clients, including improved client services and reduced regulatory burden, which will reduce the cost of doing business.
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment (Enhancing Australia's Anti-Doping Capability) Bill 2019
The Australian Government supports a fair, safe and healthy environment for all athletes and is committed to clean sport. Sport delivers for Australians: it provides extensive benefits from improved health through physical endeavour to the pursuit of athletic excellence and the values it teaches and encourages in every member of our Australian community.
However, sport and all it offers our community when it is clean fair and safe is under threat. The threat of modern doping is significant, with successive national and international doping scandals over recent years undermining public confidence in the legitimacy of the sporting contest. Not only is doping a serious risk to an athlete's health and wellbeing, at its foundation, it debases all that is good about sport.
International cooperation and coordination of efforts in the fight against doping continue to improve. But even as the anti-doping effort becomes more sophisticated, making it harder for intentional dopers 'to get away with it', doping continues.
As part of the 2018 Review of Australia ' s Sports Integrity Arrangements the expert panel, chaired by the Hon. James Wood AO QC, found that increasingly sophisticated doping is harder to detect by urine and blood sample analysis alone, with intelligence and investigations now indispensable in the detection of doping incidents and programs.
Accordingly, the Wood Review determined a detection program involving both sample analysis and intelligence-led investigations is required for the enforcement of anti-doping rules, as a foundation for preventive measures and for the pursuit of non-analytical doping cases.
In the absence of significant reform and an additional funding base, including Government intervention to resolve long-standing issues regarding the costs and sustainability of the sample analysis system, the Wood Review found that Australia's anti-doping program will be unable to address current and foreseeable future doping challenges effectively.
The Wood Review also found the current Australian anti-doping legislative framework requires reform to enable national anti-doping capability to effectively address modern doping threats.
This Government heard these warnings, and is delivering.
This is why we introduced legislation into the previous parliament to amend the ASADA Act, which lapsed due to the recent federal election. Since then we have taken the opportunity to undertake further consultation on, and refinement of, the Bill being introduced today.
This Bill is the first step in ensuring that Australia's anti-doping legislative framework is robust, efficient and responsive to the contemporary threat environment.
The amendments to the ASADA Act will:
To the extent these reforms are currently directed to the functions of ASADA, under the Government's Safeguarding the Integrity of Sport policy, such functions will be performed by the new single national sports integrity body being established by the Government, Sport Integrity Australia, from 1 July 2020.
Australia is a proud sporting nation. We value, and we are proud of sport that is clean fair and safe. This Government will ensure that this will remain the case.
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment (Sport Integrity Australia) Bill 2019
Sport is an important part of Australian culture. It has shaped the Australian national identity through events such as the Ashes, the State of Origin, the Sydney to Hobart, and the Australian Open. Australians have come to expect the sports they watch and participate in are fair and honest. And while Australia has always taken a strong stance against cheating and misconduct in sport, there is more that should be done to prepare for future sports integrity threats and challenges.
It is essential the millions Australians who participate in sport at every level from grassroots to the elite — have full confidence their sports are better protected from external threats such as doping, drug use, match-fixing and criminal exploitation of athletes and events. Australians should be confident they can enjoy sports environments free of abuse, discrimination and harassment.
The nature of sports corruption is evolving at an unprecedented rate due to the immense commercialisation of sport and sporting organisations, and accelerating technological advancement.
Sports integrity matters are now beyond the control of any single stakeholder. They are complex, globalised and connected, forming a complicated threat matrix exposing vulnerabilities that require a robust and nationally-coordinated response across sports, governments, regulators, the wagering industry, law enforcement and other stakeholders.
In August 2017, the Government commissioned the Review of Australia's Sports Integrity Arrangements, as part of the Government's ongoing development of the National Sports Plan — Sport 2030. The Review Panel, chaired by the Hon. James Wood AO QC, delivered The Report of the Review of Australia ' s Sports Integrity Arrangements (Wood Review) in early 2018.
The Wood Review warns that 'without the presence of a comprehensive, effective and nationally coordinated response capability, the hard earned reputation of sport in this country risks being tarnished' and that beyond the immediate impact of corrupt conduct of the kind identified, a public loss of confidence in the sporting contest has direct consequences for the health, economic, social and cultural benefits that sport generates, and undermines significant investment in sport.
The Wood Review also identifies a critical leadership role for the Commonwealth Government by supporting the integrity efforts of sporting organisations in the evolving threat environment, particularly those sports with fewer resources.
To achieve this outcome, the centrepiece of the Wood Review recommendations is the formation of a new agency — a single coordinating body to address sports integrity matters at a national level and ensure Australia is positioned to effectively respond to escalating integrity risks.
This is why we introduced legislation into the previous Parliament to establish a new body called Sport Integrity Australia. Although that Bill lapsed due to the recent Federal election, the Government remains committed to the
establishment of Sport Integrity Australia and convinced in the benefits it will provide to Australian sport.
Currently in Australia, sports integrity functions are shared between the National Integrity of Sport Unit within the Department of Health, the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority and Sport Australia. As a result, stakeholders are often required to interact with multiple agencies on matters across the sports integrity spectrum, creating undue regulatory burden.
Initially, Sport Integrity Australia will be established to unite the nationally focussed sport integrity functions of the National Integrity of Sport Unit, ASADA, and Sport Australia; establishing a single point of coordination for all sport integrity matters and a single point of reference for all stakeholders, working in close cooperation with the Sports Betting Integrity Unit (a joint initiative of the National Integrity of Sport Unit and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission), states and territories and across the sports sector.
Sport Integrity Australia will seek to prevent and address threats to sports integrity. The agency will coordinate a national approach to these matters with a view to achieving:
Sport Integrity Australia's focus will be on policy and program delivery, education and outreach, anti-doping regulation including monitoring and intelligence. The Agency will stand ready to assist sporting organisations to ensure that the skills and capabilities in the sporting sector exist to identify and prevent threats to the integrity of Sport. Through its role as a single point of contact for all sports integrity matters, Sport Integrity Australia will be ideally positioned to receive, handle and share information as appropriate to prevent and address threats to the integrity of sport.
The Government remains committed to developing and implementing additional and enhanced capabilities recommended by the Wood Review, including: enhanced anti-match-fixing intelligence capabilities; a new regulatory scheme referred to in the Wood Review as the Australian Sports Wagering Scheme and a protected disclosure (whistle-blower) framework for sport. This will be implemented in Stage-Two, as outlined in the Government Response to the Wood Review.
However, the early establishment of Sport Integrity Australia will improve the coordination of Australia's sports integrity response and reduce the regulatory burden on sport, athletes and others who are currently required to interact with multiple agencies across the spectrum of sports integrity issues.
This Government is intent on protecting the integrity of the sports that make up this great sporting nation, the sports Australians enjoy and have come to expect as being safe, fair and inclusive — sports that deserve to be enjoyed by all, for generations to come.
Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Ensuring Integrity No. 2) Bill 2019
The government remains absolutely committed to ensuring the integrity of all registered organisations—employer groups and unions alike—for the benefit of workers, for the benefit of our national economy and for the broader public interest.
The rule of law is not a concept to be taken lightly. It is not a fair weather principle to be applied in some circumstances and disregarded in others. Obeying the law is of the utmost importance to the proper functioning of a democratic society and it is incumbent upon all organisations, be they employer groups, unions, banks or other corporations, and all of their directors, executives and officers, to comply with the law or face appropriate consequences.
This bill concerns registered organisations which, despite the claims of some, are not above the law. Multiple Royal Commissions and innumerable judgements of the courts have exposed the misconduct, lawlessness and even corruption at the heart of some parts of registered organisations, including a stubborn but militant minority in the CFMMEU.
To quote one of many similar passages from many judges of the Federal Court, " the conduct of its officers and employees has consistently shown a total contempt ... for the constraints imposed by the law " and a " cavalier disregard for the prior penalties imposed by this Court ".
And this conduct is continuing. Over 30 contraventions of the law and close to $400,000 in court ordered penalties in the last few months alone. The Australian Building and Construction Commission filed a case just recently alleging CFMMEU officers threatened and intimidated workers of a crane company in New South Wales, including by spitting at them, calling them dogs and scabs and photographing them then uploading the images on social media where they were further subjected to abuse and intimidation.
Of course, it's not just repeated contraventions of workplace law. Just this week we have seen New South Wales CFMMEU officers convicted of drug offences and a CFMMEU officer in Queensland is in court right now facing criminal charges for intimidating a State Work Health and Safety inspector.
We have also seen examples of quite horrendous conduct against women by the officers of the CFMMEU, including intimidating female police officers, spitting at female building inspectors and making abhorrent threats about sexual violence to workplace inspectors. Is it any wonder that data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows the number of working women in construction has fallen from 13 per cent 30 years ago to 11.8 per cent today?
So what should the government do in the face of organisations such as these, that place themselves above the law, that happily spends members' money on paying court-imposed penalties while continuing to do it what they like? Make an exception? Admit defeat, and say employers and other unions must obey the law, but not organisations like the CFMMEU?
If existing sanctions are not working effectively to deter lawbreaking, you need stronger sanctions. If penalties are not working, the courts need other options. It's clear that's the case when it comes to registered organisations.
Courts need to be able to disqualify officers who keep breaking the law — removing them from office or alternatively suspending or taking from the organisation itself the rights and privileges of registration. In essence, that it what this Bill does.
How this approach can be portrayed as an attack on unions, much less their hard working members, is difficult to see — unless of course one views these organisations as above the law and therefore beyond reproach. Any such view is at best, horribly misguided and at worst, a genuine threat to the even-handed supremacy of the rule of law.
The bill introduced into parliament today incorporates the sensible and constructive amendments, safeguards and protections proposed to a previous iteration of the bill by the Centre Alliance Party and Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party. It also incorporates a provision requiring the operation of the bill to be reviewed in the near future, as suggested by the Greens and the Jacqui Lambie Network.
The grounds for disqualification and cancellation of registration in the bill are set at an appropriately high level, and will only be met where courts have imposed penalties for serious or repeated contraventions of the law. Of course even where any such ground is met, only the independent regulator will be able to decide whether disqualification or cancellation should be sought, and even then, only the independent Federal Court will be able to make these orders, and even then, the court can only do so where this would not be unjust in light of the gravity of the underlying conduct and all other relevant considerations.
To suggest safeguards such as these and the multitude of others in the bill will lead to a person being disqualified or an organisation deregistered for submitting paperwork a few days late, as those opposite have repeatedly and disingenuously claimed, is so far down the path of fanciful it evokes sobering questions about precisely what sort of serious and unlawful conduct these allegations are designed to excuse.
Under the bill, only amalgamations of organisations with a long track record of breaking the law will be required to satisfy a public interest test, administered by the independent Fair Work Commission. Members of organisations will continue to be able to vote on whether their organisation should merge with another organisation, but where there is ongoing contempt for the law, the question can be asked: is it in the public interest for this organisation to spread its culture of lawbreaking to other organisations?
It is vital to note that nothing in the bill prevents a registered organisation from exercising its rights under the law to represent workers, including investigating underpayment issues or acting on work health and safety concerns. The vast majority of unions and employer groups manage to perform these important functions and work hard for their members within the confines of the law, recognising that they cannot in good conscience insist employers pay workers their legal entitlements, bargain in good faith, and comply with other legislative provisions, if they themselves ignore the law.
The bill simply deals with those registered organisations who break the law or mistreat members. Organisations that contribute positively to the industrial relations framework, work in their members' interests and adhere to the rule of law—and thankfully that's the vast majority of them—will not be impacted by the bill.
Respect for the law not only goes to the integrity of registered organisations, but to the efficacy and integrity of the industrial relations system itself.
That these bills be listed separately as separate orders of the day.
Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Bill 2019
That Senators be discharged and appointed to committees as set out in the document available in the chamber and listed on the Dynamic Red.
Community Affairs Legislation Committee—
Discharged—Senator O'Neill
Participating member: Senator Polley
Appointed—Senator Polley
Participating member: Senator O'Neill
Community Affairs References Committee—
Discharged—Senator O'Neill
Participating member: Senator Ciccone
Appointed—Senator Ciccone
Participating member: Senator O'Neill
Environment and Communications Legislation Committee—
Discharged—Senator Urquhart
Participating member: Senator Green
Appointed—Senator Green
Participating members: Urquhart
Foreign Interference through Social Media—Select Committee—
Appointed—Senators Molan and Van
Participating members: Senators Abetz, Antic, Askew, Bragg, Brockman, Chandler, Davey, Fawcett, Fierravanti-Wells, Henderson, Hughes, McDonald, McGrath, McMahon, O'Sullivan, Paterson, Rennick, Scarr, Dean Smith, and Stoker
Temporary Migration—Select Committee—
Appointed—Senators Chandler and Bragg
Participating members: Senators Abetz, Antic, Askew, Brockman, Davey, Fawcett, Fierravanti-Wells, Henderson, Hughes, McDonald, McGrath, McMahon, Molan, O'Sullivan, Paterson, Rennick, Scarr, Dean Smith, Stoker and Van
Treaties—Joint Standing Committee—
Discharged—Senator Bilyk
Appointed—Senator Ciccone.
That the Senate take note of the documents.
AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO THE RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT REFERENCES COMMITTEE REPORT: OPERATION, REGULATION AND FUNDING OF AIR ROUTE SERVICE DELIVERY TO RURAL, REGIONAL AND REMOTE COMMUNITIES
The Australian Government welcomes the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee report on the inquiry into the operation, regulation and funding of air route service delivery to rural, regional and remote communities.
The Australian Government recognises the importance of aviation to remote and regional Australia. It offers connections to community members and for tourism, travel, business, health and education. It is vital the regional aviation sector remains vibrant and competitive.
The inquiry has raised the profile of the discrepancy between airfares between regional and remote areas and those between major centres. It also investigated the causes of higher airfares which is due to a number of factors including smaller passenger populations and large travel distances.
The Australian Government thanks everyone who participated in the public hearings, entered submissions or otherwise participated in this inquiry. The Australian Government recognises the issues investigated by the Committee are matters of great interest for all Australians, particularly those living in remote, rural and regional areas of Australia. All of the input has proven valuable in the forming of the report and the recommendations within it.
As has been noted by the Committee, the Australian Government supports the regional aviation market through a number of funding programs, which currently provide much needed support to regional, rural and remote aviation. This includes:
General regional grants programs, such as the Building Better Regions Fund, which have delivered over $50 million to regional airports over three rounds of funding.
The commitment of $75.1 million to the Regional Aviation Access Programme and its component parts, which deliver much needed funding and services to remote airstrips to improve their ability to support aeromedical services. Funding is also provided for landing lights, animal fencing and other critical services.
The Australian Government recently committed $100 million to establish the Regional Airports Program. This program will provide assistance to allow regional airports to undertake essential works, promoting aviation safety and access for communities.
The Australian Government is providing $50.1 million in funding to support eligible regional airports to upgrade or purchase equipment to meet new aviation security screening requirements through the Regional Aviation Security Screening Fund. Limited funding is also available for airports commencing security screening that are required to make infrastructure changes to accommodate X-ray technology.
The complex issues and challenges identified by the inquiry for commercial air services are symptomatic of the broader issues faced by all levels of government in ensuring regional Australia has access to essential services on an economic basis. Aviation is just one component of a broader set of policy and program frameworks aimed at ensuring regional Australia enjoys economic growth, social inclusion and access to essential services through a reasonable level of transport connectivity.
Given that the provision of air services to regional Australia continues to be a key facilitator of broader economic development and service delivery, the Australian Government has commenced work on developing a strategic and forward-looking Regional Aviation Policy statement. The statement will consider the unique challenges and opportunities facing people living in regional and remote areas of Australia and will identify strategies to ensure regional aviation remains vibrant, competitive and viable into the future.
The Australian Government is committed to engaging closely with airlines, regional airports and their local council owners, state and territory governments, and local communities in developing the Regional Aviation Policy statement.
This engagement is particularly important to recognise the constitutional role and responsibilities that state and local governments play in the provision and regulation of intra‑state air services, and for ensuring access to essential services and for aviation‑related activities such as flying training schools. Regional development and tourism organisations and business interests will also be key stakeholders that will be engaged in the development of the policy statement.
Current domestic policy settings and airfares
Under long standing Australian Government policy settings, there is no regulation of airfares, capacity or routes for interstate domestic commercial flights in Australia. Subject to safety and security requirements, and the Australian Government's competition and consumer framework, airlines are free to compete and to make commercial decisions about what routes are served and what fares are charged.
On interstate routes, these policy settings have delivered more competition, lower fares, a greater range of services, and greater demand for air services than ever before, and the Australian Government has no plans to change these settings.
The Australian Government also recognises that the benefits arising from the deregulation of the domestic aviation industry have been less extensive in relation to the provision of air services to small regional, rural and remote communities, simply because the benefits of competition cannot be realised in markets that are too small to support competition.
This is not to say there is no role for government in circumstances where important air services are of marginal commercial viability, impacting the affordability of airfares.
As noted by the Committee, the regulation of intra-state routes is a matter for state governments. In recognising the different circumstances that apply to commercial operations serving smaller regional centres, several state governments choose to regulate various intra‑state routes, and have route and airfare subsidies in place, as a means of ensuring the ongoing provision of air services in rural and remote areas, and on routes with relatively low passenger demand.
The Australian Government also provides support for services on eligible low volume commercial routes through the Airservices Australia Enroute Charges Payment Scheme and to remote areas through the Regional Aviation Access Programme.
In addition, Australian Government policy allows any foreign investor (airline or other) to own up to 100 per cent of an Australian domestic airline, subject to approval by the Foreign Investment Review Board.
These foreign investment settings for domestic operations are among the most liberal in the world and provide an opportunity for domestic airlines to seek foreign investment to support and expand domestic operations. A number of Australian domestic airlines are currently majority foreign owned, including Virgin Australia's domestic operations and Regional Express.
Longstanding international practice is to restrict aviation cabotagea1a and reserve domestic markets for airlines of the home country.
In Australia's case, the only exception to this policy is New Zealand, whose airlines are able to operate domestic cabotage services as part of the Single Aviation Market between New Zealand and Australia (though, to date, New Zealand airlines have not chosen to take up this opportunity for commercial reasons). Small passenger volumes on regional routes, suitable aircraft size, limited airport facilities and regulatory oversight of foreign registered aircraft and crews are among factors which would impact on the viability of operating cabotage services to/from regional destinations in Australia.
Notwithstanding concerns raised by the Committee, the Australian Government does not consider the cost of Australian air travel compares unfavourably internationally. It is difficult to compare the cost of air travel in Australia with the cost of air travel in other countries, particularly in relation to travel on regional routes.
Australia has many long distance air routes where passenger numbers and hence commercial returns available is very limited. In addition, wage rates, foreign exchange rates, government subsidies, direct operating costs and the extent of airline competition vary significantly between countries, making direct 'cost of air travel' comparisons between Australia and other countries difficult.
While recognising that limited objective evidence is available, the Australian Government considers Australian airfares are internationally competitive when these variables are taken into account.
The Australian Government's aviation policy settings continue to encourage strong competition by airlines in the domestic market which benefits air travellers in Australia. Such settings should ensure airfares continue at levels that are comparable with other countries when taking into account Australia's relatively unique operating environment. On routes where there is ultimately only limited demand and competition by airlines, various measures are in place to minimise cost of travel pressures on these routes.
Recommendations of the Senate Committee
Recommendation 1
The committee recommends that the Australian Government direct the Productivity Commission to undertake a standalone, public inquiry into the determinants of domestic airfares on routes to and between regional centres in Australia. The inquiry should, via a detailed economic analysis, investigate the feasibility of increasing operational subsidies and introducing other price control alternatives to address the high cost of regional airfares. The inquiry should consult with regional communities to determine whether additional routes should be subject to regulation. The Productivity Commission should use its compulsory information-gathering powers to inform its investigations.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The Australian Government notes that state governments are constitutionally responsible for intra‑state aviation and operate a range of schemes involving operational subsidies and route regulation.
The successful design of these schemes are heavily dependent on local factors, and it is unclear if a national review of disparate local issues will yield useful insights that could inform policy making at the national level. The Australian Government considers state government agencies such as the Queensland Productivity Commission may be better placed to analyse the issues identified by the Committee.
The Australian Government will consult with state, territory and local government counterparts about the Committee's findings and to review current policy settings and programs to ensure they continue to adequately meet the needs of regional Australia and are responsive to future trends and opportunities.
Recommendation 2
The committee recommends that the Australian Government direct the Productivity Commission to expand its terms of reference in all future reports into the economic regulation of airports, to include investigations into the social and economic impacts of air route supply and airfare pricing on rural, regional and remote Australia.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The Australian Government anticipates the Productivity Commission will be well placed to continue to examine issues related to the economic regulation of airports, including in the context of negotiations between regional airports and airlines.
However, as noted in the Australian Government's response to Recommendation One, the Australian Government considers state government agencies such as the Queensland Productivity Commission may be better placed to analyse the issues identified by the Committee.
The Australian Government is currently developing a Regional Aviation Policy statement.
The Australian Government will further analyse the economic impacts of regional aviation as part of this process, and will work with state and territory governments as part of this process (see response to Recommendation Three).
Recommendation 3
The committee recommends that the Australian Government, through the Council of Australian Governments, review the efficacy of Western Australia ' s Strategic Airport Asset and Financial Management Framework in 2022, in accordance with the suggestion of the Productivity Commission. The Government should assess the efficacy of the Framework and determine its suitability for application across all jurisdictions.
The Australian Government agrees to this recommendation.
The Australian Government will undertake a review to analyse the Framework's suitability for application across all jurisdictions. If the review finds the Framework is effective and suitable to be applied to all jurisdictions, the Australian Government will work in an appropriate forum with state and territory counterparts with a view to establishing a nationally consistent framework.
Recommendation 4
The committee recommends that the Australian Government complete, as a matter of priority, a financial analysis to determine the ongoing operational, maintenance and staffing costs of proposed passenger security screening enhancements at regional airports, as announced in the 2018–19 Budget. The analysis should further consider ongoing security costs at regional airports more broadly.
Recommendation Five
The committee recommends that following a financial analysis into the ongoing costs of the provision of security screening at regional airports, the Australian Government consider providing ongoing financial assistance to those regional airports which have been identified as requiring passenger security screening enhancements as part of the 2018–19 Budget, where required.
The Australian Government notes these recommendations.
The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and Regional Development is working with industry and the Department of Home Affairs to undertake up to six case studies to assess the financial impact of the new aviation security requirements on regional airports and, where possible, the flow on impact to the local communities. The airports, from across a number of states, will be selected based on varying profiles and operating environments.
It has been a longstanding policy of successive governments that industry is responsible for the cost of security, including operating costs. The majority of regional airports required to upgrade screening equipment already conduct security screening and are responsible for managing the associated costs.
Recommendation 6
The committee recommends that over the forward estimates, the Australian Government ensure the ongoing operation and funding of the Regional Aviation Access Programme and its component programs (the Remote Airstrip Upgrade Programme, Remote Air Services Subsidy Scheme and the Remote Aerodrome Inspection Programme).
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The Australian Government views these programs as a key part of helping remote communities maintain access to important passenger and aeromedical services, particularly where there is limited or no commercial viability for services. The Australian Government has demonstrated this through committing $75.1 million to the Regional Aviation Access Programme over the forward estimates.
Recommendation 7
The committee recommends that the Australian Government undertake a review into the funding of regional and remote aerodrome infrastructure and maintenance, to ascertain whether financial support to such aerodromes should be increased, and whether the current grants programs are the best means of financial assistance. Local councils, as airport operators, should be consulted as part of the review to determine the annual financial impact on councils of aerodrome operation and maintenance.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The Australian Government is committed through its Regional Airports Program ($100 million), Regional Aviation Access Programme ($75.1 million) and Building Better Regions Fund (which has delivered over $50 million to regional airports) to ensuring essential access to important regional and remote aerodromes and will continue to work closely with applicants to ensure appropriate funding frameworks are in place.
Regional grants programs such as the Building Better Regions Fund play an important role in investment decisions across all types of assets and projects in regional Australia. When agreeing to provide grant funding, the Australian Government gives consideration to broader regional economic growth and potential, as well as the social and community benefits the project to be financially supported will deliver to those local communities.
The Australian Government also recognises the diversity of ownership and operating arrangements for regional and remote aviation infrastructure across jurisdictions. It continues to work closely with state, Northern Territory and local government agencies in determining funding priorities for capital expenditure under the Remote Airstrip Upgrade Programme, and continues to deliver aerodrome technical inspection services to 57 Indigenous communities.
The Australian Government is committed to ensuring achievement of the objectives promoted through the significant financial support that it is providing to assist regional and remote airports.
The Government will ensure the implementation and management of each of these schemes are aligned closely to optimise the outcomes each delivers to regional and remote communities. The Regional Aviation Policy statement will consider a wide range of issues relevant to communities served by regional and remote air service providers.
Recommendation 8
The committee recommends the Transport Ministers of the Council of Australian Governments develop a nationally consistent framework for the tender process, implementation, operation and review of regulated routes in each jurisdiction. The framework should have a particular focus on improving the overall transparency of the operation of regulated routes. In developing the framework, affected communities should be consulted, particularly in jurisdictions where regulated routes are identified as being beneficial to the provision of regional air services.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The regulation of intra-state air routes is primarily the responsibility of each state and territory government. The degree of regulation and the level of subsidies each government decides to provide will vary according to particular circumstances, with each government determining its priorities and type of support for air services to its regional and remote communities.
Recommendation Nine
The committee recommends the Transport Ministers of the Council of Australian Governments develop a nationally consistent framework which, by leveraging each state ' s purchasing power, aims to expand access for regional communities to initiatives such as community and compassionate fares, particularly for ' last minute ' flights. The framework, which should be developed in consultation with airlines, should encourage greater transparency around the operation of such fares, and consider the feasibility of allowing residents in regional, rural and remote areas to access subsidised airfares through online purchasing.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The pricing and availability of seats offered as compassionate fares are a matter for determination by each airline, which will consider the full range of commercial, logistical and social concerns in the development and operation of their compassionate fare schemes.
The Recommendations of Senator Rex Patrick
Recommendation 1
Until such time as the disallowable instrument that mandates a new airport security equipment requirement is passed through the Parliament, no taxpayer money should be spent on security screening equipment.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The Australian Government is committed to strengthening Australia's comprehensive and robust aviation security system to ensure safe and secure air travel.
The disrupted terrorist attack in Sydney in July 2017 demonstrated a level of sophistication not seen before in Australia and reinforced that aviation remains a high profile target for terrorists. To keep ahead of the evolving threat environment major and regional airports will upgrade their security screening technology.
The majority of these regional airports are already required under the Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005to undertake security screening. The proposed regulation changes will only impact a small number of airports commencing security screening for certain flights. The Department of Home Affairs is engaging with these airports directly.
The Australian Government recognises that aviation is critical to regional communities. Eligible regional airports are being supported to purchase or upgrade their security screening equipment through the Regional Airport Security Screening Fund of $50.1 million. Airports have commenced implementation of the new security screening technology upgrades. Affected airports are reliant upon this to meet their contractual arrangements for the new requirements.
Recommendation 2
Consistent with the recommendations of former Senator Nick Xenophon, in the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee inquiry report into airport and aviation security, the Australian Government should adopt a US Transport Security Administration-like agency approach to airport and aviation security at all airports.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The current regulatory and screening service delivery model reflects the long-standing policy of successive governments. Australia's aviation security model—where government sets policy and regulation, and delivery of security is by private industry—is commonly used around the world.
This model recognises that airports are best placed to understand and manage their operational risks on a day-to-day basis. Further study would be required to fully assess the advantages and disadvantages and cost implications of each model in the context of Australia's air network and aviation security requirements. The approach taken by the United States Transportation Security Administration is only one of a range of alternative models used globally.
Recommendation 3
Failing the acceptance of Recommendation 2, the Australian Government should cover the full cost of ongoing security equipment maintenance and security screening staff costs at regional airports.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
It has been a longstanding policy of successive governments that industry is responsible for the cost of security, including operating costs.
The Australian Government is providing significant financial support to regional airports through a number of initiatives. Under the $50.1 million Regional Airport Security Screening Fund, eligible regional airports will receive financial assistance to purchase new or upgrade existing technology to meet the new aviation security screening requirements.
Regional airports may also access funding through the Building Better Regions Fund and Regional Aviation Access Programme.
Recommendation 4
Failing the implementation of either Recommendation 2 or 3, the instrument to oblige security screening at smaller airports should be disallowed.
The Australian Government notes this recommendation.
The Australian Government will consult with industry on any regulatory changes required to implement the new security requirements.
Recommendation 5
In recognition that the current Civil Aviation Safety Regulations have stalled the wings of General Aviation, the Australian Government must initiate a major rewrite of the Regulations, such that they are significantly simplified.
The Australian Government does not agree with this recommendation.
The Australian Government rejects the assertion the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASR) "have stalled the wings of General Aviation".
The Australian Aircraft Activity 2018 report by the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics (BITRE) shows that total hours flown by the General Aviation sector has increased by approximately 9 per cent since 2015. While hours flown in some sub-sectors have decreased, hours flown in other sub-sectors such as Instructional Flying (Commercial) has increased by more than 30 per cent since 2015.
The CASR have been developed in consultation with industry and are written in accordance with the Australian Government legislative drafting manual.
Further, the BITRE study found that, among the nine key challenges affecting General Aviation, the only one relating to regulation noted that the "impact of regulatory changes" was a challenge to General Aviation; therefore, the Australian Government does not support a major rewrite of the Regulations.
The Government supports the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's continued work in developing guidance material to foster greater understanding and easier adoption of the CASR by the general aviation community. The development of a plain English guide for general operating and flight rules (CASR Part 91), which explains the regulations in lay terms using diagrams and charts, is one such example.
1 Cabotage refers to the transport of domestic passengers or cargo by a foreign aviation carrier.
That the Senate take note of the report.
That the Senate take note of the document.
That:
(a) the Senate, at its rising, adjourn till Tuesday, 4 February 2020, at midday, or such other time as may be fixed by the President or, in the event of the President being unavailable, by the Deputy President, and that the time of meeting so determined shall be notified to each senator; and
(b) leave of absence be granted to every member of the Senate from the end of the sitting today, to the day on which the Senate next meets.