The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Sue Lines ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
Criminal Code Amendment (Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes) Bill 2024
I look at the open fields and see
the space where my people used to be
I see the scars of wounded ground
I cry as I hear the death call sound
of curlew mourning by.
In its application, the Attorney-General's fiat creates silence.
The Commonwealth Director Of Public Prosecutions … exercises discretion to institute prosecutions for offences against the Commonwealth in accordance with the CDPP … policy. The CDPP also reserves the right to decide whether to proceed with, take over or decline a private prosecution in accordance with the same policy.
Aung San Suu Kyi has complete immunity, including from being served with court documents because under customary international law, heads of state, heads of government and ministers of foreign affairs are immune from foreign criminal proceedings and are inviolable …
… genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
The Senate divided. [09:58]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That on Wednesday, 26 March 2025:
(a) the hours of meeting be 9 am till adjournment;
(b) at 5 pm, the questions on all remaining stages of the following bills be put immediately:
(i) Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025,
(ii) Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-26 Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-26 Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill 2025-26
(iii) Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024,
(iv) AusCheck Amendment (Global Entry Program) Bill 2025, and
(v) Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025;
(c) divisions may take place after 6.30 pm;
(d) paragraph (b) operate as a limitation of debate under standing order 142;
(e) the routine of business from the conclusion of consideration of the bills listed in paragraph (b), or at 6 pm, whichever is the later, be:
(i) valedictory statements, and
(ii) Budget statement and documents—party leaders and independent senators to make responses to the statement and documents for not more than 15 minutes each; and
(f) the Senate adjourn without debate on the motion of a minister.
That on Wednesday, 26 March 2025:
(a) the hours of meeting be 9 am till adjournment;
(aa) the routine of business after the placing of business be:
(i) general business notices of motion nos 807, 811, 812 and 817, proposing the introduction of bills, and
(ii) consideration of the following bills:
A. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025,
B. Supply Bill (No. 1) 2025-26
Supply Bill (No. 2) 2025-26
Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill 2025-26,
C. Transport Security Amendment (Security of Australia's Transport Sector) Bill 2024,
D. AusCheck Amendment (Global Entry Program) Bill 2025, and
E. Parliamentary Business Resources Legislation Amendment (Machinery of Government Change) Bill 2025;
(ab) the business before the Senate be interrupted at 6 pm to allow senators to make valedictory statements;
(b) at 10 pm the questions on all remaining stages of the bills listed in paragraph (aa) (ii) be put immediately;
(c) divisions may take place after 6.30 pm;
(d) paragraph (b) operate as a limitation of debate under standing order 142; and
(e) the Senate adjourn without debate on the motion of a minister.
That the question be now put.
After paragraph (aa)(i) insert "consideration of proposals under standing order 75".
That the question be now put.
The Senate divided. [10:11]
(The President—Senator Lines)
The Senate divided. [10:14]
(The President—Senator Lines)
That at the end of paragraph (aa)(ii) of the motion agreed to earlier the following bills be added: Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Setting Gender Equality Targets) Bill 2024, Fee-Free TAFE Bill 2024, National Broadband Network Companies Amendment (Commitment to Public Ownership) Bill 2024 and, contingent upon introduction into the Senate, Treasury Laws Amendment (More Cost of Living Relief) Bill 2025.
That the question be now put.
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
Labor is committed to fixing our environment laws so that they work better for our environment and better for business. That means our laws need to improve nature, and protect our unique native plants and animals.
And our laws need to be less bureaucratic and provide more certainty for business. That's what the community expects and that's what we're delivering.
We will do this in a common-sense way that supports both national productivity and environmental protection.
Everybody agrees that the current laws don't work.
We said we would improve certainty for business. Certainty that helps drive investment in jobs, communities and nation-building projects.
That is what we are doing.
We said we want a country in which nature is being repaired and is regenerating rather than continuing to decline.
That is what we are doing.
This Bill would address a critical problem in our current laws.
A problem that is playing out right now in a small community in Tasmania, that is supported by a well established industry.
A problem that is putting jobs, investment and individual livelihoods at risk.
This Bill would support the Government's commitment to provide certainty, clarity and fairness for ongoing industries, workers and communities affected by reconsideration of decisions under the EPBC Act.
The Bill would remove the ability of the Minister for the Environment to reconsider a past decision on an action that meets certain criteria.
Reconsideration powers have been available to the Minister since the beginning of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act a quarter of a century ago.
These powers exist to enable the Minister to respond to a limited range of circumstances, based on new and changing environmental information.
This is important.
But, these powers can create considerable uncertainty and affect communities that have come to depend on a lifeline industry.
The economic and social impacts of changing a decision can be severe, putting jobs, community and individual livelihoods at risk.
Industries and communities like Macquarie Harbour. This is a timely example, but it's potentially not an isolated event. This means that swift action is required now, but also to ensure that these circumstances do not occur again.
The Bill recognises that established and lawfully operating projects, where proponents did the right thing and referred their action to the Environment Minister, and which have been investing and operating for 5 or more years on the basis of that decision, should not be put at risk.
The Bill would only capture a small subset of decisions that can be reconsidered called 'not a controlled action- particular manner' (or NCA-PM) decisions. These decisions are made when the Minister decides that an action does not require approval, because the action would be undertaken in the particular manner described.
The Bill would also recognise the important role that states and territories play in managing environmental impacts, through their own plans, policies and laws. The amendment specifies that a project must have a state or territory management arrangement specified in its 'particular manners' to meet the criteria.
The Australian Government is committed to working in partnership with industry, communities and states and territories to protect our environment and support the conservation and recovery of our threatened species.
We have invested more than $500 million in targeted threatened species recovery, including under the Saving Native Species Program, the Natural Heritage Trust and the National Environmental Science Program. This is complemented by other Government investments for Ramsar wetlands, World Heritage properties and protected areas that support biodiversity conservation and the recovery of threatened species.
We have invested $37.5 million in priority conservation actions for the Maugean skate population in Macquarie Harbour. Investments to improve water quality and environmental conditions within Macquarie Harbour and support critical species conservation actions including a successful captive breeding program.
We are also actively working with salmon industry stakeholders on further steps that can be taken to protect the environment and ensure the industry has a sustainable and long term future producing high quality salmon.
This Bill strikes a balance between the important task of protecting our environment, and the need to provide certainty and stability to businesses which have already made substantial investment to get a project up and running, and most importantly protecting jobs.
This is good, sensible and balanced regulation.
The proposed changes would commence the day after Royal Assent and would apply to any reconsideration decision made under section 78 after the amendment commences, regardless of how long ago the original decision was made.
I commend the Bill to the Chamber.
At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate notes that:
(a) on the eve of a federal election, the Albanese Government has been forced to work around their own Environment Minister in an attempt to fix a political mess of their own making—and that they should instead simply have ended the Environment Minister's disastrous review of the future of salmon farming at Macquarie Harbour;
(b) the Government—and particularly the Environment Minister—must guarantee that they will not instigate other forms of legislation or regulations that will impose new controls or reviews on the salmon industry, including through the return of their Nature Positive legislation, Federal EPA or use of other mechanisms in the EPBC Act, such as directed environmental audits;
(c) the changes to the reconsiderations regime in the bill should be substantially strengthened to ensure that all assessments of all projects, across all industries, do not remain subject to the open-ended review processes that currently exist; and
(d) the Government must immediately end the millions of dollars of taxpayer funding to the Environmental Defenders Office which, amongst many of its other actions deliberately targeted at thwarting and stopping business activity, investment and job creation for Australians, was one of the three organisations that initiated the reconsideration request against the salmon industry."
The right of citizens with standing to challenge their governments in court is a fundamental pillar of a robust democracy. We must not set this principle aside simply to provide a drowning Prime Minister with a headline …
I would be grateful for your confirmation that the Australian Greens will support the bills, including the amendments above—
when they come before the Senate. I also seek confirmation, as discussed—
that you will support the Government on all procedural votes required to ensure the timely passage of the bills through the Senate as early as possible this sitting week, including on a guillotine or similar motion.
It's insane, and none of us were told about this.
We need to be focused on the cost of living and not hypothetical changes to constitution.
… as mad an idea as I have heard in a long time.
It has become a right that is creating inefficiency.
Death doesn't discriminate, and it doesn't make appointments. A sudden stroke or dementia could steal someone's ability to communicate their wishes and make decisions.
… let me tell you this is a job market that's strong. I mean, it's as strong as we have ever seen.
That:
(a) the Senate notes that:
(i) the 2025-26 Budget does not contain any substantial support for small business, and
(ii) the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024 presents an opportunity to legislate a $30,000 instant asset write off to give small businesses the certainty they deserve;
(b) the order of the Senate agreed to earlier today relating to the hours of meeting and routine of business be further varied, to insert at the end of the list of bills in paragraph (aa)(ii), the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax
Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024; and
(c) a message be sent to the House of Representatives requesting that the House immediately consider the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024.
That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.
Chalmers is wrong. The worst is not behind us, it is yet to come.
The government is stealing a $10 note from you and throwing back a $2 coin.
A worker on $100,000 a year will get a $268 tax cut in the 2026-27 fiscal year and $536 each year after that. So $5000 over a decade. But the same worker will be hit by $25,000 in increased taxes from bracket creep …
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water (Senator McAllister) to a question without notice asked by Senator Hanson-Young today relating to environment laws.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Gallagher for yesterday, 25 March 2025, on account of ministerial business.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Babet for 25 and 26 March, for personal reasons.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Van for yesterday, 25 March, for parliamentary duties.
Liability for Climate Change Damage (Make the Polluters Pay) Bill 2025
That the following bill be introduced:
A Bill for an Act to provide that major emitters of greenhouse gases are liable for climate change damage that occurs in Australia, and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
I rise today in favour of the Liability for Climate Change Damage (Make the Polluters Pay) Bill 2025, an Australian Greens Bill that will make coal and gas corporations liable for the damage caused by climate disasters.
The climate crisis is turbocharging extreme weather events and devastating local communities across the country, with locals in Northern Rivers and Queensland most recently bearing the brunt of more intense and severe storms and flooding.
We know that coal and gas are fuelling these climate disasters, yet the major parties keep approving projects that fuel the fire. Fossil fuel corporations continue to profit while everyday people are paying with their homes, livelihoods and, in some cases, their lives.
This Bill will give people and businesses affected by climate change fuelled events, such as victims of Tropical Cyclone Alfred, the right to sue coal and gas corporations to pay for the damage these corporations have caused.
In Australia, regulators and lawyers have advised that companies and their directors may have climate-related risks that should be disclosed, including litigation risk. In other countries, fossil fuel companies have faced legal action for climate damage. This Bill will clarify the situation under Australian law.
The Liability for Climate Change Damage (Make the Polluters Pay) Bill 2025 would allow victims of climate disasters, including people affected by Tropical Cyclone Alfred, to sue thermal coal, oil and gas companies for damages caused to their homes or businesses. Governments would also be able to take legal action in their own right or on behalf of people affected by climate disasters.
Major emitters of greenhouse gases, including fossil fuel producers and owners or operators of coal-fired power stations, will be liable for climate change damage if their total emissions are greater than 1 million tonnes in any 12-month period that began on or after 1 September 1990.
The first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report was released in that year, unambiguously linking fossil fuels to global warming. From at least this time onwards, every fossil fuel corporation has known, or should have known, about the consequences of their actions.
It has been widely acknowledged for a long time that climate change is making natural disasters worse. We cannot keep allowing those fuelling the fire to rake in profits while our communities are left behind to clean up the mess.
Instead of continuing to approve new coal and gas, I urge the major parties to prioritise Australian communities on the frontline of the climate crisis and support this bill.
Fair Work Amendment (Paid Reproductive Health Leave and Flexible Work Arrangements) Bill 2025
That the following bill be introduced:
A Bill for an Act to amend the law relating to workplace relations and workplace gender equality, to grant reproductive healthcare leave and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
Every person in Australia, regardless of sex or gender, is likely to experience reproductive health issues at some point throughout their working lives. Many of these health issues can take a serious physical and mental toll on workers and can inhibit their ability to work.
While some people may simply want workplace flexibility, those who need leave to manage their reproductive health should be able to access it.
This Bill will give every worker the right to 12 days of paid reproductive health leave per year.
All employees will be able to access reproductive health leave. Much like paid family and domestic violence leave, this leave will be accessible to all workers, irrespective of their employment status: casual, part and full time employees.
No one should have to suffer financially or jeopardise their employment to manage their reproductive health. Whether it's for perimenopause and menopause, fertility treatments, chronic conditions like endometriosis or preventative screening for breast, cervical or prostate cancer—it's about supporting workers at every stage of life.
If someone wants to get a vasectomy or be with their partner for the first scan of their baby, they will be able to under this entitlement.
This Bill delivers on Australian Unions' It's For Every Body campaign for paid reproductive health leave.
It builds on Queensland's 10 days of paid reproductive health leave for workers in the Queensland Public Service, and Victoria's Public Service Agreement, which provides 5 days of paid reproductive health leave to Victorian Government employees.
It also follows many employers in the private sector who have implemented reproductive health leave policies.
Menopause is a natural life transition, yet for some women and people who menstruate, perimenopause and menopause symptoms can impact workforce participation. Ensuring access to flexible work arrangements, and providing leave where it is needed, are critical tools to ensure that all women and people who menstruate can continue to participate in the workforce for as long as they want.
Evidence to the Senate inquiry into menopause and perimenopause was that many women are leaving the workforce earlier to deal with their symptoms, whereas allowing them to access leave or request flexible working arrangements could see them continue in the workforce longer.
This Bill adds perimenopause and menopause as reasons an employee can request flexible working arrangements. This could look like the ability to start a bit later if you've had a rotten night's sleep or the right to work from home if you are having really heavy bleeding.
Flexibility to manage perimenopause and menopause symptoms was one of the key calls from women, employers and unions who gave evidence to the Senate inquiry into menopause and perimenopause.
The Bill also amends the Workplace Gender Equality (Matters in relation to Gender Equality Indicators) Instrument 2023 to allow for the collection of data on the supports employers are providing, and their usage, for employees experiencing menopause and perimenopause, including specific workplace policies. WGEA used to collect this data on a voluntary basis, before it was found to be beyond the scope of the Act's remit. This change would permit and require WGEA to recommence this data collection, which will help build an evidence base on the existing approaches to menopause and perimenopause across organisations and help to paint a picture of what's working.
It is well over time to bring reproductive health issues out of the shadows and address the stigma. Paid reproductive health leave and expanded eligibility to flexible working arrangements will help do this.
Let's make employment work for everyone and ensure that workers don't suffer financially or jeopardise their employment to manage their reproductive health.
I commend the Bill to the Senate.
We All Come Together For Country Bill 2025
That the following bill be introduced:
A Bill for an Act to amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
Today I commend this Bill to the Senate, a Bill to legislate against, and apply penalties to, the release of emissions that cause damage to First Nations rock art that has been recognised as culturally, historically, scientifically and archaeologically significant. Rock art that has this significance should be recognised as an important type of national monument. In fact, for our future generations and preservation of cultural heritage, we need to protect all of our important national monuments from corrosive emissions and destruction for the benefit of resource projects.
Rock art is irreplaceable and priceless. It is the oldest surviving human art form. Across Australia rock art is an integral part of First Nations life and customs, dating back to the earliest times of human settlement on the continent. Researchers estimate that there are more than 100,000 significant rock art sites around Australia. More than 5,000 are located in the Northern Territory's Kakadu National Park alone.
The first humans arrived in Australia between 65,000 and 80,000 years ago. Australian rock art has been dated to around 45,000 years ago, although there are possibly much older sites on the continent.
All cultures use imagery to tell stories, so it is likely that, from the time of their first arrival in Australia, First Nations peoples were using artworks in sacred and public sites to give form to their narratives. For First Nations peoples in Australia, rock art sites are records of their ongoing history since time immemorial.
Rock art consists of paintings, drawings, engravings, stencils, bas-relief carvings and figures made of beeswax in rock shelters and caves. It can take two main forms: engravings (petroglyphs) and paintings or drawings (pictographs).
Petroglyphs are created by removing rock through pecking, hammering or abrading in order to leave a negative impression. Pictographs are made by applying pigments to the rock. Drawings use dry colours, such as charcoal, clay, chalk and ochre, which can be anything from pale yellow to dark reddish brown. Paintings use wet pigments made from minerals, which are applied by finger or with brushes made from chewed sticks or hair. Sometimes stencils are created by blowing the colour from someone's mouth over an outline.
Broadly speaking, rock art in Australia employs two main design types. The first uses engraved geometric forms, such as circles, concentric circles, arcs, dots or animal tracks. The second creates figurative forms, such as painted or engraved silhouettes of humans or animals. These figures can be either simple outlines or more complex constructions. The X-ray pigment art of Kakadu, for example, shows the internal organs of humans and animals.
Within these two main designs, however, infinite variations are possible, depending on the preferences of the individual artist or cultural groups.
Petroglyphs are created on almost any stone surface, and examples of engraved art can be found across the continent. But examples of pictographs usually survive only in more sheltered areas, such as overhangs or caves. Owing to their connection to First Nations beliefs, many of these locations are considered sacred sites.
First Nations peoples' knowledge of rock art is still vital and alive in Australia today. Stories about these artworks have been passed down, in some cases through thousands of generations, and in others directly from the artists themselves.
Rock art is an invaluable spiritual, historic and artistic resource, but it raises various issues, primarily concerning how it can best be protected.
In Australia, seven heritage places are on the National Heritage List, in recognition of their outstanding cultural significance to the nation: Dampier Archipelago, Grampians National Park, Kakadu National Park, Koonalda Cave, Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, the Tasmanian Wilderness and the West Kimberley. All these sites have been given the highest protection under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 . With the proper care and recognition of their cultural value, they will continue to be appreciated by generations of Australians to come, although it has to be pointed out, the EPBC Act doesn't currently prevent any project from being approved if the Minister thinks it can coexist with heritage.
The biggest island in the Dampier Archipelago is Murujuga, which many of you will know as the Burrup Peninsula. In 1963 the island became an artificial peninsula when it was connected to the mainland by a causeway for a road and a railway. Murujuga means 'hip bone sticking out', and if you have a look at the shape of the land there, the name makes a lot of sense.
Murujuga is unique. It contains the Murujuga Cultural Landscape, the world's largest and most important collection of petroglyphs. Some of the Aboriginal rock carvings have been dated to around 45,000 years old, making them some of the oldest known. The collection of standing stones there is the largest in Australia with rock art petroglyphs numbering over one million. Some of them depict the now extinct Tasmanian tiger. The Dampier Rock Art Precinct covers the entire archipelago, while the Murujuga National Park lies within Murujuga.
It is estimated that around 900 sites, or 24 percent of the original rock art on Murujuga, was destroyed to make way for industrial development between 1963 and 2006. The historical, cultural and archaeological significance of the area has led to a campaign for its protection. The preservation of the Murujuga monument has been called for since 1969, and in 2002 the International Federation of Rock Art Organizations commenced a campaign to preserve the remaining monument. Murujuga has been listed in the National Trust of Australia Endangered Places Register and in the 2004, 2006, and 2008 World Monuments Watch by the World Monuments Fund.
In 1996, a land use plan by the Burrup Peninsula Management Advisory Board divided the region into two areas, a Conservation, Heritage and Recreation Area, spanning 5,400 hectares—62% of Murujuga—and an Industrial Area with an emphasis on port sites and strategic industry— 38% of Murujuga. While the plan commented upon "the value of the Northern Burrup for the preservation of its renowned Aboriginal heritage and environmental values", no comment was made on the amount of rock art affected by development and recreational activities.
According to the Philip Adams radio show on Radio National, one worker on an industrial site, an electrician for Woodside, claimed the company had crushed 10,000 petroglyphs for road fill, at a time of international outrage over the Taliban destruction of the Bamiyan buddhas. The oldest representation of a human face was destroyed.
As of 2011, the area remained on the World Monument Fund's list of 100 Most Endangered Places in the World—the only such site in Australia—because of continued mismanagement of the heritage and conservation values of Murujuga.
Murujuga has become the host for one of the gas industry's largest facilities, the Burrup Hub, and there are plans for extensive expansions. We are talking about one of the biggest oil and gas developments ever undertaken in Australia, by Woodside Petroleum and BHP, known as the Scarborough project, Scarborough being the name of the gas field 375 km off the Pilbara coast. The project includes a floating production unit, the drilling of 13 wells, and a 430 km pipeline to transport the gas to the onshore Pluto LNG processing facility near Karratha, which will be expanded. The existing facilities already burn the equivalent of the entire annual emissions of New Zealand, every day.
Much of the rock art now lies inside the Murujuga National Park, and on 7 July 2008, the Australian Government placed 90% of the remaining rock art areas of the Dampier Archipelago on the National Heritage List. Campaigners pushed for the Australian Government to include all of the undisturbed areas of the Dampier Archipelago on the World Heritage List and, in January 2020, the Australian Government finally lodged a submission for the Murujuga cultural landscape to be included as an entry to the World Heritage Tentative List.
But along with mechanical damage to the rock art from industrial land clearance for roads, pipelines, power lines, and other activities, Murujuga rock art has been damaged by industrial emissions. Without even considering the plumes that rise from the fertiliser and gas plants, acidic dust pollution can combine with water to form acids that dissolve manganese and iron compounds, causing the fragmentation of the rock varnish. Researchers have said that reducing the amount of dust stirred up by machinery is essential to protect the rock art for future generations.
Then we have to consider the emissions that arise from fertiliser and LNG production itself. Airborne emissions from industrial activity that can degrade rock art and other monuments include nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, ammonia and particulate matter. The existing facilities at the Burrup Hub produce all four of these pollutants, and the proposed expansions will fill the air above Murujuga with chemicals that react with water and air to produce acids and other corrosive materials.
There are nine matters of national environmental significance under the EPBC Act, including, but not limited to, world heritage properties, national heritage places, Commonwealth marine areas and water resources. There is a policy gap in that emissions which cause damage to the surfaces of national and world heritage monuments are currently not considered a matter of national significance under the EPBC Act. The Bill seeks to address this deficiency.
The Bill will establish a new class of controlled action under the EPBC Act relating to emissions which damage the surfaces of important monuments. When this is shown to be occurring, an entity that continues to pollute despite the damage will receive a civil financial penalty under the EPBC Act. The penalties for non-compliance are in line with the rest of the Act.
The Bill will insert an item into Section 34 of the EPBC Act. That item is "the National Heritage values of a National Heritage place". This establishes National Heritage values as being important to the Act.
A person that is a corporation, the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth entity contravenes the Act if the person or entity takes a damaging industrial action within what's called the 'prohibited area' for a vulnerable monument. Prohibited areas will be defined through scientific investigation.
A person who proposes to take an action that may significantly impact a monument that is part of a National Heritage place must cause a vulnerability investigation to be conducted for the monument. The purpose of the vulnerability investigation is to determine whether damaging industrial action is causing, or is likely to cause, damage to the monument.
If a vulnerability investigation finds that damaging industrial action is causing damage to a monument, the Minister must declare the monument to be a vulnerable monument, and must declare a prohibited area around the monument. The investigation will also determine whether preventing damaging industrial activity in a particular area would prevent or minimise future damage.
The Western Australian Government has tried to deny that airborne emissions cause damaging compounds to form on the surface of rock art. This is not surprising, seeing as the WA Government always seeks to boost the gas industry, regardless of the consequences.
University of Western Australia archaeology expert Benjamin Smith has pointed to the scientific consensus showing that emissions such as nitrogen oxides have an acidic effect that destroys the surface of stone monuments. Professor Smith has also been involved in research involving the first photographic evidence of the art being damaged since industry arrived on the Burrup in the 1960s.
Photos, taken about 50 years apart, clearly show artworks that have faded and had their surfaces peeled away. In all, photographs of 26 pieces of rock art, or petroglyphs, taken prior to or early in the industrialisation process were compared with recent pictures. Professor Smith said 50 per cent of them had changed, and he has stated clearly, "Once those rock surfaces start to degrade, there's nothing one can do. We have to stop the acidity getting on to the rocks."
Of course, this is disputed by the companies that operate on the Burrup. The WA Government launched its own monitoring program in 2019, which was jointly funded by Woodside, the Yara fertiliser company, and iron ore giant Rio Tinto. There was no attempt to put the program at arm's length from parties with a vested interest. Anyone could be forgiven for being sceptical about the objectivity of the study.
Woodside backed the government's monitoring and said previous research did not prove LNG production was damaging the rock art. A Woodside spokesperson said, "The photographic methodology used [by Professor Smith] is not a reliable means of determining such changes". In other words, the evidence from your own eyes, when examining Professor Smith's photos, should be ignored.
This Bill bypasses all of that. It puts the onus on the proponent of a development, or an expansion, to prove scientifically that they are not destroying a monument. Let's make the law match the science, and let's see what the evidence shows.
If we have to talk about money to make people understand the value of our heritage, look at the tourism value of Murujuga. When we tell people that Western Australia is home to some of the world's oldest artworks, tourists come in droves. They want to see. Most of the potential is untapped. A boardwalk has been constructed near some of the most visible pieces, and the numbers are growing.
Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation wants to establish a new benchmark for Indigenous tourism with a Tourism Precinct at Conzinc Bay on the western side of the peninsula. The precinct will include the Murujuga Living Knowledge Centre, eco-accommodation and day-use facilities at the bay. The business case for the precinct is being drawn up now.
WA Tourism's new approach to its work is all about First Nations heritage. The WA Visitor Economy Strategy 2033 —or WAVES 2033—that came out last year, talks about a vision for Western Australia "to be recognised as a world-class destination that immerses people in its unique cultures, communities, and environment". Murujuga could not be more relevant to that goal.
Tourism is Australia's third biggest export and we must start valuing the assets that underpin the industry. Tourism brings in an enormous amount of revenue, and that revenue is different to the revenue from other industries, because tourism spreads the benefits around. Most of the beneficiaries are smaller, localised businesses. The money doesn't disappear overseas or line the pockets of the already-rich. Tourism benefits all Australians.
We as Australians all have a critical role to play and we have seen extensive campaigns, including the open letter from 95 top Australian and international artists who united to stop the destruction of one of the world's greatest artwork. People are fascinated to see and visit a place and to have an experience like no other, which brings to our shores visitors from all over the world. And it's not just the rock art—the country and wildlife that inspired the art are grounded in story, time and place. If we protect these precious and sacred places like Murujuga, we can continue to showcase them to the world.
This Bill inserts a new value into the considerations of the EPBC Act—the value of some of our most important national heritage. More than that, this is our heritage as human beings. We are talking about 45,000 years of human history. Murujuga has been put forward as a World Heritage site for a reason. Not for the first time, I ask the Parliament to put heritage in all its forms, but in particular First Nations cultural heritage, above a quick buck for a few corporations.
Crimes Amendment (Repeal Mandatory Minimum Sentences) Bill 2025
That the following bill be introduced:
A Bill for an Act to amend the Crimes Act 1914 , and for related purposes.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The inclusion of mandatory minimum sentencing in Labor's Hate Crimes Bill earlier this year was an absolute disgrace. When the bill came to the Senate, I made it clear that this was a disgusting breach of civil liberties, born from a completely unnecessary dirty deal between the Labor and Liberal Parties. And it was rammed through at the last minute in a highly charged political atmosphere that we now know was based on a hoax by known criminals. It now appears that the community and the crossbench were fed lies to manufacture consent for an attack on the rights of Australians to a fair trial.
When this bill passed, I didn't think I could be more disgusted by a gutless Labor Party that goes out of its way to align itself with Mr Dutton's Liberals.
The ALP 2023 Platform states the following: "Labor opposes mandatory sentencing. This practice does not reduce crime but does undermine the independence of the judiciary, leads to unjust outcomes, and is often discriminatory in practice."
Labor has not only once again capitulated to the Liberals, but in doing so they have acted in direct contradiction to their own party platform.
And, still, you know what the most galling part of this debacle is?
The original bill had the numbers to pass. There was no need to make a dirty deal with Mr Dutton. But as usual, Labor would rather deal with the Liberal Party to pass racist laws than work with the progressive crossbench.
We are not seeking to repeal the Hate Crimes bill, just the dirty deal that brought in mandatory minimum sentencing. The dangers of mandatory sentencing are well known.
Legal expert after legal expert tells us mandatory minimum sentencing simply does not work. It takes judicial decisions out of the hands of judges and courts and into the hands of politicians.
The Australian Law Reform Commission has highlighted that mandatory minimum sentences are discriminatory and in breach of our international human rights obligations.
The Law Council of Australia president, Juliana Warner, has said that mandatory sentencing laws are "arbitrary and limit the individual's right to a fair trial", and the organisation has warned that mandatory sentencing refuses to take into account the personal circumstances of an offender, and therefore, the laws disproportionately affect vulnerable groups.
Australian Lawyers Alliance spokesperson, Greg Barns SC, has said there is "simply no evidence" to support mandatory sentencing.
We do, however, have extensive evidence that mandatory sentences disproportionately and unfairly target First Nations people and other people of colour.
The Australian Law Reform Commission that mandatory sentencing increases incarceration, is costly, ineffective as a crime deterrent and can disproportionately affect marginalised groups.
Go and speak to any community lawyer or peak legal body and they will categorically tell you that mandatory sentences are unjust, inappropriate, and highly discriminatory. A recent Conversation article by legal scholars described the mandatory sentencing amendments that are "populist, knee-jerk reactions [that] are highly unlikely to make the community safer." []
Politicians are not in a position to understand the individual circumstances of a case, and there is no justifying politicians intervening in judicial discretion.
I oppose mandatory minimum sentencing for all the reasons law experts have given, including because we should not strip the judiciary of its ability to assess cases individually, it undermines judicial independence, and it undermines a fair trial.
I receive racist, Islamophobic, and misogynistic hate constantly. I want consequences for hate crimes, but mandatory minimum sentencing makes no one safer. It is egregious, unjust and discriminatory.
I can already see the eyerolls from the Liberals as soon as I mention Islamophobia. Yes, Islamophobia exists. It is extensively documented.
I remind the Senate of Senator Sharma's shameful claim that there is a "fictitious Islamophobia which was not going on." And not a word of condemnation from anyone in this place. Imagine if that had been said about any other group.
The latest Islamophobia register's report documents the rise in anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian hate. Muslim women are being spat at, punched in the face, their hijabs being torn off, racist graffiti is rampant, and two mosques have now had threats referencing the Christchurch Mosque massacre where an Australian man with an extreme far-right, white supremacist and Islamophobic ideology murdered 51 Muslims.
But to the Liberal Party, Muslim lives simply don't matter. We've known that for a very long time.
And Labor is meek, mediocre and morally compromised. They have again capitulated to the Liberals to push through this bad law.
And we must talk about the elephant in the room, the criminal attacks on the Jewish community that Labor and the Liberals appear to have exploited, weaponised, and politicised to push through these mandatory minimum sentencing laws.
Following the revelations that the caravan found with explosives was part of a "fabricated terrorist plot", Executive Officer of the Jewish Council of Australia, Sarah Schwartz, made the following comments:
Yesterday's statement from the AFP should prompt reflection from every politician, journalist and community leader who has sought to manipulate and weaponise fears within the Jewish community. The attempt to link these events to the support of Palestinians—whether at protests, universities, conferences or writers festivals—has been irresponsible and dangerous.
It is now clear that individuals are seeking to exploit the Jewish community, and the broader public's concern about antisemitism. Disinformation and irresponsible reporting is providing a permissive environment for these malicious acts. We restate our calls for politicians to act responsibly and stop using the Jewish community as political footballs to push divisive agendas.
The Prime Minister has serious questions to answer. If the AFP knew almost immediately that the caravan plot was a hoax and linked to organised crime, why did Labor whip up media hysteria and community fear? Did they push these laws through under false pretences?
There was no justification for mandatory minimum sentencing in the first place, but now that the truth is public, there is even more reason to repeal these provisions.
Sentencing should be up to judges, not politicians. And certainly not politicians in the Labor and Liberal Parties, who thrive on stoking fear and division. That is why these mandatory sentencing provisions must be repealed.
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
Labor's Budget is a Budget for an election, not one for our country's future prosperity, and at a time when living standards have suffered the biggest collapse on record and when the security environment is the most dangerous since the Second World War, it fails to deal with the economic and national security challenges our country faces.
Labor's Budget is a Budget for an election, not one for our country's future prosperity …
Labor's Budget is a Budget for an election, not one for our country's future prosperity …
Our $33 billion plan will help build 1.2 million new homes before the decade is out.
The first two rounds—
of the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund are helping build … 18,000 … homes …
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:
In recognition of the National Day of Action for Palestine, and in recognition of the State of Israel's renewed assault on Gaza that demonstrates an ongoing and blatant disregard for international law, that the Australian Government imposes sanctions on the extremist Netanyahu government, ends the two-way arms trade and calls for an end to the genocide against the people of Gaza, system of apartheid, and illegal occupation."
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
In recognition of the National Day of Action for Palestine, and in recognition of the State of Israel's renewed assault on Gaza that demonstrates an ongoing and blatant disregard for international law, that the Australian Government imposes sanctions on the extremist Netanyahu government, ends the two-way arms trade and calls for an end to the genocide against the people of Gaza, system of apartheid, and illegal occupation.
If you're reading this, it means I have been killed—most likely targeted—by the Israeli occupation forces. When this all began, I was only 21 years old—a college student with dreams like anyone else. For past 18 months, I have dedicated every moment of my life to my people. I documented the horrors in northern Gaza minute by minute, determined to show the world the truth they tried to bury. I slept on pavements, in schools, in tents—anywhere I could. Each day was a battle for survival. I endured hunger for months, yet I never left my people's side.
… … …
I ask you now: do not stop speaking about Gaza. Do not let the world look away. Keep fighting, keep telling our stories—until Palestine is free.
… do not stop speaking about Gaza. Do not let the world look away. Keep fighting, keep telling our stories—until Palestine is free.
We, Jewish Australians, oppose the Israeli government's decision to break the hostage and ceasefire agreement negotiated in January 2025 and resume the horrific bombardment of Palestinians in Gaza.
On 18 March, the Israeli military launched a wave of airstrikes in Gaza, massacring over 750 (and rising) Palestinians, including countless children. Survivors of Israel's assault face excruciating conditions, including having to endure amputations without anaesthesia. Palestinians in Gaza are suffering from famine, the destruction of healthcare systems, relentless aerial attacks, and are now being subjected to a new wave of violence.
We reject any naive suggestion that the Netanyahu government has renewed fighting in order to bring back the Israeli hostages. The resumption of the bombardment of Gaza only endangers the lives of the hostages further, while ensuring death and destruction of Palestinians in Gaza.
We call on the Australian Government to immediately censure the Netanyahu government's resumption of war in the strongest terms and move to imposing sanctions on the state of Israel.
The Senate divided. [17:20]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Bragg)
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025
Limiting reconsideration requests beyond three years and limiting who can make them is highly problematic. You're turning it into an entirely political situation, as opposed as a scientific, factual one …
We practised discrimination and exclusion.
It was our ignorance and our prejudice.
And our failure to imagine these things being done to us.
… putting what occurred at this meeting—
and the events of the preceding days together, a clear picture emerges, but it is entirely at odds with the notion of an attempt being made to cover up an allegation … by discouraging it to be reported to the police.
For outstanding achievement as the Director of Army Strategic Reform Program coordination.
Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives and Integrity) Bill 2024
Treasury Laws Amendment (More Cost of Living Relief) Bill 2025
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Reconsiderations) Bill 2025