The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Slade Brockman ) took the chair at 12:00, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to give precedence to a motion relating to the consideration of the Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill 2021.
The Senate divided. [12:38]
(The President—Senator Brockman)
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me from moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to give precedence to a motion relating to Australia's climate targets.
That the question be now put.
The Senate divided. [12:55]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Fawcett)
The Senate divided. [12:57]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Fawcett)
That the order of government business today be as shown on the order of business:
Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment (Economic Empowerment) Bill 2021
We have been working on this now for many years. For the first time Aboriginal people have been at the table with government ensuring the interests of Aboriginal people are front and centre. Finally we are seeing real progress.
… this government has a dismal history with respect to making changes to traditional negotiation and consent processes in the context of native title. In recent years, claimed improvements to make those processes more efficient have in fact come at a cost to the rights of First Nations people and have threatened the integrity of traditional decision-making processes.
The reforms have the potential to reduce the amount of time associated with the application process for exploration licenses and permits. Creating more efficient and consistent processes will benefit Traditional Owners and mining parties equally.
In fact, they're precisely there at the request of traditional owners, who don't want to be humbugged by endless meetings when they've already clearly made their views known to the land councils. So it's traditional owners who were pushing for that particular change, not the miners.
…in no way derogate from the central requirements of traditional owners. The so-called 'veto right' that traditional owners maintain is sacrosanct under the land rights act. That is absolutely protected.
It undermines Traditional Owner decision making as well as the Land Council’s ability to discharge its statutory function to act on behalf of Traditional Owners as a group.
Land Council members are elected to represent the views of Traditional Owners and other Aboriginal residents in their Land Council region. If they fail at this, they get voted out.
… Age Pension recipients can choose to join the Cashless Debit Card program if they wish to.
It is astonishing the level of dismissiveness with which those concerns have been met.
At the same time, I see a government paying lip service to this notion of respect at work and the protection of women and I believe that the concerns that I have raised have caused the party to sweep yet another critical issue under the rug.
That the Senate take note of the minister's answer.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Birmingham) to a question without notice asked by Senator McCarthy today relating to federal quarantine facilities.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Birmingham) to a question without notice asked by the Leader of the Australian Greens in the Senate (Senator Waters) today relating to the report on the Independent Review into Commonwealth Parliamentary Workplaces.
That the provisions of paragraphs (5) to (8) of standing order 111 not apply to various bills, allowing them to be considered during this period of sittings.
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE IN THE 2021 SPRING SITTINGS
AUTONOMOUS SANCTIONS (THEMATIC SANCTIONS) AMENDMENT BILL 2021
Purpose of the Bill
1. The purpose of the Autonomous Sanctions (Thematic Sanctions) Amendment Bill 2021 (the Bill) is to expand the Government's ability to impose targeted financial sanctions and travel bans against the perpetrators of egregious acts of international concern, beyond Australia's primarily country-based autonomous sanctions framework. The Bill will specify categories of conduct pursuant to which new thematic sanctions could be established. Once the Bill has passed, the Government will amend the Autonomous Sanctions Regulations 2011 to promptly establish new thematic sanctions regimes relating to serious human rights violations or abuses, serious corruption and significant cyber incidents. This reform implements the government's response to the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (JSCFADT) entitledCriminality, corruption and impunity: Should Australia join the Global Magnitsky movement?. The Minister for Foreign Affairs publicly announced the measures in the Bill on 5 August 2021. As an increasing number of countries use thematic sanctions to respond swiftly and flexibly to issues of international concern, regardless of geographic location, the Bill will also enable us to sanction individuals and entities in coordination with key global partners, including the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, where it is in our national interest to do so. This reform provides Australia with an additional foreign policy tool of statecraft to define, defend and demonstrate our values, and protect the international rules-based order.
Reasons for Urgency
With an increasing number of comparatively attractive economies joining the "Magnitsky movement", we must position Australia to act more quickly to freeze the funds of perpetrators and beneficiaries, and to prevent them from travelling here. Further delay would mean we risk becoming an isolated, attractive safe haven for such people and entities, and their ill-gotten gains. The reform will enable Australia to swiftly and flexibly deny the perpetrators and beneficiaries of egregious acts, including serious human rights violations or abuses, and serious corruption, from accessing our economy and benefiting from the freedoms that our democracy allows. This additional tool of foreign policy statecraft will allow us to more flexibly respond to situations of international concern in the national interest. Introduction and passage of the Bill in the 2021 Spring sittings will facilitate swift implementation of human rights and corruption sanctions, consistent with the recommendations of the JSCFADT.
(Circulated by authority of the Minister for Foreign Affairs)
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE IN THE 2021 SPRI NG SITTINGS
ELECTORAL LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (ANNUAL DISCLOSURE EQUALITY) BILL 2021
Purpose of the Bill
The objective of the proposed amendments to the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 is to improve the consistency of application of the financial disclosure framework and promote transparency by:
Reasons for Urgency
The Bill is urgent with the next federal election to be held on or before 21 May 2022. In order for relevant legislative changes to take effect and be implemented by the Australian Electoral Commission before the election, passage will be needed during this sitting period.
(Circulated by authority of the Special Minister of State)
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGEIN THE 2021 SPRING SITTINGS
ELECTORAL LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (ASSURANCE OF SENATE COUNTING) BILL
Purpose of the Bill
The Bill enhances confidence in elections through strengthening the integrity of counting of Senate votes, including independent assurance of computer systems and processes used to capture and count votes.
Reasons for Urgency
The bill is urgent with the next federal election to be held on or before 21 May 2022. In order for relevant legislative changes to take effect and be implemented by the Australian Electoral Commission before the election, passage will be needed during this sitting period.
(Circulated by authority of the Special Minister of State)
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE IN THE 2021 SPRING SITTINGS
ELECTORAL LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (CONTINGENCY MEASURES) BILL
Purpose of the Bill
The Bill implements the Government response to recommendations from the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters (JSCEM) inquiry on the future conduct of elections operating during times of emergency situations
Reasons for Urgency
The Bill is urgent with the next federal election to be held on or before 21 May 2022. In order for relevant legislative changes to take effect and be implemented by the Australian Electoral Commission before the election, passage will be needed during this sitting period.
(Circulated by authority of the Special Minister of State)
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE IN THE 2021 SPRING SITTINGS
INVESTMENT FUNDS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL
The Investment Funds Legislation Amendment Bill will provide alternate employment arrangements for the Future Fund Management Agency (FFMA) and a partial Freedom of Information Act 1982 exemption for the Future Fund Board of Guardians (Board) and the FFMA for documents relating to investment activities. The Amendment Bill will simplify the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) disbursements framework, bringing greater certainty to funding for health and medical research. It will also transfer administrative responsibility for expenditure from the Emergency Response Fund (ERF) to the newly established National Recovery and Resilience Agency (NRRA).
Reasons for Urgency
Passage of the Amendment Bill will ensure the new disbursements framework for the MRFF is in place ahead of the disbursement amount for next financial year being determined under current arrangements, providing certainty of the funding that is available in 2022-23. It will also give effect to the transfer of administrative responsibility for expenditure from the ERF to the NRRA, which came into existence on 1 July 2021.
(Circulated by authority of the Minister for Finance)
STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR INTRODUCTION AND PASSAGE IN THE 20 21 SPRING SITTINGS
VETERANS' AFFAIRS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (EXEMPTING DISABILITY PAYMENTS FROM INCOME TESTING AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL
Purpose of the Bill
Exempting Disability Payments
These measures will exempt the disability pension − as defined in the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (VEA) − from the income test under the Social Security Act 1991 (SSA). This would remove the need for the Defence Force Income Support Allowance (DFISA). These measures will also amend the VEA to remove the disability income rent test for rent assistance under the VEA, providing additional support to certain disability veterans who rent privately.
These measures will simplify the way income support payments are calculated and administered by DVA and Services Australia. The changes align with the Government's commitment to remove unnecessary complexities in the broader welfare system.
These measures will also remove an anomaly whereby the more impaired a veteran is, the lower the rate of rent assistance they receive. Once implemented, the rent assistance measure will result in some highly impaired individuals receiving higher rates of rent assistance.
Approximately 14,000 veterans and dependents will benefit from simpler administration of their payments. Of these people, approximately 6,900 veterans and their dependents will receive additional rent assistance. All clients (including those who will not have a change to their payment rate) will benefit from a simpler payment structure. The veteran community is particularly anxious that benefits from removing the rent assistance anomaly flow through to them as soon as possible.
Overall, these measures will provide much needed financial and other assistance to severely impaired veterans.
Pilot of Non-Liability Rehabilitation
These measures will establish access to vocational and psychosocial rehabilitation services for transitioning Australian Defence Force (ADF) members and other veterans who have an identified need, without the requirement of having lodged a compensation claim.
Currently, access to DVA-funded rehabilitation services is only available once the Commonwealth has accepted liability for an injury or disease as being related to the person's ADF service, or while their claim is being determined. The proposal will establish a two-year pilot program that will provide early access to rehabilitation services and break the nexus between a liability claim and undertaking rehabilitation.
An instrument-making power will allow the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission to determine a class of persons to whom the provision of rehabilitation programs would apply in the context of the new pilot program.
The pilot is in response to Recommendation 6.3 from the Productivity Commission's Report, A Better W ay to Support Veterans , and seeks to foster cultural change, encouraging early and voluntary participation in rehabilitation.
Reasons for Urgency
The Exempting Disability Payments from income testing measures were part of the 2020-21 Budget with a commencement date of 20 September 2022. The 2021-22 Budget however brought the commencement date forward to 1 January 2022.
These measures have been long awaited and are in response to the Independent Review into the TPI Payment delivered to the Australian Government in August 2019. The measures will provide much needed financial and other support to a significant number of the veteran community.
The non-liability rehabilitation measure was announced as part of the 2021-22 Budget with a commencement date of 1 January 2022. Early commencement of the pilot will enable the Government to assess the beneficial impact of providing early rehabilitation to veterans.
The 1 January 2022 commencement date will necessitate introduction and passage of the bill in the Spring sittings.
(Circulated by authority of the Minister for Veterans' Affairs)
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Henderson for today, for personal reasons.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Carr for 30 November, for personal reasons.
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction, by no later than 9.30 am on Thursday, 2 December 2021, the modelling undertaken for the 2021 National Gas Infrastructure Plan (NGIP) which is referred to in the NGIP's foreword and executive summary.
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
Undermining of public health by the Morrison-Joyce Government by always doing too little too late, including ongoing failure to open any new federal quarantine facilities and deliver sovereign mRNA vaccine manufacturing capacity that would protect Australians and our neighbours from new variants of COVID-19, and instead pandering to anti-vax extremists for votes despite an ongoing global pandemic.
We both consider that Australia’s aged care is understaffed and the workforce underpaid and undertrained.
Of all the forms of wisdom, hindsight is by general consent the least merciful, the most unforgiving.
The Senate divided. [16:55]
(The President—Senator Brockman)
That the Senate take note of the document.
That the report be adopted.
I started out like everyone did back in my day, as a labour hire employee … Back then … crews were made up of 40 full-time employees and about five labour hire workers … within 10 years, labour hire had ballooned to about 120 workers while full-time employees remained around 40 … My crew has not had a full-time employee join our team in over seven years.
It is our view … that this is nothing short of a pandemic. We talk about a COVID pandemic. We are actually living a casualisation pandemic … there can be absolutely no mistake that this completely undermines the socioeconomic health of our regional and remote communities and is an offensive insult that continues to be allowed to happen …
I have been in labour hire … for seven years, and there are just no permanent jobs being offered anymore. I work the same roster and shift as the permanent workers on my crew, but I have no job security. I get paid less, and it is really hard to take time off.
I work the same roster and shift as the permanent workers on my crew, but I have no job security. I get paid less …
My crew has not had a full-time employee join our team in over seven years. That is why I need 'same job, same pay' just as much as casuals in the industry.
As a consequence, I finished my working life about four years earlier than I really wanted to.
That the Senate take note of the report.
That the Senate take note of the report.
Dear Mr President
Following my commitment yesterday in question time, I am providing further information in response to a question from Senator Katy Gallagher about allocation of grants at the discretion of Ministers. Whilst her primary question asked about discretion for Ministers to award amounts from 'funds', I take it, from her supplementary questions, that she was not referring to investment funds, but rather to Commonwealth grant programs.
I indicated to the Senate yesterday that there are known constraints on extracting aggregated data about grant decision makers, hence I cautioned that I could only endeavour to provide more detail so far as such information could be extracted.
The ANAO recently observed in Information Report No. 7 2021-22 that "[t]he GrantConnect dataset does not include information about whether ... a Minister was involved in the decision making" (p12). The ANAO's statement relates to structured data held on GrantConnect, in a searchable form.
I can clarify that Grant Opportunity Guidelines are also available as separate documents on GrantConnect, containing details on the relevant decision maker for each program, including where this is a minister. Information on decision makers is not discretely placed into a unique datafield and therefore cannot be extracted through search tools. To determine the number of grants awarded by ministerial approval would therefore require a manual assessment of all Grant Opportunity Guidelines and consultation with all Commonwealth entities involved in grants administration.
This would be an unreasonable diversion of resources and require an extensive period of time to assemble the information. As the ANAO recently reported, there were 108,206 grant awards, with a total value of $60.2 billion, published on GrantConnect with a start date between 31 December 2017 and 30 June 2021.
I note that GrantConnect became operational in February 2017 and was initially designed to improve the discovery and transparency of granting activities at a whole-of-government level, replacing the previous process of granting entities publishing limited details of their granting activities on their own websites. I also note that it is a tool to connect members of the community to grant opportunities, including by registering for 'push notifications' of different program types. Accordingly those factors have shaped the way in which the database has been built and evolved. Ongoing work continues to enhance the utility of the database for other purposes, including for extraction of data and reporting.
As I noted in my answer in the Senate yesterday, the awarding of grants by Ministers serves many benefits including enabling expedited responses to targeted areas of need, such as support to the aged care and early childhood sectors to assist them dealing with the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
When Ministers decide grants they are always required in the first instance to receive and consider official advice on the merits of applications and must record in writing the basis for the approval relative to the grant opportunity guidelines and the key principle of achieving value with relevant money (these are mandatory requirements under rule 4.10 of the Commonwealth Grant Rules and Guidelines). But they are not rubber stamps and are obliged to use their own judgement.
Ministers are often uniquely positioned as grant decision-makers because they often have greater opportunities than officials to consult extensively with community organisations, local business and other stakeholders. Ministers have a very broad understanding of community needs as they travel extensively around the country and hear frequently from constituents, including from people who are referred by Parliamentary colleagues from around the country on both sides of the aisle.
Yours sincerely
Simon Birmingham
20 November 2021
That the Senate take note of the document.
I move that Senator Thorpe be discharged from and Senator Rice be appointed to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.
Telstra Corporation and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Telstra Corporation and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 proposes to amend legislation to maintain regulatory obligations that protect consumers and promote competition in response to Telstra's proposed restructure.
The Coalition Government's priority is to ensure that all Australians benefit from a competitive telecommunications industry and have access to the internet and telephone services that they need. Telstra plays an important role in the Australian telecommunications market, particularly in the provision of services to regional and rural Australians. The continuity of services and Telstra's regulatory obligations are critical to Australian communities and businesses, particularly in the economic recovery from COVID-19.
Telstra has announced its intention to undertake a corporate restructure that will be the most significant change to the company since its privatisation. While Telstra is free to restructure its business as it sees fit, successive Parliaments have placed and maintained a range of regulatory obligations on that business, and it is important that these remain effective irrespective of the future corporate structure.
These obligations cover core parts of Telstra's regulatory arrangements, including the Universal Service Obligation and the requirement for Telstra to provide other carriers with access to its infrastructure to promote competition. If Telstra's restructure were to weaken the application of these obligations, that would not be acceptable to the Morrison Government. We have a strong commitment to protecting consumers, promoting competition and maintaining Telstra's public interest roles in Australia's telecommunications market.
Without legislative amendment, there is a risk that Telstra's obligations would become less effective or cease to apply to its successor entities following the restructure or future resales. Therefore, there is a compelling need for the legislative amendments set out in this Bill. Their effect will be to maintain Telstra-specific obligations and to address related policy issues that arise from Telstra's proposed restructure.
There are two key sets of provisions in the Bill:
The first establishes a mechanism in the Telecommunications Act 1997 to re-point Telstra-specific obligations that would otherwise cease to apply to new Telstra entities. The Bill also includes amendments to the competition authorisation provisions in Part 33 of theTelecommunications Act . These provisions are being amended to make sure that the National Broadband Network can continue to operate through cooperation between NBN Corporations and Telstra. In particular, the Bill includes new subsection 577BA(10C) that allows NBN corporations and Telstra and other designated Telstra successor companies to enter into contracts, arrangements and understandings where the sole purpose of those contracts, arrangements and understandings are to repoint rights and obligations under the existing definitive agreements to NBN corporations and new entities in the Telstra group. For clarity, subsection 577BA(10C), is not intended to prevent, deter or affect the ability for NBN Co and Telstra and their related entities to enter into any other types of lawful contracts, arrangements and understandings to effect these obligations or achieve other desired commercial outcomes.
The second key part of the Bill closes a loophole that allows carriers, including Telstra, to avoid facilities access obligations by transferring assets such as towers, into subsidiaries or other related entities. The Bill does so by providing that if a group of companies includes a carrier, a company (other than a carrier) that is in the group must provide all carriers with access to the tower infrastructure that it owns. This will apply to all carriers, not just Telstra.
The Bill establishes a requirement for Telstra to notify the Australian Communications and Media Authority when Telstra transfers a telecommunications business or asset to another company. This will provide visibility to the Government to respond to any future restructure.
The Government recognises that the continuity of service is critical. This Bill therefore provides that obligations associated with carrier licences continue between the passage of the Bill and the commencement of the restructure.
This legislation will uphold Telstra's current obligations to the Australian community and businesses, by maintaining regulatory equivalency for Telstra's successor entities. In doing so, it will protect consumers, promote competition and support Telstra's public interest roles in Australia's telecommunications market.
National Health Amendment (Enhancing the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) Bill 2021
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The National Health Amendment (Enhancing the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) Bill 2021 amends the National Health Act 1953 to implement reforms negotiated with the medicines industry to improve and guarantee access to medicines for Australian patients.
1. Industry agreements
The amendments reflect new five-year agreements with Medicines Australia, the representative body for the innovative medicines sector in Australia and the Generic and Biosimilar Medicines Association which represents generic and biosimilar medicines suppliers in Australia. These agreement's build upon the long standing partnership this Government has fostered with Australia's medicines industry with the goal of supporting Australian patients.
Australians have world-class access to medicines. In the 2020-21 financial year, over 300 million prescriptions for around 16 million Australians were supplied through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (the PBS). Without the PBS, many of these treatments would be beyond the reach of ordinary Australians. An Australian who, for example, is diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a type of bone marrow cancer, would face costs of around $160,000 per year to access the medicine needed to treat that condition. However, through the PBS, that Australian would only need to pay $6.60 per prescription to access treatment if they hold a concession card, or $41.30 otherwise - a mere fraction of the actual cost of the medicine.
Every year, and in fact nearly every month, new medicines are added to the PBS and access to existing medicines is expanded to new patient groups in line with emerging evidence about the safety and effectiveness of those medicines for treating health conditions. Treatment options for patients are ever expanding and the PBS has continued to expand with them. Since 2013 the Government has approved close to 2,800 new or amended medicines listings on the PBS at an overall cost of around $13.9 billion.
The Australian Government recognises that this is fundamentally important to Australians - that Australians continue to gain access to the best available medicines. And to that end, in 2020, the Government committed to the PBS New Medicines Funding Guarantee. This Guarantee safeguards the Government's policy to list all medicines on the PBS as recommended by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. It will deliver new funding each year for the listing of new medicines on the PBS, to be replenished each year to meet the expected cost of new and expanded PBS listings.
In entering new agreements with the medicines industry, the Government recognises that delivery of this world-class access in a way that is sustainable over the long term, requires partnership with the Australian businesses and industries that supply, distribute and dispense the millions of medicines that Australians need and use every day.
Through these new agreements, the Government and the medicines industry have co-developed a comprehensive package of reforms to the PBS:
1. to ensure that Australians continue to gain access to new, break-through, medicines as early as possible;
2. to deliver robust and uninterrupted supply of the medicines that Australian's need and use every day; and
3. to keep the PBS on a long-term sustainable footing.
The industry agreements do this:
1. by securing commitment from the medicines industry to new savings for Australian taxpayers through improved statutory price reductions which will be reinvested in the PBS - helping to make headroom on the PBS for listing new medicines; and
2. by securing commitment from the medicines industry to holding a greater level of stock in Australia of a number of commonly prescribed and older medicines that, in recent years, have become susceptible to global medicines shortages.
These reforms will generate savings of around $1.9 billion over the terms of the agreements. These reforms also target Commonwealth investment towards securing supply of commonly prescribed medicines that have lower margins and are often in short supply globally.
Increasingly, global shortages are interrupting supply of medicines that are the mainstay of treatment for some of the most prevalent health conditions in the Australian community. Recently, global shortages have interrupted the supply of medicines for high blood pressure and diabetes, and medicines for mental health conditions such as depression, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.
These reforms agreed with the medicines industry will ensure that manufacturers are better placed to compete for supply of these medicines in the global medicine market and hold greater reserve supplies to buffer the Australian market when interruptions occur. These reforms are critical to ensuring the continuity of access that is so important to the proper treatment and management of common medical conditions.
The agreements with the medicines industry strike a balance between affordable access for Australians, a PBS that is sustainable over the long term, and providing the Australian medicines industry the right conditions for it to thrive, launch new and innovative medical treatments in Australia, and provide reliable supply. The agreements support the medicines industry in a number of ways. They do this:
1. by recognising the importance to businesses that they have certainty about Government pricing policy settings;
2. by committing to reinvest savings from the agreements in the PBS; and
3. by supporting industry investment in supply chain redundancies with stable and once-off higher subsidised prices for medicines most at risk of global medicines shortages.
These enhancements to the PBS agreed between the Government and the medicines industry are to be delivered through amendments to the National Health Act 1953 made by the National Health Amendment (Enhancing the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) Bill.
The legislative elements of these landmark agreements are in addition to the significant policy and process reforms committed to in the Strategic Agreement's with Medicines Australia and the GBMA, which include:
At least $5 Billion of uncapped new investment in PBS medicines listings over the life of the agreement; which consists of the PBS New Medicines Funding Guarantee and the reinvestment of efficiencies agreed with the sector.
The co-design and implementation of an Enhanced Consumer Engagement Process to better capture the patient voice early in the medicines assessment process.
Ongoing timely access to medicines through a review of Australia's already world leading Health Technology Assessment (HTA) policy and methods to support its continuous improvement.
A Horizon Scanning Forum to ensure Australians have early access to breakthrough treatments.
Commitments to policy stability and predictability for the industry and Government.
These landmark agreements also build on the Government's strong record on the PBS which is demonstrated through
the Seventh Community Pharmacy Agreement (7CPA) between the Australian Government, the Pharmacy Guild of Australia and Pharmaceutical Society of Australia singed in June 2020.
The related improvements to the pharmaceutical wholesaler arrangements designed with the National Pharmaceutical Services Association (NPSA) and enacted through the 7CPA.
2. Improved statutory price reductions
The savings under the new agreements are to be delivered through improved statutory price reductions that will apply to brands upon the fifth, tenth and fifteenth anniversary of a drug listing on the PBS, and when the first new brand of a medicine lists on the PBS.
New Statutory Price Reductions
The new anniversary price reductions in the bill will apply:
1. a five per cent price reduction to brands of a drug on the fifth anniversary of the drug being listed on the PBS;
2. a five per cent price reduction to brands of a drug on the tenth anniversary of the drug being listed on the PBS; and
3. a 26.1 per cent price reduction to brands of a drug on the fifteenth anniversary of the drug being listed on the PBS. This will increase to 30 per cent on 1 April 2027 for drugs that meet their fifteenth anniversary in the year to that day.
4. Catch up price reductions for medicines that have already been listed for fifteen years and have not had these new price reductions apply.
Under current legislation, a company seeking to list the first new brand of a drug on the PBS that is bioequivalent or biosimilar to an existing PBS listed brand of the drug must agree to list at an ex-manufacturer price that is 25 per cent lower than the ex-manufacturer price of the existing brand. These arrangements will continue but will not apply if the existing brand has taken a new 15-year anniversary or catch-up price reduction.
The new statutory price reductions will be capped at 60 per cent off the original listed price of the medicine.
Ministerial Discretion
Under current legislation, the Minister can determine that anniversary and first new brand price reductions should be a lesser amount or not apply at all. These are important powers to ensure that the Minister can intervene if a legislated price reduction were to have an unintended adverse consequence - such as the withdrawal of an important medicine from the Australian market. These powers, which are currently legislated to cease after 1 June 2022, will continue.
3. A Medicines Supply Security Guarantee for Australia
In 2019 and 2020, brands of over 500 PBS items were affected by medium to critical impact shortages, with medicines supplied by manufacturers for $4 or less per pack being the most susceptible.
The amendments in the bill will give effect to commitments from the medicines industry made in the agreements to invest in holding greater stocks of medicines most at risk of global shortages and invest in greater supply chain resilience. In return, the PBS subsidised prices of those brands will be maintained at a sufficient level to support industry investment in greater stockholdings and ensure that manufacturers are better placed to secure supply in the competitive global medicine market.
Stockholding r equirement
The amendments will require manufacturers, from 1 July 2023, to keep in stock in Australia at least four months of their usual demand for any brand that is protected from further price reductions, and six months of usual demand for any brand where the ex-manufacturer portion of PBS subsidy is increased. This will cover over 600 PBS items when it commences including nearly all PBS brands that have an ex-manufacturer price of $4 or less, which are most susceptible to medicines shortages.
The Government and the medicines industry have agreed that the PBS should, in future, only subsidise brands supplied by manufacturers that maintain the required stockholdings and employ business models that support long-term reliable supply. To that end, the amendments in the bill will provide the Minister with express power to make PBS listing decisions to ensure that this occurs.
The amendments will provide the Minister with powers to remove any brand, or refuse to list any brand, supplied by a manufacturer if that manufacturer is not maintaining the required stocks of their PBS listed brands in Australia. And for PBS listed brands that have an approved ex-manufacturer price that is less than $4 and are protected from further price reduction, the amendments will provide the Minister with power to remove any brand, or to refuse to list any brand, supplied by a manufacturer if the additional Commonwealth investment for those brands that is intended to support supply, is instead used by the manufacturer to provide discounts to supply chain customers. In making such a decision, the amendments also provide for the Minister to take into account the extent to which supply could be compromised in these circumstances and any other relevant matter which would include any potential impact of a decision to remove a brand from the PBS.
Price reduction floor
The investments by the medicines industry in additional stockholdings and improved supply chain risk management will be supported by the introduction of a new price reduction floor.
The amendments in the bill will prevent PBS listed brands that have an approved ex-manufacturer price less than $4 from taking any further price reductions.
The amendments in the bill will also prevent further price reductions to brands that have an approved ex-manufacturer price that is more than $4 when it is likely that further price disclosure reductions will be detrimental to reliable supply and where it is clear through market behaviour that significant discounting is no longer occurring.
In creases to the subsidised prices of low-cost PBS medicines
In recognition of the already low margins of brands that have an ex-manufacturer price less than $3.50, the increased frequency of shortages for medicines in this category, and the additional costs to manufacturers in holding greater stocks of these brands, the subsidised prices for these brands will be increased.
The amendments in the bill provide for one-off increases to PBS subsidy for brands that have an approved ex-manufacturer price that is less than $3.50. Brands with an approved ex-manufacturer price that is less than $2 will be increased to $2.50. Brands with an approved ex-manufacturer price that is more than $2 will be increased by 50 cents to a maximum of $3.50.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the amendments in the bill will deliver a number of enhancements and improvements to the operation of the PBS for the benefit of patients, tax-payers and the medicines industry. Delivery of a program like the PBS relies on close partnerships with the medicines businesses that support it. The amendments in the Bill reflect the outcome of extensive negotiations and could not be possible without the strong, collaborative, partnership between the Australian government and the medicines industry.
The Australian Government's to the commitment to the PBS is rock solid. The reforms provided for by the amendments in this bill, reflect this commitment, and will ensure that the PBS will continue to meet the needs of Australians well into the future.
Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Approval of Overseas Service) Bill 2020
Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment (Economic Empowerment) Bill 2021
At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate notes that:
(a) this bill proposes the most substantial changes to the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act since it commenced in 1976;
(b) an overwhelming majority of submitters to the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee's inquiry into this bill recommended that it not be passed, mainly due to insufficient and inadequate consultation about the changes contained in it;
(c) submitters to the inquiry noted that consultation during the bill's development was only conducted with Land Councils and no free, prior and informed consent was obtained from Traditional Owner communities and non-land holding First Nations people in the Northern Territory; and
(d) the Government has failed to conduct extensive, open, transparent, direct and independently facilitated consultation with all affected First Nations communities across the Northern Territory on this bill".
The Coalition Government says that they will make the processes more efficient for the Minister, NIAA and miners without impacting on the rights of traditional owners. It is not clear, however, whether there is any benefit to Aboriginal people from these amendments. More importantly, there is no independent evidence produced that assesses the impact for traditional owners and the valuable right they have to consent to exploration on their land.
This discretion to provide land councils with greater flexibility might result in more or fewer meetings, but the power to convene such meetings seems to lie entirely with land councils, not traditional owners.
Without clarity and transparency as to how representative the support for this legislation is, there is no certainty that the changes proposed in this Bill have the free, prior and informed consent of the Aboriginal Territorians affected.
… a co-design process dealing with institutional mechanisms that potentially affect the balance of powers/responsibilities between land councils and traditional owners that is only undertaken with one side of the equation is arguably a flawed co-design process.
The Senate divided. [18:32]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 4), omit the table item.
(2) Schedule 2, page 47 (line 1) to page 60 (line 6), to be opposed.
I have now spoken widely to elders and leaders in my electorate and they do not know about any changes to the ALRA. I have also spoken to members of the Land Councils from my own electorate and more broadly across the regions, and they have advised that they do not know the detail of the Bill.
Our key recommendation is that the Committee should request a significantly longer time frame for the Inquiry in order to properly consider the Bill and ensure that the amendments have the genuine free prior and informed consent (FPIC) of the Aboriginal Territorians who will be impacted, including but not limited to Traditional Owners.
Thanks, but NO THANKS!
The proposed amendments to the Aboriginal Land Right Act do nothing more than to further erode the already meagre rights of First Nations in the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia. They masquerade as 'progressive' legislation when, in fact, they represent a reincarnation of successive waves of colonial policy initiatives designed to usurp Our rights and transfer them to the Settlers.
The committee divided. [18:50]
(The Chair—Senator Lines)
(1) Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 13), after item 3, insert:
3A After subsection 64 (4)
Insert:
(4AA) The Minister must consult the Northern Territory Aboriginal Investment Corporation before giving a direction under subsection (4).
(2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 9 (before line 10), before paragraph 65BB(a), insert:
(aa) to advise the Minister in relation to debiting the Account for the purposes of making payments under subsection 64(4);
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (after table item 6), insert:
(2) Schedule 1, item 4, page 5 (after line 20), at the end of section 64AA, add:
(5) The Minister must give a direction under subsection (4) at least once in each financial year starting on or after the third 1 July that occurs after the commencement of this section.
(3) Schedule 1, item 6, page 21 (line 7), after "independent", insert "Aboriginal".
(4) Schedule 1, item 6, page 21 (lines 21 to 25), omit subsection 65ED(3), substitute:
(3) A person is not eligible for appointment as a Board member under subsection (1) unless the person is an Aboriginal person.
(5) Schedule 1, item 6, page 21 (after line 33), after paragraph 65ED(4)(d), insert:
; or (e) holds a right that relates to an area in the Northern Territory and arises under any Australian law dealing with the rights of Aboriginal persons in relation to land or waters, including if the person is:
(i) a traditional Aboriginal owner of an area of land that is held by a Land Trust; or
(ii) a native title holder (within the meaning of the Native Title Act 1993 ) whose approved determination of native title (within the meaning of that Act) relates to an area in the Northern Territory; or
(iii) a registered native title claimant (within the meaning of the Native Title Act 1993 ) whose claimant application (within the meaning of that Act) relates to an area in the Northern Territory; or
(f) lives outside the Northern Territory.
(6) Schedule 1, item 6, page 38 (line 26), omit "7 years", substitute "3 years".
(7) Schedule 3, page 75 (after line 16), at the end of the Schedule, add:
Part 5 — Review of operation of Schedule
45 Review of operation of Schedule
(1) The Minister must cause a review of the operation of the amendments made by this Schedule to be undertaken as soon as possible after the end of 5 years after the commencement of Part 1 of this Schedule.
(2) The persons undertaking the review must give the Minister a written report of the review. The report must not include information that is commercially sensitive.
(3) 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.
(1) Schedule 1, item 19, page 46 (line 4), omit "may", substitute "must".
(2) Schedule 1, item 19, page 46 (after line 5), after subitem (4), insert:
(4A) The Minister must table a copy of any progress report given to the Minister in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the Minister receives the report.
The Committee divided. [19:02]
(The Chair—Senator Lines)
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add:
(2) Schedule 3, item 25, page 70 (lines 29 and 30), omit "it is satisfied that".
(3) Schedule 3, item 25, page 71 (lines 14 and 15), subsection 12D(7) to be opposed.
(4) Page 78 (after line 18), at the end of the Bill, add:
Schedule 5 — Ensuring the consent of traditional Aboriginal owners etc.
Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976
1 Subsection 11A(3)
Omit "it is satisfied that".
2 Subsection 11A(6)
Repeal the subsection.
3 Subsection 19(5)
Omit "the Land Council is satisfied that".
4 Subsection 19(6)
Repeal the subsection, substitute:
(6) If:
(a) a Land Council gives a direction for a proposed grant, transfer or surrender of an estate or interest in land; and
(b) the person to whom the grant, transfer or surrender was made procured the direction of the Land Council by fraud;
the grant, transfer or surrender is invalid.
5 Subsection 19A(2)
Omit "it is satisfied that".
6 Subsection 19A(3)
Repeal the subsection, substitute:
(3) If:
(a) a Land Council gives a direction for a grant of a lease; and
(b) the approved entity to whom the grant was made procured the direction of the Land Council by fraud;
the grant is invalid.
7 Subsection 21E(2)
Omit "the Council is satisfied that".
8 Subsection 23(3)
Omit "the Land Council is satisfied that".
9 Subsection 28(4)
Repeal the subsection.
10 Paragraphs 42(6)(a) and (b)
Omit "it is satisfied that".
11 Paragraphs 43(2)(a) to (c)
Repeal the paragraphs, substitute:
(a) it has, as far as practicable, consulted the traditional Aboriginal owners (if any) of the land concerning the terms and conditions; and
(b) the traditional Aboriginal owners understand the nature and purpose of the terms and conditions and, as a group, consent to them; and
(c) it has, as far as practicable, consulted any other Aboriginal community or group that may be affected by the grant of the licence concerning the terms and conditions; and
(d) the community or group has had an adequate opportunity to express its views to the Land Council; and
(e) the terms and conditions are reasonable.
12 Paragraphs 46(4)(a) to (c)
Repeal the paragraphs, substitute:
(a) it has, as far as practicable, consulted the traditional Aboriginal owners (if any) of the land concerning the terms and conditions; and
(b) the traditional Aboriginal owners understand the nature and purpose of the terms and conditions and, as a group, consent to them; and
(c) it has, as far as practicable, consulted any other Aboriginal community or group that may be affected by the grant of the mining interest concerning the terms and conditions; and
(d) the community or group has had an adequate opportunity to express its view to the Land Council; and
(e) the terms and conditions are reasonable.
13 Subsection 48A(4)
Omit "it is satisfied that".
14 Subsection 48D(3)
Repeal the subsection.
15 Subsection 67B(3)
Omit "it is satisfied that".
16 Subsection 67B(5)
Repeal the subsection.
17 Subsection 68(2)
Omit "the Land Council is satisfied that".
That this bill be now read a third time.
Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Legislation Amendment (Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority Board and Other Improvements) Bill 2019
… to make sure you folks in aged care get the love you deserve in this holiday season … love GetUp.
Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective…
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
With perceptions of corruption in Australia increasing the erosion of public trust in institutions and the advent of an increasing number of political scandals, there are growing calls for a better National Integrity Commission than the one proposed by the government.
Being from New South Wales, I'm conscious of the need to heed the lessons from the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption, which was used to settle factional scores and destroy careers. However, the role of such a body needs to uncover corruption and expose it publicly.
In every country, a strong system of public integrity and accountability is essential to meet the public's expectations of trustworthy, ethical and effective governance.
Once an international leader, Australia's efforts to fight corruption, undue influence and protect the integrity of democracy have been slipping. Nationally – even when individual states or territories are showing the way – Australia is now failing to keep pace.
A new federal integrity commission is a crucial step in creating a better and world leading system.
Despite increased trust in the performance of governments during COVID19, citizen belief that corruption in government is a problem has also risen from 61% in 2018 to 66% in late October 2020 – confirming the imperative for action …
The lack of a federal anti-corruption watchdog is confirmed as the biggest institutional gap in our integrity system.
However it is not a silver bullet – we need political consensus on a strong national commission, but also action to strengthen the integrity of politics and government at all levels, including more effective regulation of lobbying, checks on undue influence, and fairer, more honest election campaigns.
We also must value the contribution of whistleblowers and public interest journalism to the integrity of our democracy.
Australians are loudly demanding that our politicians and public servants act with honesty, transparency and integrity.
The assessment strongly endorses the need for a strong, independent Commonwealth integrity agency with scope to review criminal or non-criminal conduct that undermines integrity of public decision-making, and points the way forward for new, best practice investigation and public hearing powers.
While Australia has a strong past record for integrity in public decision-making, democratic innovation and multi-agency frameworks for controlling corruption, Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index confirms we've been slipping.
This comprehensive blueprint for Australia to have a strong anti-corruption and pro-integrity framework shows us the path towards a fairer and healthier democracy.
We feel strongly there must be robust debate and detailed consideration given to the establishment of a federal anti-corruption commission and we welcome the opportunities the Commonwealth has provided for organisations and individuals, including the Law Council, to provide input and views—
Respect for legal institutions underpins the administration of justice in Australia. The structure and powers of any commission are important topics for discussion, but any commentary must be tempered by fairness and balance.
…the strongest and most effective integrity commissions in New South Wales and Queensland share the following powers:
The decades-long failure of the international community to challenge grave Israeli human rights abuses and impose meaningful consequences for them has emboldened Israeli authorities to act in this brazen manner.