The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sue Lines ) took the chair at 12:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
That—
(1) The Senate notes:
(a) the matters canvassed in the media regarding a possible conflict of interest between an undeclared personal relationship of Senator Thorpe and her role while a member of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement; and
(b) the importance of maintaining the integrity of parliamentary committees.
(2) The following matter be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges for inquiry and report, whether Senator Thorpe's failure to declare the relationship:
(a) obstructed the work of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement;
(b) if so, whether this amounted to an improper interference with the work of the committee; and
(c) whether any contempt was committed in this regard.
Fair Work Amendment (Paid Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Bill 2022
Compared to the ACTU claim, the provisional model term provides better alignment with existing NES entitlements and will have less impact on business in terms of employment costs and the regulatory burden.
The ACTU accepts that there are some operational challenges associated with extending paid FDV leave to casuals, including in relation to those casual employees whose hours of work are genuinely uncertain.
The proposed legislation departs from the carefully considered approach proposed by the Commission in various ways that undermine its workability and reasonableness. It instead adopts elements similar to the ACTU proposal that the Commission had rejected.
The Bill should be amended to reflect the sensible and considered views of the Commission.
Unlike the approach adopted in the proposed legislation, the Commission envisaged that the new 10-day entitlement should apply to permanent employees rather than casuals; be calculated on a pro-rata basis for part-time workers; and should accrue progressively during an employee's first year of employment unless an employer agreed to grant it in advance.
The Commission also proposed that employees should be paid their base rate of pay when accessing the leave. This is the approach taken when an employee accesses personal / carer's leave. The Bill would instead require employers to pay employees amounts including penalty rates, overtime rates and various allowances when they access the leave.
This Bill will be much more costly for employers than the approach proposed by the Commission and there are significant questions about how the rate of pay that must be provided to an employee could even be calculated in practice.
At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:
(a) notes that employers may become aware that an employee is experiencing family and domestic violence when accessing paid family and domestic violence leave; and
(b) calls on the Government to:
(i) publish clear and comprehensive guidance to assist employers in understanding any obligations that they may have to inform authorities that an employee is experiencing family and domestic violence,
(ii) clarify its intent regarding whether perpetrators are able to access paid family and domestic violence leave,
(iii) provide greater details about the impact of the introduction of paid family and domestic violence leave on small and family businesses, particularly those that employ casual workers, and
(iv) provide resources to ensure that small and family businesses are not:
(A) adversely affected by the administration of the scheme, or
(B) worse off financially".
Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce fears that the Albanese government's multiemployer bargaining will hamper innovation …
What cost $1 billion to acquire is going to cost me $8 billion to replace. So let's talk about that and still explain to me how energy prices come down …
… protecting the rights for small business, including ensuring security of payment in the building and construction industry.
Too many workers and subbies are being left in limbo through no fault of their own.
Delivering security of payments will simply create a better, fairer industry where subbies can rely on the commitments made to them and employees can have certainty that their job will be there tomorrow.
That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.
In light of the way this decision was made … we can only hope that the Australian government manages other matters more seriously and professionally.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Senator Wong) to a question without notice she asked today relating to a fact sheet produced by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.
That the following bills be considered this week at the time for private senators' bills:
(a) Wednesday, 26 October 2022—Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Save the Koala) Bill 2021, second reading speeches only, before the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee reports; and
(b) Thursday, 27 October 2022—Social Services Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Pensioner and Veteran Workforce Participation) Bill 2022.
That leave of absence be granted to the following senators from 25 to 27 October 2022:
(a) Senators Antic and Molan, for personal reasons; and
(b) Senator Van, on account of parliamentary business.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Hanson for today, for personal reasons.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Walsh from 25 to 27 October 2022, on account of parliamentary business.
That the following matter be referred to the Economics References Committee for inquiry and report by the last sitting day of 2023:
The fairness and efficiency of savings vehicles in Australia, with particular reference to:
(a) savings and wealth patterns of Australians across their working life and retirement;
(b) the relative attractiveness of savings vehicles, including differences in tax treatment and the appropriateness of other incentives;
(c) the relationship between the Age Pension, compulsory superannuation and voluntary savings to support retirement incomes;
(d) the role of home ownership in building wealth and supporting retirement incomes;
(e) the impact of macroeconomic conditions and associated policy responses on Australian's savings and wealth patterns;
(f) how Australia's policy settings to encourage saving and wealth creation compare internationally; and
(g) any other related matters.
The Senate divided. [15:42]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Treasurer, by no later than midday on Monday, 31 October 2022:
(a) any briefing notes, file notes and emails provided by the Treasury to the Treasurer and/or to his office since 30 May 2022 in relation to the reintroduction of the full fuel excise from 29 September 2022 and monitoring activities undertaken by the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission (ACCC);
(b) any briefing notes, file notes and emails between the Treasury and the ACCC since 30 May 2022 in relation to the reintroduction of the full fuel excise from 29 September 2022 and monitoring activities undertaken by the ACCC; and
(c) any briefing notes, file notes and emails between the Treasurer and the ACCC since 30 May 2022 in relation to the reintroduction of the full fuel excise from 29 September 2022 and monitoring activities undertaken by the ACCC.
The Senate divided. [15:47]
(The President—Senator Lines)
The Senate divided. [15:51]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That there be laid on the table by the Special Minister of State, by no later than 9.30 am on 27 October 2022, any reports, briefing notes, file notes and emails of 13 December 2021 or later held by the Australian Electoral Commission that relate to compliance with sections 273AA and 273AC of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, which relate to the security of computer systems and ballot paper sampling for Senate elections.
The Senate divided. [15:36]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, by no later than midday on Friday, 4 November 2022, the following documents:
(a) all documents in relation to the Hahndorf Township Improvements and Access Upgrade Project between the Federal Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government and the South Australian Minister for Infrastructure and Transport; and
(b) all documents in relation to the Hahndorf Township Improvements and Access Upgrade Project between the Federal Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, and the South Australian Department of Infrastructure and Transport.
That—
(1) To ensure appropriate consideration of time critical bills by Senate committees, the provisions of all bills introduced into the House of Representatives after 27 October and up to and including 11 November 2022 that contain substantive provisions commencing on or before 1 January 2023 (together with the provisions of any related bill) are referred to committees for inquiry and report by 21 November 2022.
(2) The committee to which each bill is referred shall be determined in accordance with the allocation of departments and agencies to standing committees agreed to by the Senate.
(3) A committee to which a bill has been referred may determine, by unanimous decision, that there are no substantive matters that require examination and report that fact to the Senate.
(4) This order does not apply in relation to bills which contain:
(a) no provisions other than provisions appropriating revenue or moneys (appropriation bills); and
(b) commencement clauses providing only for the legislation to commence on Royal Assent.
That—
(1) On Tuesday, 25 October 2022 the hours of meeting be midday to 6.30 pm and 8.30 pm to adjournment and the routine of business from 8.30 pm be:
(a) Budget statement and documents 2021-22; and
(b) adjournment.
(2) On Thursday, 27 October 2022:
(a) the hours of meeting be 9.30 am to adjournment;
(b) the sitting of the Senate be suspended from 5.30 pm till the ringing of the bells (at approximately 8 pm); and
(c) on resumption, the routine of business be:
(i) Budget statement and documents—party leaders and independent senators to make responses to the statement and documents for not more than 30 minutes each, and
(ii) adjournment.
Dear President
Pursuant to standing order 75, I give notice that today I propose to move 'That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The need for the Senate to reaffirm the importance of consultation and careful consideration when dealing with complex and sensitive foreign affairs matters, and the need for Prime Minister Albanese to apologise to Israeli Prime Minister Lapid for the hasty and careless manner in which the decision to no longer recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel was made.'
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
The need for the Senate to reaffirm the importance of consultation and careful consideration when dealing with complex and sensitive foreign affairs matters, and the need for Prime Minister Albanese to apologise to Israeli Prime Minister Lapid for the hasty and careless manner in which the decision to no longer recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel was made.
… reaffirm the importance of consultation and careful consideration when dealing with complex and sensitive foreign affairs matters …
In light of the way in which this decision was made in Australia, as a hasty response to an incorrect report in the media, we can only hope that the Australian government manages other matters more seriously and professionally.
The government considers Jerusalem to be a final status issue for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. Australia will continue to maintain its embassy in Tel Aviv. The Prime Minister and the Minister for Foreign Affairs have restated Australian policy on several recent occasions.
The government has no plans to relocate the embassy to Jerusalem. Australia considers that, in view of the highly sensitive status of Jerusalem and its consideration as a final status issue, it is not conducive to the peace process to move the embassy there.
The Senate divided. [16:37]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Dean Smith)
Dear President
Pursuant to standing order 75, I give notice that today the Australian Greens propose to move "That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
That the government should instruct Australia's representatives at the United Nations to vote in the affirmative during the upcoming UN First Committee vote on the Treaty on the Total Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and signal the government's intent to sign and ratify the treaty."
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
That the government should instruct Australia's representatives at the United Nations to vote in the affirmative during the upcoming UN First Committee vote on the Treaty on the Total Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and signal the government's intent to sign and ratify the treaty.
Nuclear weapons are the most destructive, inhumane and indiscriminate weapons ever created.
Today we have an opportunity to take a step towards their elimination.
… … …
… Labor in government will sign and ratify the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
Mr Putin's weak and desperate nuclear threats underline the danger that nuclear weapons pose to us all, and the urgent need for progress on nuclear disarmament.
… Australia is committed to a world without nuclear weapons through implementation of the NPT, including article 6, in a step-by-step and verifiable manner. But we will not sign or ratify the ban or the prohibition treaty because we don't regard it as an effective measure to eliminate nuclear weapons.
… … …
We also take the view that the treaty is fundamentally flawed, and risks undermining the NPT. That may reflect the fact that it was negotiated very, very rapidly; it does not involve any of the states that possess nuclear weapons; no such states are likely to join; and it will not eliminate a single nuclear weapon. It does not include viable mechanisms for the elimination or reduction of nuclear weapons, or for maintaining a world free of nuclear weapons.
We have committed to signing and ratifying the treaty after taking account the need to ensure an effective verification and enforcement architecture, interaction of the Treaty with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and achieving universal support.
The Senate divided. [17:21]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Dean Smith)
That senators be appointed to committees as follows:
Cost of Living—Select Committee—
Appointed—Senators Canavan, Hume and Dean Smith
Participating members: Senators Antic, Askew, Birmingham, Bragg, Brockman, Cadell, Cash, Chandler, Colbeck, Davey, Duniam, Fawcett, Henderson, Hughes, Liddle, McDonald, McGrath, McKenzie, McLachlan, Molan, Nampijinpa Price, O’Sullivan, Paterson, Payne, David Pocock, Rennick, Reynolds, Ruston, Scarr and Van
National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation—Joint Select Co mmittee—
Appointed—Senators Chandler, Scarr and Shoebridge
Participating members: Senators Allman-Payne, Bragg, Cox, Faruqi, Hanson-Young, Lambie, McKim, Barbara Pocock, Rice, Steele-John, Thorpe, Tyrrell, Waters and Whish-Wilson.
Financial Accountability Regime Bill 2022
Financial Sector Reform Bill 2022
Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy Bill 2022
Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy (Collection) Bill 2022
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.
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY REGIME BILL 2022
SECOND READING SPEECH
This Financial Accountability Regime Bill 2022 establishes the Financial Accountability Regime, or FAR, which replaces and extends the Banking Executive Accountability Regime following a number of recommendations from the Banking Royal Commission.
The Bill underscores the Government's commitment to finalise the action necessary to fully address the Banking Royal Commission and implement measures that compel the financial services industry to act in the public's interest.
Financial services executives make decisions that impact upon the lives of ordinary Australians who have no choice other than to engage with the system that they operate. As a result, the community reasonably expects high standards of accountability and integrity of financial services directors and executives.
The Banking Royal Commission revealed too many instances of misconduct across the sector and highlighted that industry practices often did not meet community expectations. These issues were frequently found to be systemic and part of corporate cultures that can only be improved and remedied from the top-down.
The Bill would establish the FAR with the same design specifications proposed by legislation introduced in October 2021 which lapsed when Parliament was dissolved. The requests made by the former Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills and the Senate Economics Legislation Committee were considered and have been addressed in the Explanatory Memorandum accompanying the Bill.
The FAR would extend the existing responsibility and accountability framework to the insurance and superannuation sectors, to ensure that heightened accountability obligations are in place across the wider financial industry.
The FAR ensures that where these community expectations are not met, appropriate consequences will follow.
I would now like to turn to the provisions of the Bill.
The FAR imposes heightened accountability obligations for prudentially regulated financial institutions; meaning banks, insurers, and superannuation entities. These institutions are referred to as accountable entities in the regime. The FAR regulates directors and the most senior and influential executives of accountable entities. These individuals are referred to as accountable persons in the regime.
The FAR imposes four core sets of obligations. Firstly, accountable entities and accountable persons must conduct their business in a proper manner, which includes acting with honesty and integrity, and with due skill, care and diligence; dealing with Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) in an open, constructive and cooperative way, preventing adverse impact on the accountable entities' prudential standing and preventing breaches of certain specified financial services laws by their accountable entity.
Further, accountable entities must ensure clear identification of accountabilities for accountable persons in the organisation across key areas of operations, and defer at least 40 per cent of the variable remuneration of accountable persons for a minimum period of 4 years. Variable remuneration will be reduced where accountability obligations are breached. Ensuring there are financial consequences for accountable persons who do not meet their obligations will increase their focus on the long-term outcomes of their decisions.
The FAR will be supported by the imposition of notification obligations which require accountable entities to provide APRA and ASIC with certain information such as information relating to the responsibilities of their accountable persons or breaches of certain obligations by the accountable entities or their accountable persons.
Both APRA and ASIC will jointly administer the regime.
They will have the power to disqualify accountable persons, investigate suspected breaches of the regime, and direct entities to take remedial action and to apply to the Federal Court to impose a civil penalty on accountable entities.
The FAR will apply to the banking industry six months after Royal Assent and to the insurance and superannuation industries eighteen months after Royal Assent.
Through this Bill, the Government is finalising the necessary action to ensure that financial institutions are meeting the community's expectations, and shifting their focus from profit at all costs to outcomes for all Australians.
Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.
FINANCIAL SECTOR REFORM BILL 2022
SECOND READING SPEECH
The Financial Sector Reform Bill 2022 is part of a package of Bills that finalises a number of remaining recommendations from the Banking Royal Commission. It also delivers on the Government's commitment to ensure safe and well-regulated consumer markets for credit products, such as small amount credit contracts (also known as payday loans) and consumer leases.
It is disappointing that I have to introduce these measures here today. These measures all should have been implemented and introduced by the previous Government.
In February 2019, the former Treasurer promised to deliver his response to the Banking Royal Commission within two years. Even with Labor's full support, the Coalition chose not to prioritise the measures contained within this Bill that implement the response to the Banking Royal Commission.
The measures relating to small amount credit contracts date back even further—back to a 2016 report that laid out a clear path for the Government to act on payday lending. For nearly six years, the Turnbull-Morrison Government failed to act on this report.
These failures reflect the Coalition's continued unwillingness to stand with Australians against misconduct in the financial service sector. This is a Coalition that voted against the Banking Royal Commission 26 times before finally acceding to it.
Nevertheless, I hope that we will secure the Parliament and the Opposition's support to the sensible measures I am introducing today. Schedules 1 and 2 to the Bill make minor and consequential amendments to various Commonwealth laws to support the Financial Accountability Regime and provide transitional arrangements relating to the repeal of the Banking Executive Accountability Regime (BEAR).
Schedule 3 to the Bill establishes a financial services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort (CSLR). The Government has committed to introducing a CSLR and today we deliver on this commitment.
This Bill is part of a package of Bills that establish and fund the CSLR.
In 2019, the Banking Royal Commission endorsed the 3 principal recommendations of the 2017 Supplementary Final Report of the Review of the financial system external dispute resolution and complaints framework (Ramsay Review) regarding the establishment of a CSLR. The Ramsay Review noted the inadequacy of existing redress measures in ensuring all consumers are compensated for losses, and recommended the establishment of an industry-funded and forward looking CSLR that targets the areas of the financial sector with the greatest evidence of need.
The CSLR is designed to provide compensation to consumers who have received a relevant determination in their favour by the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA), where that determination remains unpaid.
Claimants may receive compensation of up to $150,000 where they have an unpaid AFCA determination in their favour for the following financial services or products: personal advice on relevant financial products to retail clients, credit intermediation, securities dealing and credit provision. The cap on claims helps maintain the ongoing financial sustainability of the scheme, whilst balancing the interests of consumers.
The operator of the CSLR will be a subsidiary of AFCA, limited by guarantee and operate on a not-for-profit basis. The operator must act in line with the primary legislation and regulations, with compliance ensured by ASIC. The operator will be managed by a Board consisting of an independent Chair appointed by the Minister, a person who is a member of the board of AFCA, and an actuary who has at least 5 years of actuarial experience.
The CSLR is designed to act as a last resort mechanism. After the claimant has notified AFCA that their determination remains unpaid, AFCA will be required, where appropriate, to take steps to ensure the relevant entity pays the compensation owed. The CSLR operator will also need to confirm that no other scheme is available to pay all or part of the compensation owed, including any state or territory arrangements.
Measures have been added to reduce the inclination of financial firms from relying on the CSLR and to facilitate better compliance with AFCA determinations. For example, ASIC must cancel an AFCA member's Australian financial service licence and/or Australian credit licence if the CSLR provides compensation to a claimant.
The Government notes the recommendations made by the former Senate Economics Legislation Committee, which were tabled on 15 February 2022, on the CSLR Bills introduced by the previous Government, including the recommendation to include managed investment schemes in scope of the CSLR. There have been no changes to the scope of the CSLR and the provisions being introduced today are substantively the same as those considered by that Committee. The CSLR provisions have only been subject to minor and targeted amendments to reflect the passage of time and further stakeholder feedback. The scope of the CSLR reflects financial products that have a history of unpaid determinations and have been subject to significant regulatory reform which have reduced the risk of misconduct. The Government will continue to consider potential enhancements to the regulatory framework of managed investment schemes.
Schedule 4 to the Bill amends the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (the Credit Act) to strengthen the consumer protection framework for consumers of small amount credit contracts and consumer leases through the introduction of new obligations for providers of these credit products.
SACCs are loans of up to $2,000 where the term of the contract is between 16 days and 12 months while a consumer lease is typically a contract longer for household goods longer than four months where the consumer does not have the right or obligation to purchase the goods.
These measures give effect to the Government's response to the 2016 Review of Small Amount Credit Contract Laws which identified a number of predatory lending practices that lead to some consumers experiencing financial hardship.
Key reforms including strengthened caps on the amount of income a consumer can spend on repayments before they are ineligible to enter into certain credit products; caps on the cost of consumer leases; equal repayment intervals for small amount credit contracts; and prohibitions on certain types of unsolicited communications and referrals.
Combined with anti-avoidance provisions, these reforms will enhance the existing consumer protections, including responsible lending obligations, while making sure these credit products are more affordable and less harmful.
The Government acknowledges that most of these reforms will require some time for industry to implement, so the bulk of the proposed changes will commence 6 months following Royal Assent.
The Legislative and Governance Forum on Corporations was notified of this Bill as required under the Corporations Agreement 2002 and theNational Credit Law Agreement 2009.
Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.
FINANCIAL SERVICES COMPENSATION SCHEME OF LAST RESORT LEVY BILL 2022
SECOND READING SPEECH
This Bill is one of two Bills which form the levy framework for the financial services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort (CSLR).
The CSLR levy framework is designed to establish an ongoing annual levy for entities that fall under a subsector in scope of the scheme. The framework will issue levies in advance of a financial year, based on expected claims in that upcoming financial year. The first ongoing levy is expected to be issued from January 2024 for the 2024-25 financial year.
The first year of operation (2023-24) will be partly funded by a one-off levy issued in the 2023-24 financial year, imposed on the ten largest financial sector entities (excluding private health insurers and superannuation trustees). This will fund the payment of compensation and associated costs relating to complaints lodged with AFCA, up to the date the Bills were introduced into the House of Representatives.
The ongoing levy amount in the subsequent financial years for a member of an in- scope subsector will be determined in line with the regulations. The regulations will impose levies on members consistent with the approach applied under the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) industry funding model. The levy will factor in compensation amounts payable, associated Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) complaint handling fees, and administrative costs of the CSLR operator and ASIC.
The CSLR is designed to be financially sustainable and provide assurance to relevant financial market sectors about the maximum amount expected to be levied. The scheme applies subsector caps of $20 million and an overall scheme cap of $250 million. This limits the amount leviable within a single levy period, whilst maintaining the ability to accommodate any unexpected large-scale events or failures. The levy framework provides the Minister with the ability to issue special levies to in-scope and out-of-scope firms, in response to higher-than-expected outlays such as 'black swan' events.
Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.
FINANCIAL SERVICES COMPENSATION SCHEME OF LAST RESORT LEVY (COLLECTION) BILL 2022
SECOND READING SPEECH
This Bill is one of two Bills which form the levy framework for the financial services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort.
The one-off levy imposed for the first year of operation (2023-24) will be issued by August 2023, and the ongoing annual levy will be issued in advance of each new financial year, with the first to be issued from January 2024 for the 2024-25 financial year.
The CSLR operator will estimate compensation and AFCA complaint costs to be paid out in the upcoming financial year, as well as associated administrative costs. These estimates will then determine the total levy amount for each sub-sector to meet expected outlays in the upcoming financial year.
Levy notices will be issued by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC). ASIC will also be responsible for the collection of levies and have the power to facilitate and enforce the payment of levies. These powers include the ability to seek information from relevant firms for the purpose of correctly calculating the firm's levy, to impose penalties for late payment and to impose a shortfall penalty where incorrect information has been provided.
Full details of the measure are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum.
National Health Amendment (General Co-payment) Bill 2022
Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Incentivising Pensioners to Downsize) Bill 2022
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.
NATIONAL HEALTH AMENDMENT (GENERAL CO-PAYMENT) BILL 2022
SECOND READING SPEECH
Today, I introduce the National Health Amendment (General Co-payment) Bill 2022. The amendments made by this Bill will cut the cost of medications by reducing the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) general patient charge, commonly referred to as a co-payment, from the current maximum of $42.50 per script, to a maximum of $30 per script.
The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, or PBS, was established (in 1948 as a limited scheme) to ensure that Australians had equal and affordable access to life saving and disease preventing' medicines when they need them.
Establishing the PBS wasn't easy. It was John Curtin and Ben Chifley who fought hard to create this essential pillar of our healthcare system. It took two high court challenges, two referendums, constitutional changes, battles with the British Medical Association, the Liberal Party, and many others over 15 years to make it what it is today, which is a genuinely universal system, and perhaps, the best medical system pound for pound, in terms of bang for buck, that we have in the world.
It was a Labor Government that first introduced the legislation to make life- saving drugs more affordable (in 1944) and the Albanese Government remains committed to ensuring that the PBS enables Australians to access affordable medicines.
The PBS, is a key component of our health system, providing significant direct assistance—$13.8 billion in 2020-21—to make medicines affordable.
As Minister I am absolutely committed to making sure the PBS works as well as it possibly can into the future.
After nine years of neglect from the former government, costs of living are soaring and many Australians are cutting back on essentials in order to make ends meet. The Bill will help ease the squeeze on household budgets for millions of Australians.
This Bill amends the National Health Act 1953 to reduce the maximum general patient co-payment under the PBS from the current maximum of $42.50 to $30.00. This reduction of $12.50 represents a saving of 29 per cent for general consumers.
From 1 January 2023, around 3.6 million Australians with current prescriptions over $30 will benefit through this Albanese Government initiative. People filling a prescription for one medication per month will save around $150 a year, while a family filling prescriptions for two or three medications per month could save $300-$450 per year.
Approximately 19 million Australians will be eligible for savings under this Bill, with total savings for consumers calculated to be around $200 million each year.
This Bill will ease the cost of living pressures that Australian households are feeling around the country.
But this Bill will also have a profound benefit for public health.
High medicines costs have meant that patients are choosing between the health care they need and providing for their families. The PBS co-payment for general patients has doubled since 2000 and according to ABS figures, more than 900,000 Australians delayed or did not get a prescription filled in 2019-20 due to the cost.
The Albanese Labor Government will keep the costs of medications down and help to ease the cost-of-living pressures that Australians are facing. All Australians should have access to universal and world class medical care. No one should have to choose between filling prescriptions for potentially lifesaving medicines or providing for their families.
No longer will general patients taking Eliquis for the prevention of stroke or Advair for asthma, or Janumet for diabetes have to choose between their script and their household expenses. This Bill will ensure they receive the essential medical care needed to prevent serious illness.
The Bill will also ensure that no patient is worse off under this change, by allowing pharmacies to continue offering optional discounts where the Commonwealth Price is between the new and current co-payment amount. The amount paid by the patient under these arrangements will still be counted towards the general safety net threshold, ensuring that no Australians are adversely impacted by the changes.
Every year, and in fact nearly every month, this government is adding new medicines 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.
Some subsidised medicines that are available through the PBS can cost thousands of dollars per prescription, however these medicines are supplied to patients at a significantly reduced cost, where general patients will only pay a maximum of $30 per prescription with the Government covering the remaining cost.
The general patient co-payment will continue to be indexed on 1 January each year in line with existing indexation arrangements. Indexing from 1 January 2024 will be calculated off the new general co-payment amount, securing savings for Australians well into the future.
Australians are paying the price for a decade of missed opportunities and through this Bill, we will make a real difference to household budgets for millions of families.
The Albanese Government is taking action. We are tackling the day-to-day concerns of Australians. We have plans to make medicines cheaper and to make it easier to see a doctor.
Millions of Australians will benefit through cheaper medicines under an Albanese Government. Just like Medicare, it was Labor that built the PBS and Labor will always protect it so that all Australians can access affordable medicines when they need them.
SOCIAL SERVICES AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (INCENTIVISING PENSIONERS TO DOWNSIZE) BILL 2022
SECOND READING SPEECH
This Bill delivers on an important election commitment of the Government to provide real support to older Australians confronted by the challenges of rising prices and soaring cost of living. It delivers amendments that will remove a potential barrier to pensioners downsizing their principal homes by reducing the impact this has in social security means testing.
This Bill will reduce the impact of selling and buying a new principal home on pensioners and other income support recipients, consistent with the values of the Albanese Government. It is yet another important step to ensuring that no one is left behind and no one is held back in our Government's vision for the future of this country. It works in concert with the Government's separate commitment to allow people aged 55 years or over to make one-off downsizer contributions of up to $300,000 into superannuation when they sell their principal home. It also works together with this Government's decision to freeze deeming rates for a period of two years.
These measures, working together, encourage more older Australians to downsize their homes, reducing the impact of downsizing on older Australians' access to pensions at the same time as improving housing access and affordability and enabling growing families more opportunities to find suitable housing options.
From 1 January 2023, this Bill will amend the Social Security Act 1991 andVeterans' Entitlements Act 1986 to double the period of the automatic asset test exemption for principal home sale proceeds which a person intends to use for the purchase of a new home. It also ensures the financial assets of pensioners is calculated on the lower deeming rate, recognising the high prices and values of home sales at the moment could mean that the higher deeming rates would apply and discourage downsizing.
Under existing arrangements, an income support recipient's principal home is exempt from the social security assets test. When a person sells their principal home, these sale proceeds are exempt from the assets test for up to 12 months, so long as the person still intends to use the proceeds to purchase, build, rebuild, repair or renovate a new principal home. During this exempt period, the person continues to be treated as a 'homeowner' for means testing purposes for income support payments meaning that they remain eligible for their income support payments.
The rationale here is that the assets test exemption works to protect an income support recipient who's moving between homes from the potentially significant impact the sale proceeds could have on their support payments if the house sale were to be counted in their assets.
Given the currently high values of Australian real estate, in many cases an individual or couple wouldn't continue to be eligible for any income support payment if the full value of their home were to be counted. In the past, the exemption period is considered to be a reasonable amount of time for people to find or build a new principal home.
The exempt period generally ends when the income support recipient no longer intends to use the sale proceeds for a new home, or when they move into their new home. The current situation is that there's an additional extension available of up to 12 months in truly extenuating circumstances, for examples such as when there are building delays due to a natural disaster.
The amendments in this Bill that I'm bringing forward today will extend this assets test exempt period for principal home sale proceeds from the current maximum of 12 months to a new maximum of 24 months. The additional 12 month exemption for extenuating circumstances will continue, meaning that in exceptional cases, home sale proceeds could be exempt from the social security assets test for up to 36 months from the date of the house sale.
Let me tum now to the second part of the means testing arrangements that this Bill addresses. The second limb to social security means testing considers income. In this part, the value of the home sale proceeds that are intended to be used in buying and the financial assets of the individual are 'deemed' by applying a uniform amount of assumed interest gained from people's financial assets working. This saves recipients the complexity of having to bring forward evidence of their actual income derived from their financial investments. This component of means testing can also affects a person's rate of income support based on the threshold applied.
Financial investments might include a person's bank accounts, managed investments, shares and most superannuation. Investment income is assessed by applying the deeming rates to the total market value of a person's financial investments. The actual returns from the investments aren't used and any excess returns above the assessed income do not affect a person's payment rate and generally benefit individuals if their financial investments are performing better.
From a policy perspective, taking into account some level of deemed income on principal home sale proceeds is appropriate, because if the proceeds are placed in a savings account or other financial investment, they would generally generate returns which a person can use to support themselves.
Under the current deeming rules, the lower deeming rate of 0.25 per cent per annum is applied to the value of financial assets up to a deeming threshold of $56,400 for singles and $93,600 for couples combined. The upper deeming rate, presently 2.25 per cent per annum, applies to the value of financial assets above these thresholds.
These thresholds apply to principal home sale proceeds—even when they are exempt from the assets test—in the same way as for funds placed in other financial investments such as shares or bonds.
Again, given the high value of most Australian homes, this means the bulk of home sale proceeds are often subject to the upper deeming rate. This can have a significant negative impact on a person's pension or other payment rates and works as a considerable disincentive for pensioners considering downsizing their principal homes.
This Bill will substantially reduce this barrier and disincentive for pensioners by ensuring that only the lower deeming rate is used to assess income on principal home sale proceeds which are also exempt from the assets test for between up to 24 months, with the possibility of a further 12 months for extenuating circumstances.
This legislative change will significantly reduce the amount of income deemed on assets test exempt principal home sale proceeds. It builds on the doubling of the exemption period by further reducing the impact on people's payment rates during the process of selling and purchasing a new principal home.
As I have noted earlier, the Government has separately committed to freezing the deeming rates at their current levels for two years to 30 June 2024. This means that for the next two years, principal home sale proceeds which a pensioner or other income support recipient intends to use to purchase a new principal home will generate deemed income at a rate of only 0.25 per cent per annum.
Let me share two practical examples that illustrate how this Bill helps pensioners downsizing and reduces the impact of selling and buying a new principal home on their payment rates.
The first illustrates the benefit of extending the assets test exempt period and the application of the lower deeming rate. Consider a maximum rate pensioner couple who choose to downsize by building a new, smaller home that better suits their needs.
Under the current rules, if the couple sold their existing family home for $1,000,000 and say intended to use $800,000 of that amount to purchase, build, rebuild, repair or renovate a house of equal value, then the $800,000 would be exempt from the pension assets test for up to 12 months.
Without the changes in this Bill, assuming the couple put the full sale proceeds of $1,000,000 into a savings account and had no other financial assets, the deemed income assessed on this amount would be at the upper deeming rate of 2.25 percent on the one million dollars less the couple's deeming threshold amount of $93,600, which would be deemed at the lower rate. This would have the effect of reducing this couple's payment rate by around $229 a fortnight. The other significant impact is that the sale proceeds of $800,000 which the couple intends to use for their new principal home would be set aside from the assets test for only 12 months.
On the other hand, with the changes to deeming and the assets exempt period in this Bill, in which the one million dollars less deeming threshold area of $93,600 would be deemed at only 0.25 percent, with the effect of reducing the deemed income on this couple's home sale proceeds to well below the free area of $336 per fortnight, meaning they would remain on the maximum pension rate.
And in terms of the assets test which could knock out their eligibility for the pension entirely, what if a building delay outside the couple's control prevents their new home from being completed within 12 months? Under the current arrangements, they could apply for an additional 12-month asset test exemption due to extenuating circumstances but if there are further complications such as a flood or other natural disaster preventing the couple's new home from being completed by the end of the second year, the assets test exemption would expire and their home sale proceeds of $800,000 would be subject to the assets test. Under the current arrangements, after 12 months they would no longer be treated as 'homeowners' for means testing purposes.
Assuming they had no other assets, under the assets test for a non-homeowner couple, their pension would be reduced by a very significant $1,069.50 a fortnight to a part rate of $419.30 per fortnight.
Unfortunately, some people do face such repeated setbacks to the completion of a new home. We know with the pressures on the economy, labour supply and supply chains due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have had a significant impact on the building sector across the country, and many areas of Queensland and New South Wales have experienced repeated bouts of severe flooding over the last two years.
The amendments in this Bill will allow the asset test exemption to be extended to a total of 36 months in extenuating circumstances such as these, giving people more time and certainty to complete the building or purchase of their new home and have greater peace of mind.
Let me share a second example that illustrates the benefit of the changes to the deeming rules in this Bill.
Consider the case of a single pensioner, let's call him 'Nick', who sells his home for $600,000, intending to downsize to a smaller unit of equal value. As he intends to use the full amount to purchase his new home, the assets test exemption applies, and the $600,000 is exempt from the pension assets test for up to 24 months under the changes in this Bill.
Nick then deposits his sale proceeds in a savings account. He has no other financial assets.
Without the changes to the·deeming rules in this Bill, deemed income would be calculated on Nick's home sale proceeds at the lower rate of 0.25 per cent for the first $56,400, and the higher rate of 2.25 per cent for the remaining $543,600. As a result, Nick would have assessed income of $12,372 a year, or around $476 fortnight.
Pensioners benefit from an income test free area, which for singles is currently $190 a fortnight. This means the first $190 a fortnight Nick receives from any source, including deemed income from financial investments, does not affect his rate of pension. Nick's remaining income will reduce his pension by 50 cents for each dollar over $190.
Without the changes in this Bill, Nick's pension would be reduced by around $143 a fortnight.
However, with the benefits of this Bill, the full $600,000 of Nick's home sale proceeds will be deemed at the lower rate of 0.25 per cent while they remain exempt from the assets test.
This would result in Nick having assessed income of only $1,500 a year. As he has no other income, this would not be enough to impact upon Nick's Age Pension rate.
In Nick's case, the amendments in this Bill would leave him $143 per fortnight better off during the period between selling his old principal home and moving into his new, smaller unit.
We know that people weigh up many factors in making the choice to sell a home and downsize to something smaller. One of the considerations that people make is how will this transaction impact on the income support that they receive. The changes in this Bill will assist older Australians contemplating downsizing who are concerned about impacts on their pension rate during the process of selling and buying a new family home applying the lowest deeming rate and giving them a longer period of time to finalise the purchase or construction of their new home.
The changes in this Bill will apply to all people who sell their principal home from the later of 1 January 2023, or one month and one day after the Bill receives Royal Assent.
These changes are beneficial for affected pensioners and other income support recipients, and are expected to cost $61.4 million in underlying cash terms over 4 years to 2025-26.
The changes in this Bill build on the Government's separate commitment to allow people aged 55 years or over to make one-off downsizer contributions of up to $300,000 into superannuation when they sell their principal home. By encouraging more older Australians to downsize their homes, these measures will improve housing access and affordability and allow growing families to find more suitable housing options.
The Albanese Labor Government is deeply committed to serving all Australians and ensuring that no matter what your circumstances, we do everything that can be done to leave no one behind and hold no one back in their lives. This measure is yet another building block that we are putting in place to help ordinary Australians manage in the challenging economic times that we face, ensuring that pensioners can take full advantage of choosing to downsize their homes and maximise the potential of that without negatively impact on their pensions.
Financial Accountability Regime Bill 2022
Financial Sector Reform Bill 2022
Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy Bill 2022
Financial Services Compensation Scheme of Last Resort Levy (Collection) Bill 2022
That the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Amendment (Annual Members' Meetings Notices) Regulations 2022, made under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993, be disallowed [F2022L01162].
… the importance of increased accountability through higher levels of engagement and effective communication between trustees and their members.
Transparency has been key to increasing the discipline on trustees to ensure they are always managing members' money in their best interests. In saying that, I am not suggesting every single thing about a fund's operations must become public … pumping out reams of raw data is not going to be helpful. Information must be disclosed in a manner that is digestible and informative if it is to be useful.
The Senate divided. [18:30]
(The Deputy President—Senator McLachlan)
The Budget 2022-23—Statement by the Treasurer (Dr Chalmers), dated 25 October 2022.
Budget papers—
No. 1—Budget strategy and outlook.
No. 2—Budget measures.
No. 3—Federal financial relations.
No. 4—Agency resourcing.
Ministerial statements—
Regional ministerial budget statement 2022-23: Investing in our regions with purpose and integrity—Statement by the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (Ms C King) and the Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories (Ms McBain), dated 25 October 2022.
Women's Budget Statement 2022-23—Statement by the Minister for Finance; the Minister for Women and the Minister for the Public Service (Senator Gallagher) and Treasurer (Dr Chalmers), dated 25 October 2022.
That the Senate take note of the budget statement and documents.
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry portfolio.
Attorney-General's portfolio.
Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water portfolio.
Defence portfolio—
Defence
Department of Veterans' Affairs.
Education portfolio.
Employment and Workplace Relations portfolio.
Finance portfolio.
Foreign Affairs and Trade portfolio.
Health and Aged Care portfolio.
Home Affairs portfolio.
Industry, Science and Resources portfolio.
Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts portfolio.
Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio.
Social Services portfolio.
Treasury portfolio.
The knowledge that more people visit Bali now than prior to the bombings shows that they failed to scare us away.
We can rest assured the Australian spirit has not been broken. Our spirit remains strong, open, free and tolerant in the memory of those lost.
Since October 9 The Sydney Morning Herald and its Sunday sisterThe Sun-Herald have published 58 articles on The Everest. These stories profiled mares from both human and horse perspectives, stroked the egos of trainers, talked in fairy-tale terms of "heroes" and "villains", workshopped solutions for horse hay fever …
Yeah, the money that $823 million for the Rockhampton Ring Road is in the Budget. It remains in the Budget. There are no cuts in fact to infrastructure investment programs for roads in Queensland at all. No cuts at all. That project will happen but—
of course what we're seeing right the way across the country is significant capacity constraints and I don't want to pretend to people that it's going to be delivered tomorrow. I don't want to pretend that, I want to deliver the project, I want to do that in partnership as I need to with the Rockhampton Ring Road. But we're being realistic about the timeframes for delivery.
The Coalition should stop playing games. The people and businesses of Rockhampton deserve certainty.
A Shorten Labor Government will deliver the project, not just talk about it.
… … …
Federal Labor's commitment to the Rockhampton Ring Road builds on our strong track record of delivering for Central Queensland the last time we were in office.
A Shorten Labor Government will deliver the project, not just talk about it.
$22.0 billion in spending reductions or reprioritisations, including $6.5 billion in savings from reprofiling—
infrastructure projects to better align investments with industry and market conditions.
The Government will re-profile $6.5 billion of funding for existing projects within the Infrastructure Investment Program to beyond the forward estimates, to better align the investment with construction market conditions.
The Australian government is continuing its investment in road and rail infrastructure projects to support regional development. The 2022-23 budget reflects a new approach to infrastructure investment that responds to market capacity constraints, creating a more sustainable infrastructure pipeline while continuing to support priorities for communities.
Of course, our commitment is $2 billion to the early works of the first component of that, it will still go to Infrastructure Australia as an overall project for assessment.
Of course, our commitment is $2 billion to the early works of the first component of that, it will still go to Infrastructure Australia as an overall project for assessment.
If we had signed, we would have opened our borders and killed our own manufacturers.
I live every day in terror of becoming homeless. I frequently eat only once per day because that's all I can afford. I'm on a 'medical' support payment yet can't afford the medical services I need to help me function. I can afford basic bills but few treats. I haven't purchased new clothes in over two years, own only one pair of shoes, had to beg for assistance to fix my car, and live concerned about things breaking down and being unable to afford replacements for example my fridge or washing machine Living in poverty is terrifying. And frustrating. … I have developed physical health concerns due to the stress.
... the income support over COVID meant that I could access the tests I needed, I was diagnosed and went through surgery in late 2020. Since then I have been able to finish my degree, get a job in my field and resume paying tax ..
I have Osteoarthritis in my right hip, due to having Perthes Disease as a child. Perthes Disease is a rare disease that affects the blood flow to the hip joint. The cause is unknown. It affects approximately 1 in 10,000 children.
It is common to develop Osteoarthritis later in life, around the mid 40's, which is exactly what happened to me. The pain gradually gets worse over time, affecting my normal day to day activities, my sleep, and my ability to perform physical tasks. I develop pain if I walk for more than 1 hour, so the weekly grocery shop is a challenge.
I have applied for similar positions in the role I was qualified for, and had years of experience -Automotive Parts Interpreting. I have not been successful. I have applied for hundreds of jobs in other fields, bearing in mind that I have to as part of my Mutual Obligations, and also bearing in mind if I can physically do the job.
I'm onto my 8th or 9th DES Provider. None of them have helped me get suitable employment. Many have no idea of what Perthes Disease is, or how it affects me. There is no point getting me a job where I have to stand for any length of time. In addition to this, once I inform potential employers that I have a pre existing medical issue, I'm immediately told I'm not suitable.
I also have to live with the constant stress around not having enough money to live on.
The cost of living increases mean that the limited income I get simply does not go as far as it used to.
.. I'm so sick of people criticising the unemployed, saying we're lazy, there's lots of jobs out there. They don't know people's circumstances, and they're often the same people that reject us when we apply for jobs.
The current level of Income Support is inadequate. I do not expect to live a life of luxury, all I want is to have enough to have a basic standard of living, and not be worried about money 24/7. I cannot afford treatments to help manage my pain. Simple things such as buying a new mattress, which might help me to sleep better are currently not affordable. My mental health is terrible, I see no way out of this. The simple solution would be to get a job, but that seems impossible, given my ongoing medical issues. The eligibility criteria for the Disability Support Pension has locked people out of it that need it. There are thousands of people like me who are unlikely to work ever again, what are we supposed to do? We can't survive on the JobSeeker Allowance for the rest of our lives! I expect my health will worsen over time, eventually I'll be unable to walk, will the Government still expect me to look for work then?
Those views are absolutely appalling, I don't support those views, that kind of intolerance, that kind of hatred, bigotry. It's just wrong.