I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I am honoured to bring to parliament the bill to legislate the National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People.

This bill delivers a permanent, independent statutory agency, led by a national commissioner, with the necessary powers to improve the lives of Indigenous children and young people today and into the future.

Experts and advocates have been calling for these reforms since the 1980s.

SNAICC, the peak body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, in their 1991 State of denial report, asked for 'legislation to recognise the unique rights of Indigenous children'.

In 2019 over 70 organisations, children's commissioners and guardians came together to call for a national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander commissioner to hold systems and services accountable.

They described the levels of discrimination and disadvantage being faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children at the time as 'widespread, systemic and intergenerational'.

Sadly, these sobering assessments have continued, but so too has the tireless advocacy to change them.

Today I want to commend the countless Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders whose sustained work and unwavering commitment has led to this moment.

I especially want to acknowledge the Safe and Supported Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Leadership Group, and all the incredible Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander state and territory children's commissioners, guardians and advocates for the important role they've played in developing this bill.

And, of course, the voices of a group of 12 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people who shared advice on what the commissioner can do to make a difference.

They highlighted:

I want to thank them all for the role they've played in bringing this to fruition.

This was a truly collaborative process, and I'm deeply grateful to everyone involved.

I'd also like to thank Lil Gordon, an experienced public servant and effective advocate, for her service as the acting commissioner; the National Children's Commissioner, Deb Tsorbaris; the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Katie Kiss; and of course, Sue-Anne Hunter, who is in the gallery with us today, who is now the permanent national commissioner of the body we're legislating today.

Ms Hunter is an inspiring, highly qualified and highly respected leader.

When taking up this role, she said: 'The work is urgent and the statistics are grim. But our children are not statistics, they are our future and they will be at the centre of everything we do.'

I've no doubt that under her leadership, we will reach our shared goal of ensuring that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people have equal access to all of the opportunities that our nation has to offer.

To reach that aim, this bill enables the national commissioner:

We know that the Closing the Gap targets relating to development, child protection, safety and justice are off track.

We know that there is more to do, both at the Commonwealth and state and territory levels—just as we know that to meet Closing the Gap targets, we have to deal with systemic issues.

This bill gives the national commissioner powers to identify and call out persistent disadvantage demonstrated by these alarming figures.

All too often, the views of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people are not heard in the decisions that affect their lives.

The measures in this bill will change that, by listening to their experiences.

The national commissioner will have the power to speak directly with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, young people, and their families on matters impacting their lives, their hopes, and their futures.

This might mean sitting down with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Darebin in Naarm (in Melbourne), or in Redfern on Gadigal country (in Sydney), on Mer Island in the Torres Strait, or in Yuendumu in Warlpiri country (in the Northern Territory), acknowledging and recognising that their opinions and perspectives are fundamental for lasting change.

This bill ensures the best interests of children and young people are at the centre of the commissioner's work—which will be characterised by collaboration and strengthened national coordination.

Where necessary, the commissioner will work with state, territory and Commonwealth agencies to identify and recommend solutions on systemic issues.

The national commissioner will make sure that governments take responsibility for how their policies impact Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people, while working to improve outcomes for those children and young people.

This bill also gives the commissioner discretion and independence to conduct inquiries into matters affecting the rights, interests, development, safety or wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people—powers that the commissioner will exercise while upholding Australia's international human rights commitments, with respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people.

Where appropriate, ministers may request the commissioner inquire into a particular matter.

The commissioner can publish reports and submit them to the minister, to be followed by tabling in parliament within 15 sitting days.

Further, the bill·gives the commissioner information-gathering capabilities, including the option to require information or ask people and organisations to respond to written requests, powers that mean governments are held publicly accountable should they fail to respond to such requests for information and documentation.

Children and young people need to understand their rights to be able to exercise them.

This bill supports the commissioner to help Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people understand their rights while also ensuring that their views, needs and experiences inform our decision-making.

In introducing this bill, I can't help but reflect on the many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people that I've met with and been inspired by over many years.

It makes me think of the young people in Redfern who wake up at 6 am three times a week to attend the Clean Slate Without Prejudice program, a program that instils a sense of pride and community through group activities and mentoring, and the amazing mentors that have grown out of that program.

They're making great choices every day. They are disciplined, they're committed and, when they show up, they're learning lifelong skills.

I think of Jasmine Yunupingu, who created the Girl Power Group in 2021. That saw her use her own money to cook and share a meal with victims-survivors of sexual violence, so they felt safe enough to tell their stories.

Or the young Indigenous rangers that I met in Murujuga, who are protecting and managing the now World Heritage listed site and its two million petroglyphs, some of them so old that the tectonic plates of the earth have shifted and they lie on seabed floor. These rangers have shared with me the importance of learning from their elders, managing their cultural heritage and protecting their country for future generations. This has been a common story for all of the young Indigenous rangers that I've met around the country.

And, of course, I think too about the young people on our youth advisory group for the Create Foundation, who are drawing on their experiences in out-of-home care to change the system for the next lot of kids.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are heirs to over 65,000 years of continuous culture.

They have a right to learn their culture and language, just as they have a right to stay connected to their country, their family and their community.

And, of course, they have a right to a safe home, a right to health, a right to an education that allows them to find their purpose, to find meaning and to find a job.

Too often, though, government policy has damaged and disrupted their young lives.

It was a Labor government that said sorry for the laws and policies of successive parliaments and governments that created these harms.

It was a Labor government that apologised for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and country.

And, today, it is a Labor government that is promoting and protecting the cultural identity and development of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people with this bill.

To get there, we'll ensure this legislated national commissioner is resourced properly.

Our government is investing a total of $33½ million over the four years from 2025-26 and $8.4 million a year ongoing to support the commission's operation.

This funding will ensure that the national commission has the staff, capabilities and capacity to deliver on and comply with its intended statutory functions and obligations.

What parents and families want for their children is the opportunity to succeed, now and into the future.

When we get it right for children and young people, our entire nation benefits.

Every child deserves to grow up connected to their family, community and culture. They deserve to be heard, to be protected and, of course, to be loved.

They should expect that, with hard work, no job, dream or opportunity is off limits to them.

This bill will drive meaningful change for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people that can be sustained throughout their lives, benefiting each one of them and, of course, all of us as Australians.

Debate adjourned.

I move:

That the bill be now read a second time.

The National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2026 is part of a package of two bills which together will create the statutory office of the National Commissioner for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People and the commission as a statutory agency.

This bill provides for the transition of the executive agency, established in January 2025, and the incumbent national commissioner to the permanent statutory agency and statutory office.

Debate adjourned.

I move:

That the bill be now read a second time.

Since the Albanese Labor government was first elected, we have been hard at work restoring trust in Australia's social security system.

This is one of the critical tasks of government, because, without the trust of the Australian taxpayer and income support recipients, the social security system loses legitimacy in the eyes of the community.

That was the legacy of the coalition government and of robodebt.

Across consecutive budget cycles and record funding, the government has restored fairness and adequacy for many income support recipients by raising the rate of working-age and student payments to help ease cost-of-living pressures. Since we were elected, we have increased the annual single rate of JobSeeker payments by almost $4,000. This is as a result of the government's real increase to working-age and student payments of $40 per fortnight, along with regular indexation. We have increased Commonwealth rent assistance maximum rates by nearly 50 per cent through real increases in 2023 and 2024 as well as indexation. We are providing more support through our changes to parenting payment single, which has expanded eligibility for the payment to around 106,000 single parents. We are expanding paid parental leave to a total of 26 weeks by the middle of this year, with superannuation now paid on top of paid parental leave.

Parents who have a child today can receive almost $12,000 more through the Paid Parental Leave scheme than when we first came to government.

And, from 20 January 2026, the government will increase the small debt waiver threshold to $250, to be indexed annually, with around 1.2 million small debts expected to be waived or no longer needing to be raised in 2025-26 as a result.

Access to special circumstances debt waivers was also expanded for more victims of financial abuse and coercion, specifically those coerced into providing false information to the government by their abusers.

The Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 1) Bill 2026 marks another important milestone in strengthening the legal framework for Australia's social security system. It's a largely technical bill and reflects the need for social security legislation to be dynamic and to evolve with the policy intent of government and as external challenges demand.

The bill also responds to priorities identified through the Legal Compliance and Remediation Program within Services Australia. Many are being resolved simply by policy or system changes in Services Australia, but other changes require legislation. Again, the robodebt era saw too many of these hidden away, put in the too-hard basket or left for someone else to fix. Minister Gallagher and I are responding to these issues as they arise and as they come to our notice.

This bill gives legal clarity to long established practice and policy intent across four key areas: firstly, clarifying the commencement date of child support periods when the Child Support Registrar receives information about a parent's tax assessment; secondly, clarifying that child support eligibility is limited to those with more than 35 per cent care of a child; thirdly, allowing for urgent payments to be provided to eligible recipients outside the standard fortnightly cycle; and finally, upholding as existing arrangements for the assessment of employment income, particularly income earned by support by partners of income support recipients.

The bill amends the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, the Assessment Act, to allow a child support period to start a month later than currently provided for if a new child support assessment is made after the 15th day of the month. This ensures that parents have sufficient time to adjust to a new child support assessment before it comes into effect. Currently, where a new tax assessment is received by the Child Support Registrar after the 15th day of the month and a new child support assessment is made in that same month, the legislation requires that a new child support period commence from the start of the next month. That means in practice that parents may have as little as one day to adjust to a new child support assessment. The amendments will ensure that where a new child support assessment is made after the 15th day of a calendar month, the new child support period will begin from the first day of the second month following the assessment. The practical effect here is that, when a new assessment is made requiring a higher or lower child support payment, we ensure that parents have the following month to prepare for the change instead of potentially just one or two days.

The bill also amends the Assessment Act to fix legislative anomalies that could allow parents with less than 35 per cent care of a child to be entitled to child support. It is a longstanding principle of the system that a parent or carer who has less than 35 per cent care of a child is not eligible to receive child support for that child as they do not bear a significant enough burden of the direct costs of care. In most cases, the existing legislation ensures a parent with more than 65 per cent care is not required to pay child support. This ensures parents who provide the clear majority of care have sufficient resources to financially support their children. These amendments ensure that a parent with less than 35 per cent care is not entitled to receive child support, and it validates decisions made since 2008 with that effect.

These amendments are necessary as amendments made in 2008 and 2018 to child support law had the unintended consequence of technically allowing some parents with less than 35 per cent care to be eligible for child support. It was never the intention of parliament to make such a change, and these amendments correct this technicality. The amendments will also validate previous decisions which have been made on this basis to provide certainty for parents and carers, and the changes uphold the objects, principles and policy intent of the Child Support Scheme and reflect consistent practice over decades.

While these two measures clarify technical legal aspects of the current operation of the Child Support Scheme, I'd like the House to note that there is much more work to be done to ensure the scheme delivers children the financial support they are owed and is safe for women at risk of violence or abuse. I expect to have more to say on further improvements to the child support system later this year.

The bill also amends the Social Security Act 1991 and the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 to strengthen the legislative basis for making urgent payments to people experiencing financial difficulties in exceptional and unforeseen circumstances.

Urgent payments are a longstanding and important part of the social security system, providing immediate financial assistance to vulnerable people in emergency situations.

An urgent payment is not an additional payment but enables a person to receive a portion of their usual fortnightly entitlement early.

Currently, a person can generally only receive two urgent payments in a 12-month period. This limit will be removed.

Instead, other safeguards will be implemented to ensure people still have enough funds on their usual payment delivery day to cover their regular expenses.

These safeguards will include limiting the payment amount to a maximum of between $20 and $200, and up to 50 per cent of the person's accrued entitlement (whichever is lower) after any deductions (such as Centrepay) or repayments have been accounted for.

People who access a high number of urgent payments will also be offered personalised support. This could include referrals to financial counselling services or to social work services, as well as alternative payment arrangements like weekly payments and Centrepay.

The government has increased funding for frontline emergency relief and financial wellbeing services by 25 per cent. These services are a lifeline when people are doing it tough.

And we've expanded our No Interest Loans Scheme, with more than $48 million over five years supporting people and families on low incomes. This gives them access to safe, fair loans with no interest, no fees and no charges. Every year, around 25,000 of these loans help Australians cover essential expenses without falling into debt traps. Making sure that people who are frequently making use of urgent payments know about these services and are able to use them is an important way of helping people manage their money longer term.

Finally, the bill amends the Social Security Act 1991 to clarify the legal basis for the operation of employment income attribution provisions, which support the determination of a person's rate of social security payment.

In particular, these amendments will clarify that these provisions apply to the employment income of a social security recipient's partner, for the purposes of income testing that recipient, and that the provisions apply at any time employment income is being assessed for the purposes of working out a recipient's rate of pension or benefit.

These amendments will uphold long-established policy intent and practice. They will ensure that there is no ambiguity around how employment income, particularly partner income, should be assessed when determining a recipient's rate of payment.

Together, the amendments in this bill improve the fairness and effectiveness of our social security safety net and ensure that there is legislative clarity in how the social security system supports people when they need it most.

Debate adjourned.

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Today, the government introduces the 2025-26 additional estimates appropriation bills. These bills are Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2025-2026, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-2026 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2025-2026.

These bills underpin the government's expenditure decisions made since the 2025-26 budget that relate to the 2025-26 financial year, including decisions made in the 2025-26 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO).

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $9.2 billion. This provides funding for the 2025-26 financial year costs of measures announced since the 2025-26 budget and ensures there is sufficient appropriation to cover variations in existing programs—for example, changes in costs for demand-driven programs.

The bill provides funding to support the following significant items.

The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water will receive over $2.9 billion, predominantly to continue support for the Cheaper Home Batteries Program.

The Department of Health, Disability and Ageing will receive over $1.5 billion for various programs to improve the wellbeing and social and economic participation of people with disability, continue to ensure access to medicines, deliver evidence based health policy, improve access to comprehensive and coordinated health care and protect the health and safety of the Australian community. Funding includes $876 million for the National Disability Insurance Agency to provide reasonable and necessary supports for National Disability Insurance Scheme participants. The department will also receive $101 million to support Strengthening Medicare reforms.

The Department of Defence will receive over $1 billion, including $985 million brought forward for updated expenditure requirements to implement the 2024 National Defence Strategy and 2024 Defence Integrated Investment Program.

The Department of Home Affairs will receive $881 million to implement various programs to ensure Australia's security, prosperity and unity by safeguarding Australia's domestic interests from crises and threats, supporting the government response to the antisemitic Bondi terrorist attack and delivering on the government's 2025 election commitment to maintain Australia's cohesive multicultural society.

Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the portfolio additional estimates statements.

I commend this bill to the chamber.

Debate adjourned.

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2025-26 seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $3.5 billion for the 2025-26 financial year. These appropriations will support the following significant items.

The Department of Defence will receive over $2 billion, including $1.5 billion brought forward to support the delivery of capabilities prioritised within the 2024 National Defence Strategy and the 2024 Defence Integrated Investment Program.

The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water will receive $411 million, mainly to fund further voluntary water purchases to support water recovery targets under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

The Department of the Treasury will receive over $325 million to provide loans to Housing Australia to support social and affordable housing projects as part of the Housing Australia Future Fund (HAFF), including HAFF round 3, which was announced in the 2025-26 MYEFO.

Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum, and the portfolio additional estimates statements.

I commend this bill to the chamber.

Debate adjourned.

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) provides additional appropriations of $9.2 million for the operations of parliamentary departments, specifically the Department of the House of Representatives and the Department of Parliamentary Services, for the remainder of 2025-26.

Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum, and the portfolio additional estimates statements.

I commend this bill to the chamber.

Debate adjourned.

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I am pleased to introduce the National Health Amendment (Passive Immunological Products) Bill 2026.

This bill expands the definition of vaccine in the National Health Act 1953 to enable new and emerging therapies to be listed on the National Immunisation Program.

The government is committed to ensuring that Australians can access the most clinically effective products through the National Immunisation Program. This includes the provision of new and emerging therapies, such as immunising monoclonal antibodies.

One example is Beyfortus, which protects children and babies from respiratory syncytial virus, also known as RSV—much easier to say. In 2025, there were 78,000 cases of RSV in young children. The virus can lead to serious chest infections in babies and also lead to long-term respiratory problems such as asthma that persist into adulthood. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee has deferred a positive recommendation for Beyfortus because they are unable to recommend this product for inclusion under the NIP until the definition of a vaccine under the act is amended.

Currently, new therapies are unable to be listed on the National Immunisation Program as they do not meet the current vaccine definition. Not listing new and emerging therapies will make it harder for Australians to access the health care that they need.

Australians may miss out on innovative immunisation products that are readily available in other countries. Furthermore, not being able to list new and emerging therapies on the National Immunisation Program may lead to a fragmented approach in accessing these products nationwide.

The bill will also contribute to the priority goals of the National Immunisation Strategy for Australia 2025-2030 which was released in June last year. Most notably, expanding the definition of vaccine will make a positive contribution to the strategy's priority areas of improving access to immunisation and to harnessing new therapies to respond to the evolving disease and vaccine landscape.

A flexible National Immunisation Program that is fit for purpose in a rapidly evolving healthcare environment is important for all Australians. As new and emerging therapies are developed, steps must be taken to ensure that the program remains as effective as possible.

The bill demonstrates the government's commitment to protecting Australians against preventable diseases by enabling access to the latest therapies nationwide and providing these products free of charge to eligible people in Australia

Debate adjourned.

by leave—I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

Back in 2022, before this government was elected, people in my community and many others were struggling to afford to pay for their medications. Back then, a PBS prescription cost $42.50. For a script that was filled monthly, that was many hundreds of dollars a year annually. But since then, this government, this Albanese Labor government, has acted to address it with two cuts to the cost of PBS prescriptions. Australians are paying only $25 per script. That same monthly refill is now $200 cheaper over the course of the year. Importantly, the freeze for pensioners and concession card holders at just $7.70 has been extended to the year 2030. Additionally, the government has listed hundreds of medicines on the PBS over the last 3½ years, including treatments for prostate, breast and lung cancers, bringing medical breakthroughs within the financial reach of Australian patients. This is an agenda for the PBS that is working, and Australians are seeing the benefits to the tune of $1.7 billion saved nationwide, including $7.8 million in my own electorate of Banks.

While Labor created the PBS, our agenda for Australia's health goes beyond access to medications. We are also investing in the nation's other great healthcare program: Medicare. During the last term of parliament, the government tripled the bulk-billing incentive for those in our communities who need access to a GP the most and saw the results of this. Now the government has delivered on its commitment to make the largest investment in Medicare since it was created and extended the bulk-billing incentive to every Australian for the first time to make sure that 90 per cent of GP visits are bulk-billed by the year 2030. In my electorate alone, 18 GP clinics indicated that they were shifting over to becoming fully bulk-billing clinics, bulk-billing every single patient.

With the launch of 1800MEDICARE, Australians have access to a 24/7 telehealth service when they need help after hours. When Australians need help that requires a little bit more than a standard GP consultation can provide—urgent but not life-threatening—they can turn to the government's network of fully bulk-billed Medicare urgent care clinics, including the clinics at Bankstown and Carlton that service the people of my electorate. At every turn those opposite have tried to talk down these clinics, unfortunately, but the results speak for themselves. In October last year we saw the two millionth visit to an urgent care clinic. Given that a majority of visits have either been on weekends or after 5 pm on a weekday, when GP clinics are typically closed, this is literally hundreds of thousands of patients who would otherwise have ended up in a hospital emergency department or, worse, not getting any care at all. They're getting the support and care they need in a more appropriate setting and taking the pressure off our hospitals.

While urgent care clinics are taking the pressure off our hospitals, we still need to make sure we are providing the comprehensive investment in our hospitals and healthcare system that Australians need. At the election we promised to put back every dollar those opposite ripped out of our healthcare system when they were in government, and last year the government delivered $1.8 billion in funding for hospitals, including $407 million for hospitals in my home state of New South Wales. Last Friday we saw the next step in this investment, with a historic deal to contribute record funding to public hospitals through another $25 billion across every state and territory in our great country. This investment in our public hospitals will improve care, cut waiting times and tackle ambulance ramping. It is a demonstration of what is possible when the government of the day is serious about health care.

To make sure that those hospitals and the rest of our healthcare system have the staff they need to provide the high-quality care that every single Australian deserves, we are investing in our healthcare workforce as well, with an extra 17,000 doctors entering the system in the last two years. This is the biggest growth out of any time in the past decade.

Finally, this government recognises that for too long many people in our community have not had their health needs taken seriously, principally among them Australian women. This Labor government is changing that with half a billion dollars of investment. We've opened 22 endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics and are in the process of opening 11 more across the country. We're making longer GP consultations possible for women experiencing menopause, and we're making both short-term and long-term contraceptives more affordable and accessible, making sure we're supporting women's health care at every single stage.

In closing, this government took an ambitious agenda to the Australian people in May last year, and we are delivering on those promises that we made, be it investing in bulk-billing or cutting the cost of PBS medications—not for the first time, but the second—or making changes in the legislation before this House to improve access to medication and to utilise the skills of our healthcare workforce. It is only this side of the House, this Albanese Labor government, who will continue to be busy fighting for the Australian people, including in my great electorate of Banks.

I rise to speak in support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill. This reform reflects our government's ongoing commitment to maintaining and strengthening the services that millions of Australians rely on each and every day.

In my electorate, interactions with our healthcare system is a lived experience for many. It is something many people live with and seek access to every single day. It determines whether people can get to work, whether children can stay focused at school, whether students can attend their lectures and complete their studies, and whether older Australians can age with dignity, security and continuity of care. The belief that health care should be universal, accessible, affordable and of high quality is a core principle for members on this side of the House. That is why we made a clear commitment to prioritising a range of practical reforms that enable health professionals to deliver timely, accessible and effective care, and this bill does exactly that.

This legislation amends the National Health Act to let appropriately trained and endorsed registered nurses to prescribe certain medicines under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, ensuring that those medicines attract Commonwealth subsidy and remain affordable for patients. This is a critical follow-up to the reforms introduced in December 2024, which established a new registration standard to enable qualified nurses to become designated registered nurse prescribers of medicines.

Right across my electorate people tell me a familiar story. They are working hard. They are raising families. They are caring for ageing parents and relatives. For them, accessible health care plays an essential role in their day-to-day lives. We do not believe rising costs and a system perpetually under strain are inevitable. We believe they can be changed, reformed and strengthened. That is why it is so important to break down barriers that prevent families from accessing the health care they need. That's why, in allowing designated registered nurse prescribers to prescribe PBS subsidised medicines, we make better use of the skilled workforce already serving in our communities. We reduce unnecessary delays and we expand the access so people can get the treatment they need when they need it and at a price they can afford. This reform does not lower standards, it does not replace doctors and it does not compromise patient safety. It is carefully designed, nationally regulated and built on years of consultation and evidence.

Since 2017, the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia, working alongside the Australian Chief Nursing and Midwifery Officer, has undertaken extensive research and consultation on how registered nurses can safely and effectively contribute to improved health outcomes by working to their full scope of practice. That process has been deliberate and it has been sustained. It has involved regulators, clinicians, educators, medical organisations, primary care stakeholders and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health representatives. That matters, because health reform works best when it is done with the workforce not at the workforce. The national registration standard that underpins this bill reflects that approach. It is evidence based, nationally consistent and designed with patient safety as its priority.

When people ask whether this reform has been properly considered, the answer is clear: it has been years in the making. It is also important to note that consultation is not a process for its own sake. It's about confidence, it's about uptake and it's about adoption. Even the most carefully designed reform will fail if the workforce does not trust it, if employers do not understand it or if patients are unsure about it. Through consultation led by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia since 2017, designated nurse prescribing has been shaped into a model that clinicians understand, employers can support and patients can trust. The registration standard clearly sets out education requirements, clinical governance arrangements and partnership models. That clarity gives nurses confidence to step into these roles safely. It gives employers confidence to implement them responsibly, and it gives patients confidence that the care they receive is properly regulated and accountable. Many Australians rely on nurses as their most regular point of contact with the health system. When reforms are clearly explained, nationally consistent and professionally endorsed, people are far more likely to engage with the healthcare system early rather than delay treatment.

The Albanese Labor government's commitment to breaking down barriers to accessing health care neither starts nor ends here. Since coming into government, we have taken decisive action to strengthen our health system and expand access to care for all Australians. This bill builds on another major reform that came into effect that started this year: cheaper medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. From 1 January, the Albanese Labor government capped the cost of PBS medicines at $25, the lowest price since 2004. We've also continued to cap the cost of PBS medicines for pensioners and concession card holders at $7.70. This is policy designed to improve access to health care while also taking real action on the cost of living. It reduces barriers for families across the country when it comes to accessing prescription medicines. This is good health policy and good economic policy, because we know that, when people delay taking their medication, it leads to poorer health outcomes and an increase in the dependency patients have on our health system across the board and into the future.

Our government has not only made medicines cheaper. We have also made it easier and more affordable to access in-person primary care. Since coming to government, the Albanese Labor government has rolled out Medicare urgent care clinics right across Australia. These clinics are playing a vital role in providing timely access to care while relieving pressure on our emergency hospital departments. This model of primary care helps free up emergency departments and general practices across the country, reducing wait times, and gives patients and their families more options when they need it. We have also expanded Medicare with 24/7 over-the-phone medical support at no out-of-pocket cost, 100 per cent bulk-billed, through 1800MEDICARE. On this side of the House, we understand that health care is accessed in different ways and at different times. Our policies reflect that reality and ensure care is accessible when Australians need it.

I'm proud of these reforms, and the truth is that none of them would be possible without our record investment in Medicare. Medicare is the foundation of Australia's health system. It's not just a green card. It is access to world-class, reliable, affordable and dignified care. Labor understands the value of Medicare today just as we did 42 years ago, when Medicare was launched in 1984 by the Hawke Labor government. It was Labor that rebuilt our universal health system after attacks on Medibank, another Labor reform introduced by the Whitlam Labor government. Labor made Medicare, and it is Labor that will always fight to protect and strengthen it. Once again, it has fallen to a Labor government to repair Medicare after a decade of neglect by those opposite, a decade in which Liberals viewed health care through the lens of ideology and profit. It seems that culture of neglect has not left them even in opposition, as they remain consumed by internal squabbles, internal division and an inward-looking focus on themselves rather than a vision for Australia defined by opportunity and possibility.

When I was first elected, fewer than 40 per cent of general practices in my electorate bulk-billed. Today, that figure stands at 90 per cent, more than doubling. That is an extraordinary achievement that is only possible under a Labor government and a Labor government delivering on its commitments and true to the values which guide it. I've visited clinics in my community that have taken up our bulk-billing incentives, including the Craigieburn Medical and Dental Centre, which moved to 100 per cent bulk-billing following our reforms. I visited the centre alongside Minister Butler and met the dedicated health professionals delivering primary care and working collaboratively with the Northern Hospital in mitigating risks to patients. What stood out was their commitment to serving our community, particularly our most vulnerable residents, and the importance of governments backing them with real investment.

This past weekend, I was pleased to join the team at the Annadale Family Medical Centre as it reopened after having been out of operation following a tragic fire. It returned to deliver fully bulk-billed medical and allied health care to our community. I give a shout-out to the team there and to the team at Happy Hippo Kindergarten and Childcare in Mickleham. Medical care and child care are essential services families in my community rely on and two things our government is proudly delivering on. That is what real, effective and on-the-ground policy looks like, translated on the ground with organisations in our community doing amazing work in helping local families thrive.

This remarkable turnaround in bulk-billing in my community reflects what is happening across the country. Our government's investment will deliver an additional 18 million bulk-billed GP visits annually. It will see the number of bulk-billing practices triple to around 4,800 nationally, with nine out of 10 GP visits bulk-billed by 2030. This bill is about making our health system work better for the people who rely on it not in theory but in practice. It recognises that the demand on the health system is real, but it rejects the idea that inaction is the only response. It makes sensible use of the skills already present in our workforce, supports safe and regulated care and removes unnecessary barriers that delay treatment and drive up costs for patients and the system alike. By enabling appropriately trained registered nurses to prescribe PBS subsidised medicines, we improve access, reduce pressure elsewhere in the system, ensure Australians can get the care they need when they need it and expand our healthcare system in sustainable ways. That is good policy. It is responsible reform and it is exactly the kind of practical change our communities expect from their government. This bill builds on a broader agenda: strengthening Medicare, lowering the cost of medicines, expanding bulk-billing and improving access to primary care right across the country. Together, these reforms are about protecting the integrity of our universal healthcare system and ensuring it remains fit for purpose.

Yesterday, I joined nurses in parliament in support of primary healthcare nurses. They reminded us of the value of patients when nurses are trusted to work to their full scope of practice, something this legislation helps deliver. They reminded us that nurses don't choose this profession because of buildings or systems, but because of a deep commitment to care. And they reminded us that, when illness shrinks a person's world and when fear, uncertainty and vulnerability take hold, nurses are there—present, skilled, compassionate, delivering care when it is needed most and in the ways that matter most. That is the magic of this profession, and it is why this parliament must do everything it can to support nurses to do what they do best: care for people with dignity, skill and humanity. Health care should never depend on where you live, how busy the system is or how long you can afford to wait. This legislation moves us closer to a system that is fairer, more efficient and more responsive to the realities Australians face every day. I commend the bill to the House.

Australians expect a health system that is accessible, affordable and built around patients. The Albanese government understands this and has been working to make it a reality since coming to office. We have strengthened Medicare. We have invested in the workforce. We've expanded access to care in the community. And the bill before the house today is the latest step in that work.

I rise to speak in support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025. This bill delivers a practical reform to the way our health system operates and to the way Australians access timely care. It amends the National Health Act to allow designated registered nurses to prescribe certain medicines under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. It is a significant reform that goes to the heart of our government's agenda, strengthening Medicare, modernising the workforce and ensuring Australians can receive high-quality care when and where they need it. This legislation builds directly on the work of the Strengthening Medicare Taskforce and the Unleashing the Potential of our Health Workforce review. Both found that highly trained nurses are too often prevented from working to their full scope of practice by outdated regulatory settings. Allowing trained and endorsed registered nurses to prescribe under the PBS is about using the skills already in our system more effectively. It makes sense. It will reduce unnecessary duplication of appointments. It will ease pressure on general practice and, importantly, emergency departments. It will improve access to care, particularly in regional and outer metropolitan communities like mine.

Importantly, only registered nurses who meet the standards set by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia will be eligible for endorsement as designated nurse prescribers. The list of medicines will be assessed by the independent Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, ensuring clinical rigour and patient safety remain paramount. The legislation also extends the Professional Services Review Scheme to designated nurse practitioners and prescribers, providing the same peer review oversight that applies to other PBS prescribers and safeguarding the integrity of the system. These safeguards matter. They demonstrate that the government is expanding access and. importantly, maintaining the high standards Australians rightly expect. This is reform done properly.

This bill also sits within the Albanese government's broader effort to rebuild Medicare after a decade of neglect. This government has responded with the largest investment in Medicare in its history. We have tripled the bulk-billing incentive for concession cardholders and children. We've expanded Medicare urgent care clinics to take pressure off hospitals and provide walk in care for urgent but non-life-threatening conditions. In my electorate, that includes the Torquay Medical Urgent Care Clinic, which is already making a real difference for families across the Surf Coast and the rapidly-growing township of Armstrong Creek. Like the Belmont urgent care clinic in Geelong, the Torquay service is giving people confidence that they can get seven-day-a-week bulk-billed care close to home. They are easing pressure on the Geelong University Hospital emergency department and they're ensuring that local health workers can deliver care in the right setting at the right time.

We have invested in general practice, headspaces, aged care, women's health, mental health support and primary care infrastructure, and we're investing directly in our GP workforce. The Albanese government is investing $14.5 million to deliver an additional 306 new GP training places in 2026 through the Australian General Practice Training Program. This investment will bring the total number of doctors starting GP training to around 2,100, a 14 per cent increase on 2025, something we should be proud of. With the Albanese government's continued investment, more doctors have joined the Australian health system in the last three years than in any time in the past decade. Doctor registrations jumped more than 30 per cent in 2024-25 compared to 2021-22. No health system can function without the people who staff it, and no amount of bricks and mortar can substitute for a well-supported workforce.

The future of primary care is team based. It is multidisciplinary. It recognises that doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners and allied health professionals all have an essential role to play, and this bill reflects that reality and builds on it. Designated registered nurse prescribing does not undermine general practitioners. It supports them. It ensures straightforward cases are dealt with efficiently, freeing doctors up to focus on complex and chronic conditions. It strengthens continuity of care and it helps practices operate more sustainably in a tight labour market. In community clinics, aged care and disability services, the ability for trained nurses to prescribe PBS medicines will mean fewer delays and better outcomes for patients, which is what we all want. In community clinics, aged-care and disability services, the ability for trained nurses to prescribe PBS medicines will mean fewer delays and better outcomes for patients which is what we all want. That is good policy.

The benefits of this reform will be felt most strongly in regional and fast-growing communities like the one I represent. In places such as Armstrong Creek, Torquay and across the Bellarine, population growth continues to drive demand for local health services. Residents regularly tell me how much they value being able to access high quality care close to home, particularly after hours or on weekends. Workforce reforms are not an abstract thing for these communities. It's about making local clinics stronger and more accessible. It's about ensuring emergency departments are reserved for the most serious cases, and it's about supporting older residents and people with disability to stay healthy in their own communities.

This bill also complements the government's work to make medicines cheaper and more accessible to Australian families. More than 610,000 Australian women have already saved money since essential women's health medications were listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme last year. New contraceptive pills, the contraceptive vaginal ring, three new hormone therapies for menopause and medicine for endometriosis were among the treatments made available at subsidised PBS prices for the very first time. Women suffering from endometriosis have the greatest individual benefit. More than 6,000 women accessed endometriosis treatments at PBS prices, saving over $4 million in total, more than $668 each on average. That is an important cost-of-living measure.

Latest data shows that in the nine months to 30 November, women filled out more than 1.7 million prescriptions for these medicines and saved nearly $62 million. Around 340,000 women obtained menopause hormone therapies through more than 1.25 million scripts saving almost $38.3 million compared to previous prices, and more than 275 women accessed newly listed oral contraceptives, with total savings of almost $19.5 million and more choice. Savings have increased further as our government reduced the maximum out-of-pocket cost for PBS medicines from $31.60 to $25 while keeping the concessional co-payment at $7.70.

These listings are part of the Albanese government's landmark $792.9 million women's health package in the 2025-26 budget. That package also delivered new Medicare benefit scheme items for menopause and perimenopause health assessments, commencing on 1 July 2025. In the first five months alone, more than 61,000 women benefited from these new services. As Minister Butler has said:

All Australian women deserve to have their health issues taken seriously and given the priority they deserve.

What welcome news! Our government is doing exactly that, with a focus on giving women more choice, lower costs and better access to services and treatments. Many women in my electorate are thrilled with these changes. They tell me about it regularly. They can talk about contraception, and they are so pleased with the savings they are making. They told us they were being left thousands of dollars out of pocket for basic contraceptive scripts and could not access support for menopause for endometriosis. So we have acted, and women are now saving hundreds of dollars on the medicines they need.

These results show that record investment in women's health is working, and, from 1 January, all Australians are now saving even more with $25 PBS scripts. These reforms are making a real difference to household budgets and everyday lives. This bill builds on this philosophy. It's about lowering barriers and improving accessibility to health services. It's about making the system work better for patients, and it's about ensuring care is delivered where people live.

This legislation sits alongside the government's broader work to strengthen Australia's health and disability systems. Last week, National Cabinet reached a landmark agreement to deliver record funding for state and territory hospitals and to secure the long-term future of the NDIS. These reforms ensure Australians can rely on world-class public health care and disability supports while keeping those systems sustainable for future generations. The Commonwealth has committed an additional $25 billion for public hospitals—three times more than under the previous five-year agreement. Commonwealth funding will reach $219.6 billion between 2026-27 and 2030-31. That includes $24.4 billion through base funding and more than $600 million in targeted investment.

The Albanese government is backing in Medicare and our public hospitals, and this bill forms part of that wider commitment to strengthen our health system. For communities like mine, that means stronger regional services and better connected care. It means urgent care clinics working alongside hospitals, it means general practices supported by nurses and able to provide greater access for people to get the health support they need, and it means families having confidence in the future of our health and disability systems.

Taken together, this bill and the government's wider agenda reveal a clear and determined focus. We are strengthening Medicare. We are investing in the workforce. We are expanding access to health services in the community, and we're doing so responsibly, safely and with patients at the centre. This is not about grandstanding; it is about fixing everyday problems that are barriers to health and wellbeing, it is about reducing waiting times, it is about improving affordability and it is about securing the system for decades to come.

This bill is sensible and necessary. It empowers highly trained nurses, it improves access to PBS medicines, it relieves pressure across the system and it strengthens Medicare for the future. It reflects this government's commitment to evidence based policy and patient centred care. For these reasons, I commend the bill to the House and urge all members to support its passage.

Last year this government was re-elected with a clear commitment to strengthen Medicare, expand access to affordable medicines and ensure our health workforce can work to its full scope of practice. The Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025 is part of that commitment of the Albanese Labor government. It delivers on the government's commitment to ensure our health workforce operates at full scope, enhancing safe and timely access to medicines. It's a win for nurses and a win for all Australians.

At its core, this bill is about supporting and promoting access—access to care, access to medicines and access to a health system that works when people need it, not weeks later and only if they can afford to wait or travel. It recognises the truth that communities across Australia, including my electorate of Hughes, understand too well: as demand for primary health care grows, workforce pressures are becoming more acute and our system needs to make better use of the skilled professionals we already have. It was a truth not recognised by those opposite during their near-decade in office—a period during which the Leader of the Opposition, as health minister, distinguished herself as the only health minister in the history of Medicare never to increase the rebate for Medicare once—a goose egg! The health minister who went out for a duck on Medicare and extended Peter Dutton's Medicare freeze from two years to six years now leads the opposition. That shows Australians that what those opposite value: when you cut access to health in the Liberal Party, you get promoted. We are still cleaning up the mess that those opposite left in health and medication.

This bill represents part of those efforts to restore trust in affordable and accessible health care in Australia. It supplements our commitment to cheaper medicines. Since 1 January, medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme have cost no more than $25, a price they haven't been since 2004. It was action on our commitment to cheaper medicines, and this bill adds to that commitment.

This bill introduces historic reforms that empower nurses to work to their full scope of practice and improve access to medicines for people across Australia. Specifically, the bill amends the National Health Act 1953 to allow registered nurses who are endorsed under the new registration standard for scheduled medicines to become authorised prescribers for certain medicines under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. This means prescriptions written by designated registered nurse prescribers can attract a Commonwealth subsidy through the PBS, ensuring medicines remain affordable for patients.

The bill also amends the Health Insurance Act 1973 to ensure that prescribing services provided by designated registered nurse prescribers fall within the Professional Services Review Scheme. This ensures oversight, accountability and integrity within the system. These are sensible, measured reforms. They are firmly grounded in years of research, consultation and agreement across government and the health sector.

Since 2017, extensive research and consultation has been undertaken on how registered nurses can safely and effectively contribute to prescribing within their scope of practice. That work culminated in December 2024, when Commonwealth, state and territory health ministers approved a new registration standard, 'endorsement for scheduled medicines—designated registered nurse prescriber', under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act 2009. That standard came into effect in September 2025. It sets out clear, rigorous education and qualification requirements that a registered nurse must meet to obtain and retain an endorsement.

The first cohort of designated registered nurse prescribers is expected to complete their education, receive endorsement and begin prescribing from July 2026. This is a reform that hasn't been rushed. It's not an experiment; it's a carefully designed, nationally agreed framework. Importantly, it has been developed with extensive stakeholder consultation. The Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia consulted with the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, the Australian Medical Association, palliative care services, the Congress of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Nurses and Midwives and the Australian Primary Health Care Nurses Association.

Medical professionals have expressed support for designated registered nurse prescribing on the basis that it occurs in partnership with an authorised health practitioner under an active prescribing agreement. That partnership model remains central to this reform. Designated registered nurse prescribers will not operate in isolation. They will practice within clearly defined clinical governance arrangements that support patient safety and quality care. Primary care stakeholders expect that designated registered nurse prescribers will be able to prescribe PBS subsidised medicines in primary care, aged care, disability services, mental health settings and in acute hospital environments, particularly to support discharge processes and outpatient management.

For the people of Hughes, this means more timely care in the places they already access. It means community health clinics, aged-care facilities and hospital outpatient services can operate more efficiently. It means fewer unnecessary delays, fewer repeat appointments for administrative reasons and better coordination across the system. Currently, many registered nurses in primary care are highly skilled, highly educated and deeply experienced yet remain underutilised. Allowing them to prescribe certain medicines under the PBS boosts efficiency and allows GPs and nurse practitioners to focus on patients with more complex needs. That is good for patients. It's good for clinicians, and it's good for the sustainability of Medicare.

Designated registered nurse prescribing strengthens the health system by easing workforce pressures and building long-term capacity. It helps ensure the right professional is providing the right care at the right time. This is especially important in areas facing workforce shortages, including outer metropolitan, regional, rural and remote communities. The community at the southern tip of Sydney in Hughes is not immune to these pressures. Older Australians managing chronic conditions often need timely access to medicines. Carers and families balancing work and care responsibilities need health services that are responsive and accessible. As a result of a decade of neglect of Medicare, residents face long waits for appointments, particularly bulk-billed services, but bulk-billed services are coming back in Hughes. I've been visiting bulk-billing practices across my electorate that are seeing the value in Labor's investment in bulk-billing for patients and for doctors and healthcare professionals. There's more work to do, but it's work that this government is committed to doing, and this bill is part of that commitment.

Improved access to primary health care reduces avoidable hospital visits and preventable hospitalisations. When people receive timely treatment in the community, it reduces pressure on emergency departments and inpatient services. This bill supports that outcome. It also aligns with the Albanese government's commitment to cheaper medicines and the objectives of the National Medicines Policy. By enabling PBS subsidised prescribing by designated registered nurse prescribers, we ensure that medicines remain affordable and accessible. The list of medicines that designated registered nurse prescribers will be able to prescribe under the PBS will be determined through the independent Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. This ensures decisions are evidence based, clinically appropriate and subject to rigorous assessment.

Affordability matters in health care. For families in Hughes, the cost-of-living pressures are real. Health costs are not abstract. They are felt at the pharmacy counter, at the GP clinic and when people delay health care because they're worried about cost. This government is doing something about it, and we're doing it despite those opposite opposing every cost-of-living measure put forward by this government in the last term. Ensuring PBS subsidies apply to medicines prescribed by designated registered nurse prescribers removes unnecessary financial barriers.

This reform also supports continuity of care. In aged care and disability settings, designated registered nurse prescribers can respond more quickly to changes in a person's condition. In hospital settings, they support timely discharge and follow-up care, reducing the risk of re-admission. In mental health services, they can improve access to treatment and reduce delays that exacerbate distress. These are real, practical benefits that flow directly to patients.

The bill also ensures integrity and safety through appropriate oversight by amending the Health Insurance Act 1973 to include registered nurses under the Professional Services Review Scheme. This bill ensures that prescribing services are subject to peer review and accountability. This protects the integrity of the PBS and maintains public confidence in the system. Targeted consultation has occurred between the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing, Services Australia, the Professional Services Review and the Department of Veterans' Affairs to ensure alignment and smooth implementation.

States and territories are also doing their part. All jurisdictions are currently amending their drugs and poisons legislation to enable designated registered nurse prescribing by July 2026. This national alignment makes delivery of health care more streamlined right across this continent. It ensures consistency, clarity and safety across Australia.

This bill is not about replacing doctors; it's about supporting the entire health workforce to work together more effectively. It recognises the expertise of nurses and the vital role that they play across every part of the health system. It reflects the reality that modern health care is delivered by multidisciplinary teams, not in silos.

For the people of Hughes, this reform means a stronger, more responsive health system in southern Sydney. It means care that is closer to home, delivered sooner and more affordably. It means nurses who already provide trusted care in our community will be empowered to do more within a safe and regulated framework.

This bill is another example of the Albanese government delivering on its commitments to strengthen Medicare, support the health workforce and put patients first. It's a win for nurses, it's a win for patients and it's a win for the sustainability of our health system. I commend this bill to the House.

I too rise to speak in support of the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025. This bill is about making sure Australians can get the medicines they need when they need them without unnecessary barriers standing in their way. It really builds on our government's investment in health care and Medicare over the past few years. Of course, as we've heard from many of the speakers, we did have a decade of neglect under the Liberal and National parties when they were in government. It's taken a long time to build back and invest in Medicare and in health services. This bill today is part of our reforms to make sure that people can access health care when they do require it, particularly those in rural and regional areas. Our reforms have made a huge difference, and I'll go through some of the details later on about that.

This bill proposes amendments to the National Health Act 1953 and the Health Insurance Act 1973 to enable authorised nurse prescribers to prescribe certain medicines under the PBS. Under existing law, prescribing rights are confined largely to medical practitioners, dentists, optometrists, endorsed nurse practitioners and midwives. The reforms in this bill will mean that nurses are empowered to provide this care directly to the community, reducing the need to visit a GP or attend a hospital emergency department. It'll make a huge difference.

The reforms in this bill support the broader health workforce reform agenda of ensuring that health professionals are enabled to work to their full scope of practice. For a health professional, 'scope of practice' means the activities which they are competent and authorised to perform. As identified in the Strengthening Medicare taskforce report and the subsequent Unleashing the potential of our health workforce review, removing barriers and increasing incentives for all professionals to work to their full scope of practice is necessary in delivering better health outcomes. These reforms recognise that, while our registered nurses are highly educated and skilled, their skills have been underutilised in the primary health care system. The reforms also recognise that empowering nurses to work to their full scope of practice will strengthen our healthcare system by removing barriers, easing pressures on the workforce and building long-term capacity and sustainability.

Under state and territory legislation, some nurses are already prescribing medicines, particularly in primary care, community health and regional settings. But, without PBS prescriber status, their patients are forced to pay full price for their medicines. Two patients with the same condition, seeing two different qualified health professionals, should not face different out-of-pocket costs simply because one prescriber is recognised under the PBS and the other one is not. This bill closes that gap by creating a new category of prescriber under the PBS. The bill also contains very important safeguards to ensure that only nurses with appropriate training and professional qualifications are in fact authorised to prescribe.

Improving access to health care has been a key priority of the Albanese Labor government. We know the demands on our health system continue to increase. We have an ageing population and a growing number of people living with complex and chronic conditions. It has been at the heart of so much that our government has done in reforming health care and providing more services. The changes that I refer to today in this bill build on the work that we've done to deliver cheaper medicines, a stronger Medicare and just greater access to health care across the board. In fact, just recently we increased hospital funding. Record funding is another initiative of our government that's making a huge difference.

Of course, in 2022, we reduced the eligibility threshold for the PBS safety net to ensure that even more Australians had access to cheaper medicines and lower out-of-pocket costs. This included a 25 per cent reduction in the number of scripts a concessional patient must fill before the PBS safety net actually kicks in. We further slashed the cost of medicines in 2023, making the largest cut to the cost of medicines in the entire history of the PBS. This was the first time in 75 years that the general patient co-payment was reduced, and it saw the maximum cost of a general script falling about 30 per cent from $42.50 to $30.

We also introduced 60-day prescriptions to enable Australians with chronic or ongoing health conditions to get twice the medication on a single prescription. This means a reduction in the amount that people pay for medicines, fewer trips to the doctor and fewer trips to the pharmacist as well. And we froze the cost of PBS medicines for pension and concession card holders so that prices will stay at a maximum of $7.70 until the end of the decade. For areas like mine—we are very fortunate to have a high proportion of seniors in northern New South Wales—it makes a huge difference to have the certainty that it is $7.70 they will be paying. So many locals have told me the difference that makes to them and to their health care. Starting from 1 January this year, we delivered even cheaper medicines for all Australians by reducing the PBS general patient co-payments from $31.60 to $25. It's so low.

In my electorate of Richmond on the north coast of New South Wales, I'm very proud to have delivered on my 2025 election commitment, which was that a re-elected Albanese Labor government would deliver a Medicare urgent care clinic in the Tweed region. When I was campaigning, people were very keen to have this in place, knowing how well the urgent care clinics provide support and the difference that makes. When we talk about the urgent care clinics, we say that all you need is your Medicare card, not your credit card. That's the reality—just walk in there with your Medicare card. The one we have, the Tweed Heads Medicare Urgent Care Clinic, is based at the Tweed Health for Everyone superclinic. Our superclinic was delivered by a previous Labor government and provides wonderful services for the community. The urgent care clinic provides locals with the free, urgent care they need fully bulk billed, and it's open seven days a week from 7.30 am to 7.30 pm.

We officially opened the urgent care clinic last December. Since then, so many locals have told me that it's really filled a very crucial gap in the provision of healthcare services in our community. I've been told that since it's opened, there's been a daily average of 38 presentations. They have been incredibly busy providing that service, and it is making a massive difference. Nearly 60 per cent of patients who visit the Tweed Heads urgent care clinic would have otherwise gone to the emergency department of the Tweed Valley Hospital to access the care they need. So this shows this clinic in Tweed is easing the pressure on our local hospital. That is the feedback that I'm getting from health professionals and locals. It is making a massive difference for so many people—locals, seniors and families.

We're also delivering access to free walk-in mental health care for locals, with planning underway for a Medicare mental health centre in Tweed. The centre will be open for extended hours with no appointment or referral needed to access those services. A number of years ago, we opened the new headspace in Ballina. That's providing important support for younger people. We have an existing one in Tweed Heads, which does a remarkable job as well, but it's important that we have all these services here. As I said, that planning is underway for the Medicare mental health centre. It will make a huge difference in the community to have that operating.

We're also delivering on our election commitment to expand bulk-billing, and this has been an absolute game changer in my electorate and across the country. It's part of the single largest investment in Medicare since its creation 40 years ago. For the first time, Labor has expanded bulk-billing incentives to all Australians and created an additional new incentive payment for practices that bulk bill every patient. We've tripled the bulk-billing incentive for people who need to see their GP most often—pensioners, concession card holders and families with children. From 1 November 2025, we expanded those incentives to all Australians. It has been a huge success in my area and, I know, right across the country. We also introduced a new incentive payment for practices that bulk bill every patient. Since 25 November, a new bulk-billing practice incentive program is supporting practices that bulk bill all their patients. This is on top of the bulk-billing incentive, so fully bulk-billed practices receive an additional 12.5 per cent loading on their Medicare rebates.

Towards the end of last year, I visited the Wollumbin Medical Centre in Murwillumbah, where GPs informed me they were universally bulk billing, and that was due to two reasons. First of all, there were our increases to the bulk-billing incentives, but another major change that our government made was reclassifying the town of Murwillumbah from metropolitan to regional for healthcare services. I want to again acknowledge all of the community that worked so hard to make this happen. The fact that the previous Liberal-National government had classified it in that way, as a city, really inhibited a lot of people's capacity to access healthcare, so we changed that. I give special thanks to the health minister for that. Having that change is so important. That, combined with our bulk-billing incentives, means that places like Wollumbin Medical Centre fully bulk-bill everyone. I also invited the Minister for Health and Ageing back to the North Coast in October to visit the Tweed Banora Medical Centre in Tweed Heads South and speak to GPs who also started bulk-billing all their patients on 1 November.

Thanks to all these changes that our government's made, we now see right throughout the North Coast these wonderful signs in front of GP practices. They say, 'Medicare bulk-billing practice'. How great is it to see that sign? People know it's there. They know they can go in. They know they'll be bulk-billed. Those signs are now in the front windows of more than 20 bulk-billing practices, so it has expanded very quickly. That's going from Tweed Heads to Byron to Ballina, right throughout my electorate. We're seeing more and more practices that are fully bulk-billing.

Of course, on 1 January this year we also launched 1800MEDICARE, a free, nationwide, 24/7 health advice line and after-hours GP telehealth service. And now, of course, we're seeking to make health care more accessible through all the measures that we have in this bill. The reforms that are contained within this bill will also make a huge difference, and it's important because registered nurses are the most geographically dispersed health profession in Australia and comprise around half of the entire Australian health workforce. By enabling authorised nurse prescribers to prescribe certain medicines under the PBS, people will get better access to medicines closer to home. They won't have those associated costs with travelling further to see a doctor, and the delays in waiting for an available appointment will all be reduced. Again, this will also be another game changer when it comes to delivering health care. Of course, preventable hospitalisations that result in delayed access to medicine will also be reduced as well, and these reforms are the result of work already undertaken to improve access to timely, affordable and safe medicines and alleviate pressure on our health workforce as well.

Of course, there's been extensive research and the consultation that's been led by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia and the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Offices. This work led to the development of new standards for designated registered nurse practitioners, and in December 2020 for Commonwealth, state and territory health ministers approved the new registration standard to enable nurses to become authorised prescribers. From July 2026, it's expected the first cohort of nurse prescribers will complete their additional education and receive endorsement. That's just great news, particularly, as I say, for those of us in regional and rural areas. The reforms in this bill help align our health legislation with modern clinical practice. They strengthen patient access to subsidised medicines and support the evolution of the health workforce. And, of course, the bill complements existing practice by enabling a broader range of health providers to contribute effectively to patient care. And this is very important in context where medical workforce shortages can lead to delays or inefficiencies.

Ultimately, this whole bill is about putting patients first, and that has been our whole agenda with all of our healthcare reforms making sure we are putting patients first. It also, very importantly, recognises the skills of our nurses. And I do want to compliment all of our nurses in my region and across the country—both nurses and health professionals—for the remarkable work that they continue to do all of the time. This is a recognition of that. So it recognises the skills of our nurses, trusts the evidence and removes barriers that, quite frankly, don't make sense. It doesn't make sense that this had not been in place before. It's about ensuring that where a person lives or which qualified health professionals they see doesn't determine whether they can afford the medicines that they need, that they need then and there. By modernising our laws to reflect contemporary practice, we're strengthening Medicare; supporting the health workforce; and making our health system more responsive, more equitable and more sustainable into the future, because we do have that ageing population and we do have increasing clinical and complex care needs that are there. These investments right across the board are vitally important. I commend the bill to the House.

It's a pleasure to follow the member for Richmond. Having heard her contribution and how well she summarised the importance of this legislation, the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025, I feel she's left me with very little else to say!

I commence my own remarks by thanking the nurses in our health workforce—over 400,000 of them across the country, and, as the member for Richmond quite rightly pointed out, the most evenly spread and the largest health force sector we have in the country. Every day they provide patient care that is second to none in terms of the relationships they build with patients, the confidence they give them, and the counselling and support they give them to get through, in many cases, very difficult health issues. It's not surprising that, given the work they do, they are probably rated as the most trusted profession across all professions in the country.

That says a lot about the confidence the community has in nurses. That is not surprising when you think about the work they do, dealing each and every day with sometimes incredibly difficult situations—dealing with patients that have got very serious injuries, horrific injuries at times. They have to face that on a regular basis, whether it's drug-affected people or people with serious disability or even dementia; they're dealing with people who don't know what they're doing, and it's incredibly difficult and draining work. In particular, it can also be very risky work. I note that this year marks the 10th anniversary of the murder of South Australian nurse Gayle Woodford, in the outback in South Australia. I well remember that incident. That highlights the work nurses do and the risks they often take. I'm pleased to say that, as a result of what happened to Gayle, the laws were changed to try and provide a little bit more support and security for our nurses at the time.

Australia's health system is indeed one of the best in the world; again, we can attribute much of that to the work of the nurses and what they do. But even though it is a good health system here in Australia—and I think that would be widely accepted and recognised—the reality is it is under stress. We have an ageing population and a shortage of health professionals right across the health profession spectrum. Trying to fix that is not something we can do overnight, because, in each case, health professionals need years of training in order to do the work they do. The fact the sector is under stress is not good for patients, because at times they can't get in to see their GP or the health professional they need. Nor is it good for the health workforce themselves, who are put under incredible pressure and often have to work long hours in order to try and fit in demands from the patients that want to see them. Neither side wins unless we can fix the system.

Whilst it is something that will take time to fix, there are things we can do right now that will make a difference. The Minister for Health and Ageing, since his appointment as health minister, has been methodically working through the steps we need to take in order to bring the health system back to the level at which we would all like to see it. Empowering nurses to prescribe medications is one of those things we can do right now and are doing right now; I commend everyone who was involved in that decision and, having made that decision, bringing it to the House in the form of this legislation.

Not only do nurses have, in my view, the professional qualifications and, as I said earlier on, the confidence of the community to do what they do; their daily experience in dealing with the patients they deal with each and every day matters. It's sometimes the experience of being in the job that teaches you more than any academic training you get in universities. Whilst they are out there every day doing the work they do, they're learning on the job each and every day, which, in my view, makes them thoroughly accredited to prescribe and give medications to their patients. They know what will work as well as anybody else. They know what a patient needs when they see a patient as well as anybody else. Whilst this legislation does bring in some additional appropriate safeguards to ensure that nurses get additional training and oversight by a health professional working with them, it enables them to do what they know needs to be done—that is, when a patient needs certain medication, they are able to prescribe it for them.

In doing that, there are an enormous number of benefits. Firstly, the patient benefits because the patient gets immediate access to what they need. Secondly, it takes pressure off the health system because the patient doesn't have to wait for a doctor to come in—a doctor who may also be working long hours and unable to get there when the patient does. So it takes pressure off the doctor or the GP or whatever other health professional might have been called in. It also takes pressure off our emergency departments in our hospitals. For example, quite often people in aged care, where we now have registered nurses on duty 24 hours a day, need medical assistance. If the aged care premises can't get a doctor—and many doctors are not able to attend—then people are simply sent to the nearest hospital. That ties up medical staff at the hospital, and it ties up hospital beds as well. Having a nurse able to prescribe the medication that the patient needs will relieve an enormous amount of pressure on a whole range of different people within the health network more broadly.

It also means that, for people in remote and rural areas—which is where nurses play a particularly important role—there will be additional services. When you go into remote and rural areas, the chances of finding a doctor are very, very difficult; in fact, those are some of the areas where we have the least number of doctors. What we do have across the country is nurses in those places. Those nurses provide literally all the medical care that people need because there's no-one else. Again, enabling them to be able to prescribe medications is critical to them being able to do their job and to do it well for the patient. Apart from the fact that there are no doctors, the reality is that, for many of those people, travelling to the nearest centre where there is a GP practice or a hospital is sometimes impossible. In remote areas, travel isn't easy, and, even if people can get to a centre, it is costly. So this will save people both money and time. That is indeed a good thing.

As I said earlier, these decisions are not made flippantly. There is a process in place whereby nurses will get additional training. I understand that the first cohort of nurses providing prescriptions will be able to do so from 1 July. There is oversight. As I said earlier, they are working in partnership with an authorised health professional. These are some of the security measures that have been implemented as part of this legislation, and they are responsible measures. The nurses themselves, even before they get to this step, have had to show a level of experience within the workforce. I think they have had to have been a registered nurse for at least three years. So they're already experienced people, but that additional training and oversight ensures that there aren't any risks being taken.

I'm going to close with perhaps what all other speakers on this side of the House have closed with. This is another step in trying to reform our health system in this country. It is a health system that—as I have said from the outset—is good but can be better. We are getting there one step at a time. The 122 urgent Medicare clinics that have been opened across the country and the 15 clinics that are about to open will make a difference as well. The workforce is growing thanks to this government. We are slowly getting more doctors into the system. I understand that some 17,000 have been added in the last two years. We've tripled the GP bulk-billing incentive for pensioners, concession cardholders and kids, and since November that has been expanded to all Australians. The proportion of bulk-billing has risen from around 20 per cent in 2025 to now 40 per cent. We have literally doubled the number of GP practices that are now bulk-billing. That's all because we've tripled the incentive. As has been said time and time again, the price of PBS medicines has been reduced to $25. For concession card holders, the price will be $7.70 right through to the end of this century. The most recent hospital agreement means record funding for our hospitals.

I close with this comment: there's probably nothing more important to families than good health. Particularly when someone is unwell, there is nothing else that matters in their life other than their health because, without their health, they literally have nothing, so the health system does matter to people. We have a good health system. This is going to make it better. I commend this legislation to the House.

When this government was elected in 2022 and then re-elected in 2025, Australians made it clear that they wanted Medicare—the entire system—to be strengthened, not just protected but made to work better in practice. Of course, they were responding to nine years of Liberal neglect of Medicare, where the Medicare rebate was frozen for six long years by the former leader of the opposition and the current Leader of the Opposition. Left alone, the cost of medicines at the pharmacy would have reached $50 without Labor's intervention. Bulk-billing clinics were harder and harder to find.

People elected us to reform Medicare and to reverse that neglect because Medicare is something that people rely on every single day. In my electorate of Bennelong, strengthening Medicare has meant real and measurable change. It has meant millions of dollars saved on cheaper medicines and visits to a bulk-billed doctor for local families and retirees, providing real cost-of-living relief. We hear a lot of that term and this is real progress in families' budgets, where they're not spending as much on pharmaceutical medicines, where they're not spending as much to go and see a doctor. It has meant more people being able to see their doctor, being able to look after their health without reaching for their credit card, without punching a hole in that weekly or fortnightly pay packet, and it's meant real cost-of-living relief delivered through a health system that people trust and that Australians expect to have their back.

Since coming to government, our cheaper medicines reforms alone have saved billions of dollars nationally and, as I said, millions in my electorate. The cost of PBS medicines on 1 January dropped to $25, the lowest it's been since 2004. As I said earlier, had we not come to government in 2022 and incrementally reduced that cost, medicine today without Labor's intervention would have been close to $50 in out-of-pocket costs. Today it's half of that—$25 for people to get the medicines they need. Pensioners and concession card holders continue to pay no more than $7.70. A few years ago we froze that for five years.

Ask any pharmacist about this, about what our investments in Medicare have meant. Katrina from Blenheim Road Pharmacy, Rebecca from Eastwood Pharmacy, and George from Boronia Park and Gladesville pharmacies have all told me that these changes delivered by a Labor government that cares about Medicare meant that families haven't had to pick and choose what medicines they need to provide for their kids or provide for themselves. People used to go up and say, 'Well, I can't afford $42 this week across three medicines. Can you tell me which one I can skip?' Or they would say, 'My kids need some more medicine this week. I'm going to go without for the next fortnight.' That's all but gone now, because Labor has halved the cost of prescription medicines at pharmacies.

But it's not just about cheaper medicine or more bulk-billing; we're committed to reforming this Labor creation—Medicare—created in 1984. It's about reforming the system so it's fit for purpose today and is ready for the future of health care. It's about how easily people can access care and how smoothly the system works when they need to access care. Even with these reforms, people still tell me there are moments where the system gets in its own way, where they're seeing a qualified health professional, receiving appropriate care but yet still facing unnecessary delays, unnecessary appointments or avoidable inconvenience. That's exactly the kind of friction that our long-term health reform agenda is designed to address, and this bill is designed to reduce that friction. It builds on the work we've been doing to make Medicare more accessible, more flexible and better aligned with how care is actually delivered in a community like mine in Bennelong.

The Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025 is very important. It makes a targeted, practical change to the way medicines are accessed under the PBS. It amends the National Health Act of 1953 to allow designated registered nurses to prescribe certain medicines that are subsidised through the PBS. It also ensures that, when those medicines are prescribed, patients can access the same PBS subsidy that they would otherwise receive if those medicines were prescribed by a doctor. This isn't a broad rewrite of Medicare. It's not a change to who oversees primary care. It doesn't replace the role of doctors, particularly at initial prescription, but what it does is remove a barrier that no longer reflects how health care needs to be delivered on the ground. It gives easier access to medicines in a streamlined and more cost-effective way, not only for the system and the taxpayer but also for family budgets, meaning you don't need to go see a doctor to get a script for certain medicines. You'll be able to see a nurse to get that done—a huge change.

This change is needed because, in suburbs in Bennelong like mine, the demand for primary care continues to grow. Suburbs like Ryde, Lane Cove, Eastwood and Macquarie Park are all seeing general population growth because—let's face it—it's a great place to live, I've got to say, in Bennelong and some of those suburbs. We see a growth in population, and we also have an ageing population, so people need more access to primary care, when, as we've heard, there are constraints in the supply of qualified people to provide it.

Registered nurses are ready to serve more. They already play a critical role in access to primary care and aged care and in community health settings. In many cases, patients are already receiving appropriate care from these very highly trained nurses, but they still need an additional appointment or referral just to access a prescription. In 2026, I don't think that makes sense anymore. This bill will reduce that duplication. This reform will remove another friction point for people accessing primary care. It means that this care can be delivered more efficiently and without compromising safety standards. For older residents, it means fewer appointments at the doctor, less back and forth. Travelling to and from a doctor can be of concern for some of our older residents. This will help them with that. For working families, it means quicker access to treatment without having to take time off work, without eating into an already packed weekend. It means those families can get quicker access to the medicines they need.

This is a careful and deliberate reform. Only registered nurses who meet strict education, training and endorsement requirements will be authorised to prescribe. Prescribing will occur under a national registration standard, approved by health ministers, which is now in effect. Nurses will only prescribe within their scope of practice, clinical setting and level of competence. Prescribing services provided by nurse prescribers will be subject to existing professional oversight arrangements. These safeguards are important because they ensure prescribing is appropriate, evidence based and consistent with PBS requirements. The first nurse prescribers are expected to commence from July this year, following the completion of required education and training, because we understand that patient safety remains central to this reform, just as it is across every form of Medicare supported care. Australians should and can have confidence that the same standards will apply regardless of which health professional is providing this care and which health professional is prescribing these medicines.

This bill is not an isolated reform. This is a deliberate next step in the agenda that the government has to strengthen Medicare, things we've been doing progressively since we were elected in 2022. Rightly, we started by tackling affordability, cutting the cost of medicines and easing pressure on household budgets. We backed that up by expanding bulk-billed care, tripling the incentive for concession card holders and children under 16 and then making sure that tripled incentive was available to every Australian with a Medicare card. That's seen real results. Since 1 November last year, we've gone from nine bulk-billing practices in Bennelong to 14 bulk-billing practices in Bennelong, and we expect more to follow in 2026, meaning that more families, the elderly and other residents of Bennelong can access free bulk-billed care right across the community.

We've invested in Medicare urgent care clinics. Overdelivering on our promise to do 50, we have hit over 100 open right across the country—importantly, one in Top Ryde and one in Chatswood, promised and delivered by this government. We've expanded access to Medicare mental health centres so people can get the support they need without long waits or complex referrals through the mental health network. The Ryde mental health centre is now under construction and is expected to open in the first half of this year.

This is what strengthening Medicare is all about. It's about making sure that our system works, that it's fit for purpose in 2026 and that it's set up for the future. It's a system that should work for patients and for the clinicians delivering care. It's about getting people the right care in the right place at the right time. And in Bennelong, just like right across the country, those investments are making a huge difference, taking pressure off emergency departments with our urgent care clinics' open extended hours from 8 am to 10 pm in most cases; giving locals more options for free care through more bulk-billing; through the passage of this legislation, making it easier for people to get prescription medicine; and, of course, making that prescription medicine cheaper.

The future will put pressure on Medicare, and we need to make sure that our entire health system can respond to what will be challenges in our health system. Australians are living longer. More people are managing chronic and complex conditions, and demand on primary care will continue to rise. We can see that happening. Instead of cutting funding from Medicare, instead of neglecting Medicare, instead of freezing rebates like the Liberals and Nationals did for nine years with the same warnings we're getting now, we're setting up Medicare to ensure that it can deliver the care that Australians expect, just having that green and gold Medicare card. We'll continue to remove unnecessary barriers to help ensure that the system remains responsive and sustainable, particularly for growing communities like mine in Bennelong. And this will mean fewer delays. It'll mean better use of our health workforce, and it will give us a Medicare system that works the way people expect it to. The health legislation amendment bill is a practical continuation of the reforms that we've been putting in place since 2022, and I commend the bill to the House.

I rise to make my contribution to the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025. Australia arguably has the best health workforce in the world. They are well trained, up to date and regulated to ensure that best practice is followed. On the occasion when things do go wrong, we must admit and then do something about it. Our health system has checks and balances to ensure that the independent investigations are undertaken and appropriate measures are implemented to ensure better outcomes in the future. The demands of our health system are constant. We're all living longer and largely healthier lives, but, with an increasing population, this inevitably places more pressure on our system, particularly at our emergency departments and hospitals.

The Albanese government has implemented many initiatives since being elected to ensure that Australians can see a doctor when they need to and that they have the appropriate care that is required. Just last week, the Medicare urgent care clinic promised by the Albanese government in Werriwa opened for patients. It is opening extended hours, and it means that people seeking medical assistance for things like stitches or illness will not face the long wait in emergency departments. The government has made the biggest investment into the health system in decades, prioritising primary health care with bulk-billing initiatives. There are so many pillars to our health system. I've already mentioned EDs, hospitals and primary care, but there's also the PBS system, Medicare, bulk-billing, urgent care clinics, gold card benefits for veterans and the National Immunisation Program. Underpinning all of this is the world's best-trained health workforce.

The bill before us seeks to support our health workforce by amending the National Health Act 1953. Specifically, the bill supports the Albanese Labor government's election commitment to prioritise implementation of scope-of-practice reforms for nurses and midwives. In practical terms, the bill proposes to amend the National Health Act 1953 to allow a registered nurse endorsed against the registration standard to be an authorised prescriber. This will allow them to prescribe certain medicines that can be supplied under the PBS. Further, the bill will amend the Health Insurance Act 1973 to include registered nurses to enable review of the provision of their prescribing services by the Professional Services Review Scheme.

The government has consulted widely with groups including the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, the AMA, palliative care services, the Congress of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Nurses and Midwives and the Australian Primary Health Care Nurses Association. I am pleased that medical professionals support the designated nurse prescribing based on the requirement that they must practice in partnership with an authorised health practitioner under the active prescribing agreement.

It is anticipated that the first cohort of designated nurse prescribers will complete their education and receive endorsement from July this year. In anticipation of this, all states and territories are currently amending their drug and poison legislation to enable registered nurses to prescribe, to meet that 26 July timeframe.

Australia deserves the world's best health system, and, as part of this, we need to ensure that all Australians, wherever they live, can get affordable medicines when they need them and have them prescribed by someone they trust. This bill will help to deliver on this aim. Under this bill, highly trained designated nurses will be able to extend their scope of practice, primarily in primary care and aged-care services. This is good news for designated registered nurses, good news for patients, particularly in rural and remote areas, and good news for stressed primary and aged-care health settings in the rest of the country. I commend the bill to the House.

I thank the member for Werriwa and all of the other members for their contributions to this important piece of legislation.

The Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill amends the National Health Act 1953 to authorise designated registered nurses as prescribers under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, or PBS. These nurses will be able to prescribe specific medicines that qualify for Commonwealth subsidy under the PBS. This bill advances scope-of-practice reforms identified by the Unleashing the Potential of our Health Workforce review, as well as the Strengthening Medicare Taskforce.

Since 2017, the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia and chief nursing and midwifery officers have conducted extensive research and consultation on nurse prescribing models. The NMBA, the board, developed these standards for designated registered nurse prescribers through multiple rounds of public consultation, which received strong and broad support. All health ministers endorsed the scheduled medicines standard, which came into effect in September 2025, with the first cohort of nurses expected to complete their education and receive endorsement by July this year.

By enabling designated registered nurse prescribing under the PBS, the bill supports safe, timely and affordable access to medicines. Registered nurses can already prescribe. This bill enables them to prescribe under the PBS, improving affordability for consumers. It enables registered nurses to better meet community health needs and strengthens the health system by addressing workforce shortages and building long-term capacity and sustainability. As with other prescribers, the list of medicines that will be able to be prescribed under the PBS by a designated registered nurse prescriber will now be considered, if this bill passes, by the independent Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.

This reform aligns with the objectives of the National Medicines Policy, promoting equitable, affordable and timely access to high-quality medicines and related services. It also supports the government's commitment to deliver cheaper medicines to the Australian community. The bill also amends the Health Insurance Act 1973 to ensure that nurse prescribing under the PBS is also subject to the Professional Services Review Scheme. This peer review mechanism safeguards the integrity of the PBS and other Commonwealth programs.

Designated registered nurse prescribers must maintain an active prescribing agreement with an authorised health practitioner, like a medical practitioner or a nurse practitioner, ensuring appropriate oversight and collaboration in care delivery. This legislation supports the government's commitment to enabling Australia's health workforce to operate at full scope of practice. It delivers better access to cheaper medicines under the PBS.

I thank the member for Mackellar and the member for Mallee for their proposed amendments to the bill. The government will not be supporting these amendments. The bill has already undergone extensive consultation, as I said, going back to 2017. I also thank the member for Mackellar for her contribution, particularly on maintaining patient safety, which this government is committed to. That's why, only in the past week, I announced steps to deliver a national medicines record, ensuring that patients and their care teams can have accurate and up-to-date medicines information. A consultation process on the design of that medicines record will commence very soon, and, obviously, we'll take account of the change to nurse prescribing under the PBS, if this bill passes. I thank all members for their contributions to the debate on this important bill.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

I move:

(1) Schedule 1, page 12 (after line 4), at the end of the Schedule, add:

37 Application of amendments

(1) The amendments made by this Schedule apply only if a declaration under subitem (2) is in force.

(2) The Minister may, by notifiable instrument, declare that the amendments made by this Schedule apply on and after a day, or throughout a period, specified in the declaration.

(3) However, the Minister may make a declaration under subitem (2) only if:

(a) a trial of nurse prescriber treatments (within the meaning of the National Health Act 1953) is conducted in at least one State or Territory; and

(b) after the end of the trial, the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia conducts a review of the trial; and

(c) the review demonstrates a suitably supportive evidence base for the safety and effectiveness of the amendments made by this Schedule.

I rise to speak to the amendment circulated in my name to the Health Legislation Amendment (Prescribing of Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2025. This bill seeks to enable eligibility for PBS rebates for medications prescribed by a new category of prescribers, 'authorised registered nurse prescribers'. It acknowledges the essential role nurses play in our health system, especially in the regions, and the important work they do. It also acknowledges that nurses are the largest component of the health system and the most well-distributed workforce in regional Australia.

The Nationals want to see improved access to health care and progress for the nursing profession and for multidisciplinary care more generally. However, I am moving an amendment because implementation of new policy must have appropriate testing to ensure it is safe, effective and won't have unintended consequences. The Nationals have two key concerns. The bill is not evidence based, as it fails to follow normal processes where testing of any new model of care occurs in a state or territory in Australia prior to the application of PBS rebates, and this bill does not have a funding model to enable registered nurse prescribers to work in primary care as no funding model or structure has been developed. It is important to differentiate the new RN prescriber model from existing master's qualified nurse practitioners who are autonomous prescribers.

My amendment is that this legislation should not be enacted until there has been a trial or pilot of this new model of nurse prescribing in a state or territory which is then reviewed by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia to ensure suitability and a supportive evidence base for safety and effectiveness of the model. This is about following due process, ensuring accountability and transparency for Australian consumers and making good use of Commonwealth funds. There must be clear evidence that any new model of nurse prescribing will improve access to high-quality care, especially in the regions, and will not have negative unintended consequences for patient safety or continuity of care. RN nurse prescribers will still require an autonomous prescriber in primary care, such as a GP or a nurse practitioner, to oversee that prescriber. The problem is that there are not enough GPs or nurse practitioners in the regions now. How is this going to work?

The process of a nurse practitioner gaining PBS access was debated in the late 2000s, and nurse practitioners had already been prescribing under state and territory law for many years from the mid- to late-1990s. Governments, therefore, had real world prescribing data, independent evaluations, patient outcome studies and safety audits. These formed the evidence base for Commonwealth reform which enabled PBS access to commence from 2010, though restricted. Major reforms to PBS access for nurse practitioners have occurred only very recently. PBS access for nurse practitioners was based on extensive safety and effectiveness evidence in states and territories. That evidence was synthesised nationally. It directly informed the Commonwealth's decision to grant PBS access in 2010. PBS access was therefore an evidence based policy decision, not simply a political concession. While it arguably took many years too long, PBS access for nurse practitioners was a thoroughly evidence based policy decision, and this amendment seeks that the same evidence base be produced before implementation of the bill currently under consideration. I urge the House to support this amendment.

As I indicated, we won't be supporting this amendment. The effect of the amendment would really be to ensure that this particular group of registered nurses, who are now able to seek this endorsement through changes made by the board and will now be able to prescribe as state and territory parliaments change their legislation, which they have all committed to, will not be able to access the PBS. It would effectively make medicines more expensive for patients who had those medicines prescribed under changes that have already been decided on by the board and that are in the process of being made by state and territory parliaments. This legislation will simply ensure that those patients are able to pay PBS prices, not the market prices that the National Party would have them pay under their amendment.

I also indicate—and I think I said it in my summing up—that this has been the subject of almost a decade of consultation and modelling by the nurses' board. All the doctors' groups were involved in this as well as, obviously, a range of other groups. The member said that there was no funding available for this. As the member well knows—I know she's very familiar with primary care—the workforce incentive payment already supports the employment of registered nurses in primary care settings. This will simply ensure that they're able to do some more work subject, obviously, to the oversight of medical practitioners working in those practices. Importantly, this will also enable registered nurses, subject to the endorsement of the board, to play a prescribing role, in the appropriate way, in other settings such as: aged-care settings; hospital settings, including for discharge; mental health settings; and others. For those reasons, we will not be supporting the amendment.

The question is that the amendment moved by the honourable member for Mallee be agreed to.

by leave—I move amendments (1) to (4) as circulated in my name together:

(1) Schedule 1, item 11, page 5 (lines 7 to 11), omit subsection 84AAM(4), substitute:

(4) The requirements determined under subsection (3) must include the following:

(a) a requirement to hold particular qualifications in nursing;

(b) a requirement to have particular experience in nursing;

(c) a requirement to be endorsed by a particular body.

(2) Schedule 1, item 11, page 5 (line 17), after "The approval is subject to", insert "the condition that the eligible nurse prescriber does not prescribe Therapeutic Goods Administration Schedule 8 medications and".

(3) Schedule 1, item 11, page 6 (after line 11), after section 84AAN, insert:

84AANA Additional requirements for authorised nurse prescribers

(1) The Minister may, by legislative instrument, determine requirements that authorised nurse prescribers must meet.

(2) The requirements may relate to:

(a) participating in relevant real time prescription monitoring; or

(b) making contributions to the National Medicines Record.

(4) Schedule 1, item 11, page 6 (line 28), at the end of subsection 84AAP(1), add:

; or (e) has failed to meet a requirement determined under section 84AANA.

I wholeheartedly support the intention of this bill, as it responds to a clear need to improve access to Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme medications, ease workforce pressures and provide better access to health care for people living in rural and remote areas of Australia. However, serious concerns have been raised by key medical professional bodies regarding elements of this legislation. The amendments I have moved today seek to address those concerns.

Both the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners and the Australian Medical Association have expressed strong reservations about the bill in its current form. Their concerns go directly to whether the framework provides adequate protections for patients. Specifically, these amendments address three main concerns, including, firstly, that designated nurse prescribers should not be permitted to prescribe schedule 8 medicines, otherwise known as drugs of addiction, under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme; secondly, that there is currently no requirement for an eligible nurse prescriber to participate in real-time prescription monitoring or to contribute to the national medicines record; and, thirdly, that, unamended, the bill allows the minister to determine eligibility as a nurse prescriber by reference to one or more professional requirements, rather than requiring that all relevant clinical and professional standards be met.

The amendments I'm moving today will do three things. Firstly, they specify that designated nurse prescribers cannot prescribe schedule 8 medicines under the PBS, making this a condition on the minister's power under section 84AA. This is a strong recommendation of both the RACGP and the AMA. Schedule 8 medicines are classified as controlled drugs and include opioids such as morphine, oxycodone and fentanyl, which carry a high potential for misuse, dependence, addiction and harm. These drugs are subject to strict regulatory controls. Nurse practitioners are authorised health practitioners within collaborative prescribing frameworks. However, they do not possess the same depth or breadth of training as medical practitioners. Training in pharmacology, diagnostics, interpretation of test results and ongoing medication monitoring differs significantly between nurse practitioners and general practitioners. For this reason, the range of medicines that may be prescribed by nurse practitioners or nurse prescribers must be carefully balanced to ensure prescribing remains safe and appropriate. Given the high misuse potential associated with controlled drugs and the risk of increased fragmentation of care, schedule 8 medicines—the most dangerous and addictive drugs—should be excluded from the list of medicines that nurse practitioners can prescribe under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. These amendments would do just that.

Secondly, these amendments require that all the professional conduct attributes listed in section 84AAM form part of the definition of an eligible nurse prescriber. As the bill is currently drafted, the minister may determine eligibility by reference to one or more of these attributes. However, professional medical bodies would reasonably expect all nurse prescribers to meet all these requirements as a matter of course, including holding particular qualifications in nursing, having particular experience in nursing and being endorsed by a specified professional body.

Thirdly, the amendments add further safeguards by requiring nurse prescribers to participate in relevant real-time prescription monitoring systems and to make contributions to the national medicines record. Real-time prescription monitoring plays a critical role in identifying and preventing prescription misuse, prescriber shopping and unsafe combinations of medications, particularly where controlled drugs are involved.

These amendments respond directly to the concerns raised by professional medical bodies and ensure that any expansion of prescribing authority under the bill is balanced by robust and appropriate safeguards. Of course, it must be made easier and more affordable for people to access the prescriptions and treatments they need; equity of access to health care is an essential goal. However, it is also essential that we do not cause unintended harm by undermining patient safety. We must ensure we maintain a safe, strong and well-regulated medical system.

I thank the member for Mackellar for those remarks and also her engagement on this bill and other bills—particularly in the health portfolio, given her background. She raises some issues that are being ventilated in the Senate committee inquiry in relation to this bill, which is still underway; the committee hasn't yet reported. I reiterate what I said in response to the member for Mallee's amendments—that this change, that's been endorsed by the board and will be the subject of enabling legislation at state and territory level, has been the subject of nine years of work, with patient safety right at the core of that work.

I'm glad to hear the member for Mackellar's comments around the national medicines record that I announced last week. 'Prescriber shopping', which was the term the member for Mackellar used, has become much more of a challenge in a telehealth environment. Some tragic cases, one in particular, led to the government making that announcement last week to ensure all prescribers—because that was a question of the number of doctors prescribing—have access to and actually use the records. As I said in response to the member for Mallee's amendments, we've made the announcement. There will now be a process of consultation to design the national medicines record, and we will obviously take account of any change to the prescribing population as we go forward.

The other comments, though, that the member for Mackellar makes about the submissions that the college and the AMA have made to the Senate committee, we will take into consideration if this bill passes the House and then moves to the other place after the committee has reported. I want to emphasise again that both doctors' groups were heavily involved in that consultation. Indeed, both of them have pointed to that consultation as being a very high standard compared to another consultation that is under way right now that they're not as happy about.

But I also want to say the prescribing rights of this population of registered nurses, who will have to have done additional training and receive the endorsement of the board, is proceeding. Whether or not this bill passes the parliament, that is proceeding. The board has made that decision. State and territory governments have made the decision that they will amend their legislation.

The bill before the House now determines whether or not a patient who has a prescription made by an eligible nurse is able to access the PBS, and the member for Mackellar well understands that. This really is an affordability question before the House and then after it the other place, so we will not be supporting the member for Mackellar's amendments in this place. Her comments obviously come from a very good place and from a very rich background as a medical practitioner. We will listen to the submissions that are made by the AMA, the college and other groups that are participating in the Senate committee inquiry. But, as presently advised, we'll be opposing the amendments.

Bill agreed to.

by leave—I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a third time.

I rise to speak on the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025 and the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025. These are the bills which establish the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, known as ATEC. Let me say at the very outset that these bills are very troubling. They establish a new regulator for an overregulated sector. They fail to articulate a clear vision for tertiary education in Australia but, at the same time, they tie it to inappropriate objectives. They don't deal properly with the independent or vocational and technical education centres and their links with universities. They are replete with problems of a technical or operational nature, and they've been criticised across the board. It's a turgid technocrats' policy that entrenches more bureaucracy. Labor loves to write its own hagiographies and they love to talk about education. When they go to write the next chapter of their own history, I fear these bills will be an unfortunate footnote. They are, to put it bluntly, not what Australia needs right now.

I want to start at the top with the policy objective. The Universities Accord started with the point that the roadmap for Australian universities needs to start with a vision and a shared objective. That's unobjectionable as a statement of general principle. Of course, if you're going to embark on reform, you should have a sense of where you're going. But the accord process then made two extraordinary leaps. First, it produced an objective for the tertiary education sector as a whole. I pause here to make this critical point. The higher education sector is more than just about our public universities. In fact, public universities make up only around 20 per cent of the higher education providers in Australia, and the tertiary education sector, which includes both higher and vocational education, is broader still. There are 4.86 million student enrolments in the independent sector. In our tertiary sector, more than 71 per cent of the enrolments are not in the public universities. But having just completed a consultation centred on the needs and demands of Australia's public universities, the accord set an objective for the remaining 71 per cent of tertiary students who arguably weren't adequately accounted for. This was the first extraordinary leap. The second was to seek to define that objective in a way that seems completely divorced from the needs and purpose of our higher education sector and, worse still, to try and entrench it in legislation.

The Universities Accord proposed a national tertiary education objective, and that's the objective which has found its way into the bill in section 13. And it's not just the objective of our tertiary education sector as a whole. It is an objective that ATEC will be required by law to take into account in the performance of every function and the exercise of every power. It's the iron rod that will guide this new regulator. So what does the objective say? The legislation says:

… the National Tertiary Education Objective is the objective for tertiary education in Australia to:

a. promote a strong, equitable and resilient democracy; and

b. drive national, economic and social development and environmental sustainability.

It's quite extraordinary. The words 'teaching', 'learning' and 'research' simply do not appear. There's nothing in there about the quality of our institutions. There's no consideration given to the way in which our tertiary system can align with or support our national interest. There's no reference to student experience. There's nothing about fostering dynamism, competition, innovation or efficiency. In fact, there's nothing at all which sets out the things you'd ordinarily expect in a statement setting expectations of an educational institution or a critical sector of our economy. But according to this government, this is the unifying objective or vision that's meant to shape our higher education sector out to the 2050s and an objective it wants to set down in law.

Let me be clear. This government's national tertiary education objective says nothing about tertiary education, and why on earth not? If you were to stop the average woman or man in the street and ask, 'What do you think should be the objective of our tertiary education system?' they'd probably say something about teaching students or doing research or the other things you generally associate with education. These considerations simply do not make their way into the definition in this bill.

That omission is bad enough in its own right. It is what the government has included that really makes the stick in the craw. Instead of talking about teaching, learning and research, the government says that our ATEC should be governed by vague and inappropriate references to 'social development and environmental sustainability'. What does social development even mean? It's an extraordinarily loaded term that goes to fundamental beliefs about the way our society should be shaped and the direction it should take in the future. It is a deeply, deeply political idea. It is the core focus of this parliament, the function of this place, to debate and contest the way our society should develop with ultimate accountability to the voters who ask us to represent them here.

This is an undefined and heavily contested and entirely inappropriate function to confer on a bureaucratic body entrenched by law in the Department of Education. Take, for instance, the ATEC's role in providing for domestic and international student allocations. Does driving social development affect those processes? Those are questions for the parliament and the people, not the ATEC. And why, regardless of the decision or the topic, is environmental sustainability shoehorned into the ATEC decision-making processes? It's a naked attempt to introduce cultural and political considerations into the decisions about our tertiary education sector.

If environmental sustainability is relevant to the performance of ATEC's functions, it will be taken into account. That's basic administrative law principle. And if it's not relevant, it should not be taken into account. That is common sense. But under this bill, regardless of context, the ATEC is required to have regard to environmental sustainability. Quite simply, that is not the appropriate focus of our higher education sector. It means that this is a bill about ideology, not improvement.

To those opposite who say, 'Well, all we've done is adopt a recommendation of the Universities Accord,' I say that's not good enough. Governments accept and reject recommendations all the time. They're expected to have the intellectual curiosity to engage with those recommendations. They're expected to weigh consequences. They're expected to look carefully at proposals that are put to them and make decisions in light of the interests of all Australians and the electors who choose them to be in this place. Once it's in legislation, you own it; it's your policy.

It's not just me making these criticisms. The National Tertiary Education Union has slammed this ham-fisted attempt to ram more ideology into our universities and tertiary providers. It said:

The NTEU believes that this objective does not adequately address the character, nature and purpose of higher education; it makes no reference, for example, to the importance of critical inquiry, academic discovery and discourse, institutional independence or even to academic freedom. Instead, the objectives seek to define tertiary education as part of broader Government policy and could apply to virtually any sector.

Deputy Speaker, you know that, when a member of the Liberal Party is quoting the National Tertiary Education Union in its criticism of a Labor bill, the bill is in real trouble.

Deakin University, in a submission that included a detailed paper from its Vice-Chancellor, Professor Iain Martin, about the social licence of universities, emphasised the need for universities to maintain their social licence and to consider the way they are seen by the public at large. He said, 'Either through action or inaction, we are readily accused of being politicised; the playthings of left-wing, inner-urban cultural elites, who possess social and economic capital.' He specifically described education, teaching and learning as the 'core responsibility' of university and specifically argues for excellence. It's a point well made and one the government has missed. In setting its legislative objective for the entirety of the tertiary education sector, this government has missed the mark. The point of our tertiary education sector is not social development and environmental sustainability. It's education. It's learning. It's teaching. It's research. It's a dynamic, vibrant, competitive sector. It's support for our values and alignment with our national interests. If we are going to have a national tertiary education objective set out in legislation, it cannot be the one set out in clause 13.

I want to say something about the second major flaw of this bill, which is that no serious commentator has looked at our tertiary education sector and concluded that it needs yet another regulator. Perversely, though, that is exactly the situation which this government has now found itself in. In a submission to the universities governance inquiry last year, the existing regulator, TEQSA, specifically highlighted the complex governance and regulatory environment in which our institutions operate. It listed 13 different bodies which exercised some kind of oversight, influence or control of our universities. And that number rises to 14 once TEQSA itself is included. As Western Sydney University said, Australia's universities now operate under more than 300 pieces of legislation and regulation, a system it describes as a 'Frankenstein system'. This bill adds to that system. Submissions to the inquiry have made absolutely clear that the ATEC will be a regulator in all but name. Describing ATEC's function as 'stewardship' is not an answer.

Stakeholders have specifically rejected the government's denials through Senate estimates that ATEC will be a regulator, saying that attempts to do so rely on an overly technical definition of the term. I go further. it's disingenuous to say that ATEC will not be a regulator. It will exert policy influence. It will shape resource allocations. It will have the power to enter into compacts with universities, suspend them where it decides to do so and replace them with standard-form agreements. That is a suite of powers that is clearly designed and intended to regulate behaviour within a very important sector of our economy. It will operate alongside but distinct from the Department of Education, which oversees general education policy; the Department of Home Affairs, which governs international student intakes; the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, which has responsibility for skills and the VET portfolio; TEQSA, which is the specific higher education regulator; ASQA, which regulates the remainder of the tertiary sector; the National Student Ombudsman; the Australian Research Council; the National Health and Medical Research Council; Jobs and Skills Australia; state and territory regulatory bodies and designated state authorities; professional accreditation bodies; and all of the other bodies which exercise oversight, influence, control or otherwise shape the tertiary education environment. ATEC is a new regulator, and no disinterested observer would look at the constellation of higher education and VET regulatory and governance bodies and say, 'What we really need right now is yet another regulator.'

Let me move to issues of duplication, cost and lack of harmonisation. These issues of excessive regulatory burden raise the related issues of duplication and cost, because, as has become clear in Senate estimates, the department, as a department of state, will retain policy oversight over all matters within its policy remit, including higher education. Inevitably, with all of the regulators, there will be overlap and there will be duplication. Translated, that means there will be cost to taxpayers. But there's a broader problem, because the $54 million that's allocated to ATEC does not create a single additional student place. It does not improve student experience. It does not add value for those who make sacrifices to attend universities. The $54 million could be allocated to fund $1 million research grants for each one of Australia's universities, with more than $10 million left over.

And when it comes to harmonisation between higher and vocational education, these bills don't achieve what they're meant to do. ATEC is intended, in part, to reduce the barriers between VET and higher education, to allow students to move back and forth between the two freely. However, the ATEC legislation appears to be focused on Australia's 43 universities, largely ignoring the 166-odd non-university higher education providers and the 3,700 tertiary education businesses. It is unclear how the ATEC can achieve harmonisation and mobility across the whole of the higher education sector in these circumstances. And at a time when interest rates are rising as a result of Labor's poor economic management, which has seen education costs balloon by 5.4 per cent—higher than the core inflation rate—there's no justification for yet more government expenditure which doesn't add to productivity or reduce the cost of education for Australians. Yet again—when Labor spends, you pay.

But the criticism of the bills doesn't stop there. Extraordinarily, there seems to have been incredible disquiet about this bill even among the very institutions that championed ATEC in the first place. Universities Australia has said:

As currently drafted, the Bill does not deliver on the Australian Universities Accord's … aspirations for an independent body to design and drive the longer-term reform agenda for Australia's tertiary system.

Independent Tertiary Education Council of Australia said:

ITECA supports reform aimed at improving the long-term clarity and cohesiveness of Australia's tertiary education system. However, the ATEC Bill as currently drafted, does not align with the stated ambition of creating an integrated and equitable tertiary framework.

The ATEC Bill suffers from drafting that is based on there being no clear needs case for the tertiary system, especially the more than 4.8 million students and over 3,700 tertiary education businesses that will have little or zero engagement with this new bureaucratic fancy.

It seems clear that the ATEC Bill before the Committee is not at a stage where it is ready for consideration by the parliament and the Commission is not ready to be established. It is far preferable to ensure that an agency of this importance is ready, and its enabling legislation is not compromised by eagerness for speed.

ITECA strongly urges the Committee to deeply consider the need for this Commission, as its core functions can, and in many cases already are being undertaken by existing agencies of the Commonwealth.

Independent Higher Education Australia said this:

The Bills establish the Australian Tertiary Education Commission … as the central system "steward" for Australia's tertiary education sector. It is in fact a regulator in all but name.

… in practice, ATEC's functions, including allocation of domestic and international places, establishment and oversight/monitoring of compacts and influence on the Threshold Standards, give it a regulatory role.

… Without [expertise in the independent sector], there is a real risk that ATEC's work will default to a public-university-centric view of the tertiary system, overlooking the contributions, challenges and operating environments of independent providers. This would undermine the Commission's ability to function as a genuine system steward and would diminish the accuracy, balance and relevance of its advice to Government.

Deakin University, having described itself as a firm supporter of ATEC, said:

However, though supportive of an ATEC, and already engaged with the interim body in a productive and meaningful manner, Deakin holds several concerns regarding the proposed legislation. We posit that addressing these concerns, which range from a lack of clarity to missed opportunities to truly achieve the ambitions of establishing such a function, should be a priority.

The Tasmanian government, in diplomatic language, fired a warning shot about the introduction of unnecessary and duplicative compliance mechanisms. Referring to such mechanisms, it said:

These mechanisms should be demonstrably necessary and proportionate, avoid administrative burden and ensure that reporting requirements contribute directly to improved educational and research outcomes. Integration with existing data collections and reporting platforms is essential to minimise duplication.

Compliance obligations should, at their core, add value for students by generating actionable insights that improve equity, participation, and completion rates, rather than diverting resources from teaching and support services.

Science and Technology Australia, the peak body for the nation's science and technology sector, said:

Science & Technology Australia is concerned that while the Bill states the proposed Australian Tertiary Education Commission's … powers will extend to university research and research training … there is insufficient clarity in the proposed legislation and no evidence of sufficient capability or resourcing built into the ATEC to properly support university research.

In short, ATEC does not support Australia's national research agenda.

Regional Development Australia picks up on the failure of the legislation to address the needs of regional communities. Under the heading 'Concerning gaps for regional communities', it says:

The Bill and its settings make welcome progress towards access equity for cohorts who are currently underserved, particularly at an individual student level. However, at a structural level there remains a risk that these settings may entrench or amplify existing inequities affecting regional institutions and communities, with implications for their capacity to contribute to the nation's long-term prosperity.

That's extraordinary.

And it's not just bodies who are impacted by the change that have criticised the bill. Dr Ant Bagshaw, a senior fellow at the Centre for the Study of Higher Education in Melbourne, broadly supports the diagnosis that Australia needs a system steward in its higher education sector, but he said this:

The Senate should recommend that ATEC not be established in its current form, and that the Department of Education be legislatively required to discharge the stewardship role with strengthened transparency, consultation and capability.

…   …   …

… system stewardship is not the same as creating a new agency.

Professor of higher education policy at Monash University Andrew Norton, one of Australia's leading public policymakers and commentators on higher education, asked, in the first question in his submission, whether an Australian tertiary education commission should be created at all. He said this:

The government's policies imply a belief that a more bureaucratic approach will improve higher education outcomes. Even if we accept this assumption, it is not clear that ATEC will improve matters significantly compared to current Department of Education arrangements.

His principal recommendation is simple—that the bills should be rejected—and the criticism he gives is devastating. Before dissecting the legislation in detail, he says this:

The following chapters—

in the submission—

identify numerous flaws in the ATEC proposal. They include recommendations to improve the bills, should they have in-principle parliamentary support. But the ATEC bills should be rejected. They would narrow higher education's purposes. As they stand, they offer universities nothing but additional government control and bureaucracy. Due to ATEC's design flaws, we can have little confidence that it will improve on the current policy framework.

Professor Mark Warburton, a highly influential academic, a respected public servant and a former adviser to the Australian government during the Hawke and Keating years, said this:

The Government has announced its "three important structural reforms that are central to setting the tertiary education system up for the future". These are the ATEC, Managed Growth Funding and Needs-based Funding. It has not provided adequate detail on how any of these proposals will advance the objectives the Government has set for them.

In his second reading speech for this Bill, the Minister declared:

the ATEC is the Accord. … It is a national project and it needs a steward that is there for the long haul. … To get the sector to work more like a system. … And to help drive real and lasting reform.

Unfortunately, the direction of change for the system is articulated only in the most broad and high-level terms:

Warburton goes on to say:

There is no satisfactory detail on how ATEC is going to achieve any of these things. Given the magnitude of ambition for ATEC, it does not seem unreasonable to ask for some detail on precisely what changes it will be making in the short term, how it will go about making those changes and what leverage it will have to enforce those changes.

Many of the claims made about the Government's response to the Accord are inflated …

This person was a higher-education adviser during the Hawke and Keating governments. He goes on:

In Higher Education Attainment Under the New Managed Growth Funding System

it's one of his papers—

I show how both the claimed expansion associated with Fee-free Uni Ready places and the claimed additional funding provided in the 2024-25 MYEFO changes are overstated. I provide evidence that planned government funding will most likely result in lower higher education attainment in the 2030s, than in 2021. …

In his Second Reading Speech, the Minister stated of ATEC that "Its operations will be transparent". The Bill does not provide for this.

It's pretty damning criticism.

Many others criticise the ATEC's perceived lack of independence and its failure to deliver on what was originally conceived of when ATEC supporters first pitched the idea to government. The list of critics is extraordinary. Unions, government bodies, universities, independent providers, experts—all of these are saying that the ATEC legislation currently before this parliament is not fit to pass.

Before I go further, let me be clear. There is a committee process that is underway right now in the other place. We respect the committee process, and I hope it is an extensive committee process. There were 60 different submissions made to that committee—powerful, insightful and careful analysis from across the sector. We need to hear from those witnesses, and the committee will fail in its duty if we do not hear from them. If the government doesn't call the witnesses I've mentioned today, it will fail, because the Australian public deserves to hear from the authors to understand where this legislation is good and where it is not. They deserve to hear from the experts in the field and those with a stake—witnesses like Professor Mark Warburton, a highly respected academic from the University of Melbourne who wrote a penetrating and insightful analysis that deserves recognition and careful consideration, and bodies like the Independent Tertiary Education Council of Australia and Independent Higher Education Australia. They have the most skin in this game when it comes to this legislation, because tertiary education is more than just our universities.

As IHEA said, Australia's higher education system consists not only of public universities but of a broad range of independent higher education providers, including private universities, university colleges and both not-for-profit and for-profit non-university higher education providers, or NUHEPs, and the range of providers is much broader once VET is added. ITECA covers both, and it points out that the independent sector accounts for 77 per cent of all higher education institutions in Australia and 92 per cent of registered training organisations. Of course we should be hearing from those types of bodies. Doing otherwise is a disservice to the parliamentary committee, and it's a disservice to the Australian people, who expect us to properly scrutinise legislation. So I hope that this committee in the Senate has the opportunity to properly scrutinise the legislation, to ask questions of expert witnesses and to understand from bodies who operate in the field how this bill will affect them in a practical way, and I hope that the government would support me in showing this basic respect for stakeholders and the parliamentary process in having a proper inquiry.

Let me finish by saying this. There are bigger questions about our tertiary sector that need to be solved and where, in the last couple of years, government policy has not made any real inroads. How long can we continue with one third of our universities struggling? Does the current balance between vocational and higher education really suit Australia's long-term needs? What is the process and methodology that should be adopted for international student intakes? How do we deal with low volume, expensive but strategically important skill sets and capabilities that are taught in our universities but which are expensive to maintain? How do we maintain the presence of those regional campuses that feed activity and meet the needs of communities outside the big cities? How do we provide and promote competition and dynamism between the public and independent sector? What is the long-term trajectory of Australia's standing on the international stage, given the growth of its campuses in South-East Asia, China and in our region more broadly and their ability to offer comparable quality at a lower price point? Are our universities losing their social licence? What is the impact of AI, which right now can develop and sequence information almost to a university level and almost for free turn it into a package or a podcast that I can use to educate myself? What does that mean for our sector? What steps do we as a nation need to take right now in terms of our policy settings and longer term development to best position ourselves to train and educate future generations?

These are big questions, and they should be answered by the Australian Department of Education as the minister's principal policy adviser. Otherwise, what's the department doing? It doesn't run any schools. It doesn't run any childcare centres. It doesn't run any vocational or higher education institutions. If it's not answering these questions, what is it doing? Regardless, none of these questions are answered by these bills. Those opposite will say that the purpose of ATEC is to answer them. That's not a good answer. It doesn't explain why the department can't or won't do it, and it doesn't explain what the department will do going forward. It doesn't even explain why the sector needs yet another regulator. In any event, the gap between answering those questions and the options put forward in this bill is just too wide. Even if you support ATEC in principle, this legislation is too problematic.

So, in summing up, let me say this. If forced to vote on this legislation before the committee completes its inquiry, the Liberal Party will oppose this legislation. That is the holding position. We will join the very large chorus of stakeholders and interested parties saying these bills are not fit to pass, and we will continue working on those bigger questions in the interests of all Australians. In closing, I thank the House and move the amendment as circulated in my name:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) notes with concern that:

(a) Australia's tertiary education sector is significantly over-regulated;

(b) providers report to multiple competing and overlapping bodies; and

(c) some providers are required by law to deal with more than 300 different pieces of legislation and regulation;

(2) affirms that the objective of tertiary education in Australia must focus on teaching, learning and research, and should otherwise be aimed at promoting a dynamic and innovative sector that provides a positive student experience, delivers value for money, improves Australia's productivity and supports Australian values;

(3) further notes widespread concern among the tertiary sector and expert stakeholders about the drafting of this legislation; and

(4) calls for this legislation to be the subject of proper and thorough scrutiny".

Is the amendment seconded?

I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.

Labor is the party of education and of training. We know the power of education and training, which transform lives and transform communities. As the Minister for Skills and Training, I'm very proud of the work of this government, particularly that of the Minister for Education, to ensure that our tertiary education system—both university education and vocational education—is in the best shape for Australians now and well into the future.

The Australian Tertiary Education Commission is a key piece of the puzzle in this regard. This was, of course, a recommendation from the Australian Universities Accord, a blueprint that tells us about the kind of work that we need to get on with doing to set up the system for the next 20 years and those structural reforms that we need to pursue: building stronger links between vocational education and universities, allocating funding under the new Managed Growth Funding System, implementing needs based funding within the core funding model and negotiating mission based compacts to support the sector. Fundamentally, what the accord tells us is that, in the coming years, there will be more jobs requiring more skills and requiring vocational qualifications, higher education qualifications or both. Australia needs to grow the number of Australians with a tertiary qualification to four in five. To achieve this, we need to set the system up to meet the modern needs of Australians.

At the very core of this is breaking down those artificial barriers that have separated our university and vocational education systems. As I said at the National Press Club last year, these are 'a barrier to meeting the needs of our modern economy, and that contributes to skills mismatches and shortages in critical areas'. We can make it easier for Australians to get the right skills in whatever combination that might be, bring together the very best of both pathways that work for students and unlock the breadth of opportunities that will allow us to grow our country's productivity. This is where the ATEC can and will play an essential role.

In developing a tertiary roadmap, the ATEC will plot the next steps for those who seek to move between university and vocational education—a system to support students to gain qualifications that are matched to the skills needs across our diverse communities. It will build on and support the work that we already see progressing in the sector, like that of the University of Canberra and the Canberra Institute of Technology, who have introduced guaranteed pathways from diploma to degree across courses like nursing, early childhood education and care, accounting and project management. Similarly, the partnership between TAFE NSW and Western Sydney University is removing barriers for TAFE students entering into university degrees through a single enrolment package and putting in place appropriate student supports to make this as seamless as possible. TAFE NSW Meadowbank campus has forged a partnership with Macquarie University, Microsoft and the University of Technology Sydney to establish the Institute of Applied Technology Digital, a place for students to upskill and expand knowledge in cyber, AI, software and data analytics through bite-sized microskill courses and practical microcredential courses. It's great to see TAFEs and universities jumping at these opportunities, and it's this kind of forward thinking our government hopes to support through the ATEC.

On this note, I want to highlight an area of work in my portfolio responsibilities that I am proud of because it shows how we can break down these barriers in practice. This is through TAFE centres of excellence. There are 14 of these which have been announced so far, and there are more on the way, bringing together governments, TAFEs, universities, industry and other stakeholders to develop specialised courses and skills in areas of priority for our country: modern forms of housing construction, electric vehicles, cybersecurity, health care and support, and net zero manufacturing. We're already seeing the work of these centres of excellence in action and making a difference, like the TAFE centre of excellence for the future of housing construction, which last year welcomed its first group of students participating in a pilot program to learn how to apply modern methods of construction. The short course introduces students to prefabrication, modular construction and volumetric construction.

Learning isn't here only for those on site who are benefiting from newly refurbished spaces. What sets the centres of excellence apart is how they are equipped to share their specialisations with students and teachers across the country, as the national TAFE network will also help us do—a network now including all Australian jurisdictions. Even if you're a student in Perth, you can readily benefit from the incredible courses and training and the knowledge that's been on offer in suburban Melbourne—and the other way around, too. It's a more joined-up and a more practically-oriented tertiary system in action, bringing together the extraordinary capacity of our TAFEs with a closer and more structured connection to higher education as well as industry. In Queensland, the TAFE Centre of Excellence Clean Energy Batteries and the Centre of Excellence Health Care and Support have launched the first round of applied research grants, bringing together TAFEs with universities, industry and community orgs to develop innovative new training in these critical fields. This is a big part of the future of tertiary education.

The interim ATEC has been operating for just over seven months now, and, subject to the passage of the legislation we are debating right now, its early work will soon be scaled up as it approaches full operations. With that in mind, I pay tribute to the extraordinary efforts of the interim commission over this early foundational period. In the first six months of its time, the interim ATEC was led by Professor Mary O'Kane AC as interim chief commissioner and Distinguished Professor Larissa Behrendt AO as interim First Nations commissioner, supported by Professor Barney Glover AO as the jobs and skills commissioner.

I'm very pleased that Professor Glover will be able to continue his contribution, having stepped into the interim chief commissioner role. As jobs and skills commissioner, Professor Glover brought his decades of experience and leadership to the work of Jobs and Skills Australia—a critically important body that's not only conducting research and bringing together data but also helping us all to understand how it informs the future need of our workforce and the skilling needs of Australians. As I've spoken about previously, JSA research has highlighted how a more connected tertiary education system can lift productivity and the skill level of our workforce, and that better connections also help improve access to tertiary education, ensuring we grow the pipeline of Australians stepping into a certificate, a diploma or a degree. This work crosses over with the work of the interim ATEC, and I look forward to continuing to work with Professor Glover in these areas.

Alongside him are two new interim commissioners: the Hon. Fiona Nash, someone well known to this place and someone who is continuing to contribute to public life in the education sector, doing valuable work that is widely acknowledged as regional education commissioner; and, of course, Professor Tom Calma, who is the acting First Nations commissioner and someone who brings decades of experience in higher education, amongst other fields—a genuinely eminent Australian.

The future success of this great country in large part rests on the success of our education and training system, and its ability to meet the needs of Australians and of Australia. This isn't and cannot be a set-and-forget proposition because we can't anticipate all the changes we will see in 10 or 20 years' time. But we can act now to enable the system to work better for students today and into the future, so that their learning journeys can reveal their full potential and that our national potential can be unleashed. For those reasons, I commend these bills to the House.

I think about the thousands of Australian university students who have committed themselves to three-year, four-year and five-year programs, wanting to build out the potential for their participation not just in the workforce but in contributing to human progress and human achievement. They go to tertiary institutions—in particular, universities, as I did—because they want to be embodied with knowledge, skills and purpose to be a much more significant contributor not just to themselves but to the wellbeing of the entire Australian community. When you talk to those students, so often they're looking for improvement in student outcomes and minimising the size of classrooms—which are chockers, because the universities have geared themselves towards the number of students they have who are full fee paying. There is an increasing number of students who go to university with low contact hours.

Even worse than that—Deputy Speaker, you're one of the people who have gone through life, let's say, learning from street cred—is that so much of our system is geared towards qualification inflation. I know the government is addicted to inflationary forces. Well, qualification inflation is no different. We have seen over many years because of the efforts of Labor governments the diminishing value of a tertiary qualification which means that people need to get more in order to distinguish themselves, to demarcate themselves and to be able to get ahead. Look at all the problems that university students have right now. Look at the problems of what they want from their education, not only if they're going on a pathway of research and through the academic pathway but also if it's industrial or commercial or simply for their own satisfaction or achievement. What we are not seeing is vision from this government to unleash universities and their potential because their focus is squarely on how they feed those at the top.

The Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025 and the associated bill are no different. The Australian Tertiary Education Commission is a bureaucratic solution about how more people are employed to sit over the top of policy when one of the biggest problems with universities right now is that they are completely top heavy. If we add bureaucracies on top of university administrations, where we have vice-chancellors earning in excess of the Prime Minister and everyone in this chamber, we won't be getting the focus and the resources to where we need them—learning, teaching and research. In fact, this bill does so little to advance learning, teaching and research it doesn't even mention them in the legislation. I'd say that's disappointing but, truthfully, it's an embarrassment.

Universities need a vision. Universities need reform. They have forgotten their core purpose which is to make sure that they are there to advance the educational improvement, wellbeing and transfer of knowledge between generations. Instead, the incentives that have been put in place since the Hawke government have re-engineered them towards focusing their energies on their own self-sustainability rather than the outcomes.

This is a perennial problem of so much of the legislation that this Labor government brings into this House. It is built from the proposition of intent. It is not focused on the outcome, particularly improving outcomes for young Australians to get the best standard of education that they so desperately need and, in addition to that, are paying for.

What do we need? We don't need a plan for another bureaucracy. They can sell it under any banner they like. What we need is a plan and a vision for how we are going to improve our universities, unleash their potential and focus their efforts towards turning their primary research into something that is innovative, commercialisable for the human improvement of everybody and, more importantly, underpins the economic progress of what our country needs in the future, not more bureaucracy that gets in the way, that tries to impose solutions of Canberra's way. What we need is something that empowers universities to be part of and integrate into full component of the Australian economy.

I hear this all the time. I was at a lunch recently for people who had just been elected to parliament recently—in my case, it was my second time round—with many Labor members of parliament with the Vice-Chancellor and various deputy vice-chancellors from Monash University. Their one message from that lunch was, 'Can the federal government and state government get out of our way and provide clarity and certainty so that we can attract the research funding and go on and do things like invest in the research potential around things like power, particularly nuclear power?' They have major international corporations like Rolls-Royce that are desperate to be able to invest in their research capacity, which could not only be a pathway for economic opportunities but also create jobs, and they are not getting it from Canberra nor Spring Street.

In the face of that desperation for a pathway and for a point of clarity about how universities can build themselves to be able to be part of building Australia's next round of economic progress and growth and to be able to provide the research foundation to support students to be able to achieve they can do and to drive the process of scientific progress and human improvement, the answer from this federal government is silence and another bureaucracy to sit over the top of you, to impose the government's agenda and, when they're out of office, to front run the arguments about why they should be given more power. This comes to the fundamental proposition of some of the divide between those who sit on this side of the House and those who sit on that side of the House. We understand that the strength of our country does not come from Canberra and central authorities down or from organised capital. It comes from families and communities coming together to build the foundations and success of our great nation. One of the starting points of that is we desperately, desperately want students to be able to get good value and return on investment for their energy and, more importantly, not just their money but their time. Three years or four years of young Australians' time at university is a huge investment and risk for their future, and we want them to get maximum value for that, not simply be set up to feed the interests of the select few—the vice-chancellors on their big salaries and, of course, the academics that go on to become members of the National Tertiary Education Union, which is the constituency of this government.

Bureaucracy is not an answer to human improvement. Success for us looks very clearly at how we are going to empower and enable and liberate Australia's students to be able to have a tertiary education that delivers for them, because the failure—and this is what we're going to get from this process—is more of the same, and that is currently failing Australian students under the Albanese Labor government.

The member for Goldstein talks about the divide between this side of the chamber and that side of the chamber. Can I tell you that, when it comes to higher education, whether you are going to university to get a degree or whether you are going to TAFE to get a trade, that divide is very, very clear. Labor invests in higher education, and all the opposition has ever done is cut.

We know right now that there's a further divide, and that's a divide over on the other side of the chamber. Everyone has been talking about the division in the coalition, but it's clear that, whether you're in the Liberals or whether you're in the Nationals, there is no divide when it comes to higher education. The track record is clear. With free TAFE, it doesn't matter whether you're in the Liberals and doesn't matter whether you're in the Nationals. You didn't want it to happen. When it comes to 20 per cent off student debt, it doesn't matter whether you're in the Liberals and doesn't matter whether you're in the Nationals. They didn't want it to happen. So, when the member for Goldstein talks about 'street cred' on higher education, they don't have one iota of it.

Last week I had the great pleasure of visiting Sunnybank State High School with the Minister for Education. The small but mighty Sunnybank state high is one of the 50 schools in Moreton, and it really reflects our local community. Its 700 students come from 60 different cultures, and they're doing great work there. It was the first time that I got to see equations being written up on the glass wall, with students gathered around to look; it was the first time I understood that BOMDAS could also be BIMDAS; and it was the first time that I've been able to throw paper in a classroom.

The minister and I met with Principal Carmen Anderson and her team of dedicated teachers. They're focused on strengthening literacy and numeracy outcomes and on improving engagement for students who are at risk from disengaging. It's always inspiring to hear about such work, and it was equally as inspiring to talk to the student leaders of 2026. Those students spoke about their future ambitions. We met a future fashion designer, a future lawyer, a future firefighter, a future Australia Zoo animal handler and, yes, even someone who wants to be a politician. These students are motivated and excited about their futures, and I know I left the school feeling buoyed by their enthusiasm.

Today I am speaking about the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025. Labor has brought this important piece of legislation to the House for the students we met last Thursday and for the hundreds of thousands of current and future higher education students who are working towards their future ambitions.

I first joined the Labor Party when I was in high school, when I was 17 years old. The reason I joined was that at the time the coalition government was making deep, deep cuts into tertiary education. I went to my mum and I said, 'I want to do something about this,' and she drove me to the local branch. She drove me to the local branch of the Labor Party because it is Labor who has always been the party of higher education. As I said before, the contrast between the two sides of this parliament could not be starker.

The establishment of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, is in direct response to the Australian Universities Accord. This was a first-term Albanese Labor government initiative which acknowledged that, while Australia had a strong education system, there were clear opportunities to improve it and to make it more equitable, and that is what we are striving for here. That's what we're driving for—to look beyond the horizon and to make the system even better.

Professor Mary O'Kane led the comprehensive year-long review of the nation's higher education sector and was tasked with focusing on the nation's knowledge and skills needs, both now and in the decades ahead. The review had to take into account access to tertiary education, affordability, governance and accountability. It had to examine pathways and connections between vocational education and training and higher education. Finally, the review had to sit within a wider framework of fostering the research, the innovation and the national capabilities that will drive Australia's growth. The final report was released by the government in February 2024, and it sets out 47 recommendations that this government has already implemented—31 of those in full or in part.

This bill implements the recommendation to establish the ATEC. It's supported by $54 million of funding for a decade. An interim ATEC has been in operation since July 2025 and was initially led by Professor Mary O'Kane, Distinguished Professor Larissa Behrendt and Professor Barney Glover. Professor Tom Calma and the Hon. Fiona Nash have recently been appointed as commissioners, and they join Professor Barney Glover, who has been appointed acting chief commissioner alongside his role as the Commissioner of Jobs and Skills Australia. Together, they have established the foundations for the permanent commission, and this legislation reflects their work.

This bill establishes ATEC as an independent statutory authority. ATEC's overarching objective is to be a steward for Australia's higher education system. It will guide ongoing collaborative conversations about the future direction of tertiary education in this nation. ATEC will strengthen the development of a strong, cohesive system that encourages diversity and genuine choice for students, no matter their background and no matter their ambitions. The commission will also be tasked with monitoring progress towards goals around skills development and equity, while ensuring the regulatory load across the sector doesn't impede good teaching, good learning and innovation. Specifically, ATEC will shape policy across higher education and university research and work closely with the Skills and Workforce Ministerial Council to develop joint initiatives that strengthen the whole of the tertiary education system. A big part of ATEC's role will be to plan the system's long-term direction, with additional responsibilities around setting pricing approaches and distributing funding across the higher education sector, making sure that resources are aligned with student needs and, importantly, with future workforce demands.

Crucially, ATEC will also focus on supporting and strengthening First Nations representation and creating opportunities for broad engagement across the tertiary education system. This is necessary because the Australian Universities Accord outlined the qualifications targets we need to achieve, and the report recommends that, to meet Australia's future skills needs and drive improvements to national workforce participation and, indeed, productivity, the Australian government adopt attainment targets to set the ambition for the tertiary education system to deliver the recommended tertiary education attainment target of at least 80 per cent of the working-age population having at least one tertiary education qualification—that is, a certificate III or above—by 2050. This is 20 per cent more than in 2023, and the establishment of ATEC is the bedrock which we need to drive that ambition.

ATEC will guide the future of Australia's tertiary education system, focusing on policy direction, the real cost of delivering high-quality teaching, the kinds of courses students are demanding here and now and how Australia can build the skills and knowledge that we need in those years ahead.

ATEC will also examine the barriers that are still holding some Australians back from accessing and succeeding in higher education and offer practical advice on how to improve participation and outcomes. On top of that, it will play a key role in helping government figure out how to bring higher education and VET closer together so that students can move more easily between the two.

Another major responsibility for ATEC will be introducing a redesigned funding model. Instead of a one-size-fits-all approach, the system will include demand driven places for equity students right across the sector, as well as needs based funding that reflects the number of students from low-SES backgrounds, First Nations leaders and those studying at regional campuses. If more students from underrepresented groups can access and stay at university, they are more likely to thrive. They're more likely to complete their studies. They're more likely to have a pathway to a good, secure job. Higher education isn't just about opening the door; it's also about making sure students are supported along that journey.

Finally, ATEC will be rolling out new mission based compacts with universities. These agreements allow universities to focus on their own specialities and to focus on their own strengths, such as research, strong industry partnerships or serving a particular region. At the same time, the compacts mean that universities are aligned with national higher education priorities and, indeed, are responsive to the needs of the students and the communities that they serve day in and day out.

ATEC will produce an annual state of the tertiary education system report, signposting emerging trends and challenges across the entirety of the system. It will also track headway on tertiary participation and attainment goals and outline progress towards the more connected and coordinated tertiary system. The annual review will also assess whether the system is keeping up with Australia's skills and knowledge needs as industries evolve and new technologies reshape the workforce. We know the workforce is changing. We know that, each and every year, new technology emerges. We know that, to be able to use that, we need a productive workforce that is well trained and has the skills to drive the economic outputs of this country to make us better. That's what this bill contributes to.

Finally, the report will monitor equity and inclusion, supporting the system to move towards genuine fairness and opportunity for all. ATEC will collaborate with other key agencies across the education and skills landscape, including Jobs and Skills Australia, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, the Australian Research Council, the National Centre for Vocational Educational Research and state and territory governments. Limits are placed on the Minister for Education to safeguard ATEC's independence and integrity. The minister cannot direct ATEC's findings, influence the advice it provides or intervene in the decisions about individual providers.

The establishment of ATEC follows on from the substantial investments that the Albanese Labor government has made in education since May 2022. We're making higher education more accessible and more supportive by expanding practical opportunities and strengthening student services. This includes doubling the number of university study hubs, with 20 new regional and 14 new suburban hubs, so more students can study close to home. At a time when we know that Australians are feeling the pressure of cost of living, this has never been more important.

We've also increased the number of free university bridging courses to help people prepare for tertiary study and, for the first time, introduced paid prac for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students so that they are not financially disadvantaged while completing mandatory placements—mandatory placements that are so important to our education system and to our care system—making sure that, from our youngest Australians all the way up, every Australian is educated, is given support and is safe and healthy.

To strengthen student life, higher education providers will now be required to direct at least 40 per cent of student services and amenities fees to student led organisations, ensuring funding goes where students need it the most. We've also expanded access by making demand driven Commonwealth supported places available for all First Nations students who meet entry requirements. Student safety and fairness are also priorities. A new national student ombudsman and a national code to prevent and respond to gender based violence will provide stronger protections and clearer standards.

At its core, the establishment of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission is about acting now to set our tertiary education up to deliver what Australia needs in the future. It's a future focused step—like Labor's funding for more university places—and it is an example of our prioritisation of higher education.

In 1974, Gough Whitlam made university in Australia free. In 1989, when Bob Hawke introduced our HECS-HELP system, Australia's higher education sector remained, even then, among the most accessible in the world. It produced generations of Australians with the skills to strengthen our economy, to enrich our communities and to deepen our democracy. Effectively, those who aspired to go to university to study tertiary education could do so affordably. Today, the promise of fair and accessible higher education in Australia has become a mirage. Australians are being priced out of opportunity. Our higher education system that once opened doors is closing them.

The bill before us today takes some commendable steps towards reforming our higher education sector and implementing recommendations of the 2024 universities accord. Establishing an Australian Tertiary Education Commission is a welcome reform and a step towards coherence and independent stewardship. Setting a national tertiary education objective will provide much needed clarity for our universities. Those reforms hold a promise, a promise to improve our higher education sector, and I support them.

But I'm disappointed that this legislation fails to recognise and act on the structural failures that have created the current HECS crisis. Right now, three million Australians carry, on average, more than $27,000 in HECS debts. Student contributions for courses like commerce and law are nine times higher than they were when Hawke introduced the HECS system in 1989—a time when many members of this parliament were graduating. Graduate salaries have increased by about 2½ times since 1996. In that time, student contributions have increased sixfold. The average HECS debt for someone in their 20s is more than double what it was in 2006.

How did this happen? Well, much of it can be traced back to the disastrous job-ready graduates scheme, which the Morrison government introduced in 2021. What was sold then as a way to channel students into priority fields instead delivered a HECS debt crisis—a crisis for a generation of many young Australians. Under the job-ready graduates scheme, students in disciplines like law, accounting, business, banking, finance, economics, communications and politics are contributing up to $17,000 a year in 2026. That means that those young Australians are graduating with $50,000 of debt for basic three-year degree and more than $80,000 if they undertake postgraduate study. They're then taking at least 10 years to pay it off. In popular disciplines like communications, humanities, society and culture, and human movement, student fees have more than doubled as a result of the job-ready graduates scheme.

Two in three MPs in this parliament hold degrees in arts, humanities, law or business. These are not fringe pursuits. They're foundational pursuits, disciplines that we need for our economy, our public institutions and our civil life. In a world as fragile as today's, skills from those degrees matter more than ever. But the students who pursue those disciplines are being punished with often insurmountable student loan debts. The number of students affected is enormous. As of 2024, management, commerce, society and culture degrees accounted for nearly half of all enrolments at Australian universities. Right now, there are nearly 700,000 students enrolled in those courses, Nearly half of all university students in Australia, and a large proportion of them are women, First Nations students and students living with a disability. These are the Australians who are being unfairly and disproportionately penalised by the job-ready graduates scheme and who are bearing the burden of serial government policy failures, like those from my friend from the Right.

Unfortunately, the effect of the job-ready graduates scheme has been magnified by the means of indexation of HECS. Repayments on HECS aren't deducted until after the loan has been indexed for the financial year, which means that the debt on already expensive degrees can grow further, while people are waiting for the impact of those payments to be reflected in their HECS accounts.

Increasing student debt is a drag. It's a drag on the lives of graduates. It's contributing to our record-low birth rate and to the 20 per cent fall in rates of homeownership in 20- to 35-year-old Australians over the last 30 years. Young Australians who are struggling already with their increasing cost of rent and of groceries are finding themselves unable to buy a home, unable to start a family. In a country with an ageing population and a decreasing tax base, this is a demographic time bomb. It's not just an educational equity issue, it's a cost-of-living and a societal wellbeing issue.

The universities accord report, which was received by this government two years ago, found that the job-ready graduates scheme and the expensive degrees it creates does not work. The accord recommended 'urgent remediation'—that's its words—to ease the rising and punitive student contributions. The government has publicly, on many occasions, conceded these issues with the job-ready graduates scheme. In 2023, the education minister said that job-ready graduates scheme needs to be redesigned before it causes long-term and entrenched damage to the Australian higher education system. I couldn't agree more. Professor Bruce Chapman, the architect of HECS, has said on many occasions that the job-ready graduates scheme is the No. 1 issue with our HECS system. But, two years on from the accord, students are paying more than ever before.

This is no longer just a Morrison era issue. This bad policy was introduced under the previous government, but the job-ready graduate scheme has now been in place for longer under Labor than it was under the coalition. The government could have fixed this problem at any time in the last four years. Instead, it has delayed. It tasked the universities accord with looking into student contributions back in 2022. By February 2024 the accord's final report called for urgent action, and the minister said then that ATEC would look at the scheme and what change can happen. Now, we have legislation for the ATEC before us, but there is nothing in this bill that recognises the urgent need to ease student fees. Student contributions are not mentioned in this bill, not once.

In 2025, I was pleased to successfully advocate for a 20 per cent reduction in existing student HECS debts, and I also supported the government's measures to reduce indexation and to increase the payment thresholds on student loans. Those measures have helped to decrease student debt, but they've only reduced debts back to pre-COVID levels, which, following an unprecedented inflationary surge, has done nothing to help those students who are now at university.

The legislation does grant the Tertiary Education Commission the function of advising on Commonwealth contributions to the cost of degrees, but Commonwealth contributions represent only a part of the higher education pricing equation. It's alarming that the Commission has not been tasked with considering student contributions or even just considering the impacts of HECS debts on young Australians. It's important that the commission has the power to provide the government with independent and impartial advice on whether the current maximum student contributions are too high. A note to the commission: they are! This function, which is absent in the legislation, is important. It will help begin to reverse the damage that the job-ready graduates scheme has inflicted. The reality is that the government could act today. It could reduce the maximum student contribution amount under the Higher Education Support Act 2003 today, but the government has not put that legislation on the table in Canberra this week.

What we can do is ensure that the independent statutory commission can give and will give impartial advice on the biggest cost-of-living factor affecting young Australians. The final report of the Universities Accord called for the ATEC to be an independent statutory authority 'to enable it to provide robust advice and support evidence based decision-making and planning'. It said the ATEC 'needs to be agile and responsive to immediate issues, while remaining future focused overall'. This was echoed in the minister's explanatory memorandum, which states that formal independence is a foundational element of the ATEC's design. However, there have been concerns from stakeholders and from experts about the ATEC's proximity to the minister. Many of the commission's advisory functions can only be performed at the request of the minister. This limits any policy agenda that the commission might want to promote independently of the minister's wishes, including, for example, escalating the question of the job-ready graduates scheme. So, while I support the establishment of an independent higher education commission to steward the sector, I would suggest very strongly that we need to ensure that the commission is sufficiently independent to be able to promote meaningful reform of our higher education sector.

If we are serious about securing the future of Australian tertiary education, then we have to ensure that the systems that we build are coherent, transparent and generally capable of restoring public trust. Establishing an Australian Tertiary Education Commission is a step towards that goal. It offers the possibility of a sector guided by evidence rather than short-term policies by careful long-term planning, not piecemeal fixes. This bill will move us towards the implementation of the Universities Accord, but I urge the House and the minister to ensure that the commission is fully equipped to reform the higher education sector and to better tackle the cost-of-education crisis which faces Australian students.

In my first speech in this place, I shared how I am forever grateful for the education, the keys to the kingdom, that I received and acknowledged that education changes lives. It changed mine, and it does so for many Australians in our communities. The words I shared in 2022—that I'm passionate about ensuring we have a robust higher education system that values intellectual curiosity and supports people to think, to experiment and to create new ideas, systems and solutions—are beliefs that I still hold, and I'm very pleased to support the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025. The Labor Party is the party of education, and the Albanese Labor government has invested in education ever since it was first elected. Whether that be through cutting student debt by 20 per cent while making the indexation system fairer, establishing a Commonwealth-paid prac system so students can get paid on placements, establishing a student ombudsman or making free TAFE permanent, we are absolutely committed to making sure that every Australian has the opportunity to pursue a great education in this country.

This bill to establish the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, ATEC, was a key recommendation of the Australian Universities Accord, and this furthers our pursuit of opening the doors of opportunity to every Australian so that their lives can be changed for the better via education. Harnessing the potential of education while creating a better and fairer tertiary education system that delivers for students and on Australia's skills needs now and into the future is absolutely one of our government's priorities, and I know how important the higher education system is to my electorate.

When the accord process was first implemented, I undertook a survey in my electorate and received hundreds and hundreds of responses about the kinds of changes people wanted to see. I made a submission to the accord on behalf of my electorate of Chisholm. I'm really pleased to see that we are continuing our work as a government to implement the recommendations from the accord reports. It is really critical that we have an education system that works for everyone. This is no matter where their postcode or income are set, because not only are we the land of the fair go but that's what the accord told us we will need to do to make sure that our country is set up for the years ahead.

We know that more jobs are going to require more skills. At the moment, 60 per cent of Australians working today have a certificate or a diploma or degree. We know—the data tells us—that by 2050 that level will need to increase to about 80 per cent, so there is some work to do. That is a significant increase. Governments must prepare and be ready to capitalise on this endeavour. It means we need to have more people at TAFE, more people at universities, like Deakin and Monash in my electorate and local area, and more opportunities for Australians to harness the potential of higher education through a fairer system.

It will be the job of the ATEC to help drive and steer this growth so that it is grounded both on fairness and to harness the skills our nation needs. This is all building on our government's mission—no-one held back, no-one left behind. It will draft compacts with individual universities. The ATEC will help improve policy, administration and coordination of the sector, and get the sector to work more like a system and will get the vocational education system and higher education system to work more closely together. When I speak to academics, vice-chancellors and students, I know that what they really want to see is a closer engagement between the vocational education system and the higher education university system.

The ATEC will provide expert, independent advice, which will help drive real and lasting reform. Like Jobs and Skills Australia, it will be independent and report directly to ministers. The ATEC will be guided by a ministerial statement of expectations. The key performance indicators for the ATEC will be established in consultation with the minister. It will publish its work plan, so that will be transparent. It will provide advice to government and publish reports. It will be able to undertake its own research. Staff will be directed by the ATEC commissioners, governed by a service-level agreement with the Department of Education. Its operations, really importantly, and as I've just mentioned, will be transparent. It will be required to consult.

Before entering this place, I worked as an academic, so I can see the absolute benefits that will come about through establishing the ATEC. An independent review of the ATEC—its role, its functions and its operations—critically, is also built in after two years and after five years, again to aid transparency. These reviews will be tabled in the House and the Senate to ensure the foundation of our higher education system is continually built on the principles of equity and participation. There will be real accountability there. It will be led by three commissioners: a full-time chief commissioner, a full-time First Nations commissioner and a part-time commissioner. Collectively, they will be required to have expertise in the university education sector and in vocational education and training. The First Nations commissioner must be an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person with significant understanding of issues affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

The ATEC will have its own decision-making powers and will take on responsibility for new mission based compacts with individual universities, setting out the number of domestic and international students in line with the government's strategic direction. It will take over responsibility for the higher education standards framework from the current Higher Education Standards Panel and provide advice on it to the Minister for Education and the sector regulator.

The Minister for Education and the Minister for Skills and Training will also be able to request advice from ATEC on a range of matters, so our future reforms and decisions take the sector with us. It will include the cost of teaching and learning in higher education and overall higher education funding amounts, including on a per student basis; student demand, skills demand and the capability of the system's ability to meet Australia's workforce needs; the strategic direction, governance, size and diversity of the higher education system; and the financial sustainability of higher education providers—and that includes not just universities but other non-university higher education providers. They'll be able to provide advice around ways to improve coordination and collaboration between the vocational and higher education university systems, and how to improve access, participation and outcomes for people facing systemic barriers to education, including Indigenous Australians, Australians with disability, Australians from a low socioeconomic background and Australians living in the regions and in the bush.

A key part of ATEC is that it will also be required to produce and publish a 'state of the tertiary education system' report every year, with the first report to cover the period starting from 1 January 2026. The report will set out current and emerging trends and issues, and system level changes needed to meet these challenges; progress on tertiary participation and attainment targets; the extent to which the higher education system is meeting Australia's current and future student skills and knowledge demands; and how well we are doing in breaking down the barriers between vocational education and university education, and breaking down the systemic barriers faced by Australians from disadvantaged backgrounds. ATEC will also publish a work plan and statement of its strategic priorities for the tertiary education system every two years, starting from 1 January 2027.

ATEC, together with this reporting mechanism, will ensure there are enough places at universities to allow more people to access the opportunities that we know higher education can deliver. That equitable approach has deep bipartisan roots in the parliament. The first Universities Commission was established in 1943 by the Curtin Labor government, and over the four following decades that commission and its successors oversaw significant reform of our higher education system. It is important to remember that John Curtin may have started this but Sir Robert Menzies continued it, and in 1959 his government introduced the Australian Universities Commission Act, which, for the first time, embedded the commission under its own standalone legislation. That was a key moment in the history of higher education, and Labor supported Menzies in this pursuit. We have a similar opportunity in front of us now to have genuine cross-parliamentary support for the bills before the House to build the foundations that set us up for the future, for a higher education system that works for everyone.

I acknowledge and thank the Minister for Education, Jason Clare; the Minister for Skills and Training, Andrew Giles; the Assistant Minister for International Education, Julian Hill; and the former Minister for Skills and Training, the Hon. Brendan O'Connor, for all their efforts. I also acknowledge and thank university vice-chancellors; peak bodies, including Universities Australia; state and territory ministers; the Department of Education; and the Accord Implementation Advisory Committee for this cohesive approach, and the National Tertiary Education Union for their engagement. I especially thank the interim commissioners of ATEC—Mary O'Kane, Larissa Behrendt and Barney Glover. The ATEC was a headline recommendation of the accord, and now we have the opportunity to turn those words into reality.

I'll end on this note: if we're not here to make life better and fairer for the next generation, and the generation after that, and the generation after that, then why are we even here at all? This is an opportunity to build something that our country can be really proud of and will set us up not just for now but for generations into the future. On that, I commend the bill to the House.

As the House knows, education is very important to my community in Fowler and, of course, across the country, but, for migrants and refugee communities that are in Fowler, I cannot emphasise enough how critical education is. People would recall I constantly speak about how, when we were in refugee camps when my mother chose Australia, my late mother told me the reason why we chose Australia was that it had the best education system in the world. We came here and settled here, and I have benefited from our education system.

I do want to start by acknowledging the government's efforts. It is a start, but I think we need to be honest. It should never have taken this long to recognise what students, families and educators in my community have been shouting from the rooftops for years. For decades, successive governments have lost their way. They have failed in their most basic duty to build the skills and provide the knowledge our young people need to thrive.

In my electorate of Fowler and across greater south-western Sydney, we see the consequences of this neglect every single day. For our community, university has not become a gateway; it has become a finish line that is moving further and further out of reach. We have allowed a system to take root where the path to a better life is increasingly determined by your bank balance rather than your potential. For too long, our priorities have shifted. It became about international rankings and protecting our balance sheets. Somewhere along the way, equity, access and opportunity were relegated to the fine print, and, in that process, a silent and cruel understanding was born that, if you are a disadvantaged student, you're simply condemned to a tougher road. Why is that the case? A student's postcode should never be their destiny. Whether a young person grows up in a leafy inner city suburb or in the heart of Western Sydney, quality education must be a right, not a privilege shaped by postcode.

I recognise the intention behind Australian Tertiary Education Commission. Long-term planning is good, but, in Fowler, we have seen commissions and taskforces come and go. Without real accountability, there is a risk this commission becomes just another layer of expensive Canberra based bureaucracy, well-intentioned on paper but disconnected from students' lived realities.

In the four years that I have been in this parliament, I've heard the government and the minister speak confidently about how well they understand the struggles of Western Sydney, and the minister should understand. He regularly talks about how he grew up there and went to Cabramatta Public School and Canley Vale High School. He knows Western Sydney, but understanding isn't the same as solving. Measures like the 20 per cent HECS debt reduction are held up as proof of action, but, for families in Fowler, that is a brief sugar hit. It hasn't changed the day-to-day grind. Students are trapped in a vicious cycle. They chip away at their debt only to watch it climb right back up through indexation. While the government talks about distribution, inflation and interest rates are moving faster than relief.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister spoke about how the government distributed the benefits of stage 3 tax cuts. If distribution is the measure of fairness, I ask how exactly is equity being distributed to the communities that need it most? In Fowler, students aren't just studying; they're working long hours whilst trying to maintain a full-time load. Fowler is ranked in the top 12 per cent of the most disadvantaged areas in this country. For us, systematic barriers are not just an abstract concept.

I've told this House about the about young people in Fowler and their struggles and how they are contributing to their families. Take Kimberley, a constituent of mine. Kimberley hits her $25 weekly Opal cap just travelling from Cabramatta to campus. She spends $120 a week on food. She contributes $125 a week towards her family's electricity and water bills. She does all of this while working part time and keeping up with her studies. For Kimberley, the choice isn't between degrees. The choice is between education and survival.

If we are serious about equity, we must be honest about the policies that undermine it. I agree with the member for Kooyong that the job-ready graduates scheme must be reversed. As this House knows, I've introduced my fair study and opportunity bill twice to confront this injustice. Under the JRG scheme, the cost of humanities and social science degrees more than doubled. This isn't just a policy failure; it's a social one. It punishes students for their academic interests and creates a debt trap for those pursuing careers in teaching, social work or community services, roles that are really critical to the health of our society. If this commission is to be more than a bureaucratic exercise, it must confront the JRG legacy directly. It must set out concrete options to fix what is clearly broken.

The success of this bill won't be measured by reports or frameworks. It will be measured by whether a student in Fowler can realistically afford to finish their degree without being crushed by debt. That is the test of equity. Anything less is just more rhetoric.

I rise today to speak in support of the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025. In establishing the Australian Tertiary Education Commission as a steward of the higher education system, the bill implements a key recommendation from the Australian Universities Accord final report of 2024. The review that resulted in that final report was asked to examine Australia's higher education system and create a long-term plan for reform. The overarching theme can be simply stated. If Australia is to prosper in the years ahead, Australian participation, performance and investment in tertiary education needs to improve in order to generate the knowledge, skills and research our nation needs to meet our current and emerging social, economic and environmental challenges. It noted that there were chronic shortages of skilled professionals, including early childhood educators, teachers, aged-care workers, nurses and doctors. Increasingly, Australia is going to need greater numbers of engineers and others to transform our energy grid, advance our manufacturing sector, drive new discoveries and innovations, make our agriculture more sustainable and build new public infrastructure for our growing cities and regions.

The recommendations proposed in the final review were broad, and they were ambitious. In order to successfully implement them, stronger leadership, planning and collaboration than is possible under the current system arrangements will be required, with a far greater emphasis on understanding policy and reform priorities and understanding evidence about the state of the system. So, to implement this broad and ambitious change, the review recommended that the Australian government establish the Australian Tertiary Education Commission, which would be tasked with providing the leadership and stewardship necessary to transform the system. The breadth of the challenge and the breadth of the reform needed to meet the challenge must be coordinated, streamlined and efficient. Without this, reforms will run the risk of being fragmented, out of sync and not fit for purpose. The review delivered 46 other recommendations, but the key one relates to ATEC in that the Australian tertiary education sector needs a dynamic, collaborative and responsive system that serves the national interest. The ATEC, which this bill proposes as a statutory national body to plan and oversee the creation of a high-quality and cohesive tertiary education system to meet Australia's future needs, is what is required.

The recommendation is that ATEC be established under legislation to work collaboratively with tertiary education institutions supporting the tertiary system to meet the needs of students, the community, research users and employers. The review identified that the functions of the ATEC should centre on policy coordination and development, system planning, pricing authority, funding allocation and the negotiation of mission based compacts for universities. It will achieve this by doing a number of things, including delivering on this overarching objective; focusing the system on current and future skills needs; promoting access and opportunity; developing an improved understanding of the cost of delivery for providers and appropriate and fair levels of student contributions; promoting a diverse choice of institutional and study options by fostering a cohesive tertiary education system through the development of sound and sustainable policy; encouraging continuous improvement in tertiary education, research and research training; support for increasing the quality of the tertiary education workforce; and providing expert advice to the government and tertiary education system.

The review also recommended that the commission should be an independent statutory authority answering to the education and skills ministers to enable it to provide robust advice and support evidence-based decision-making and planning. As a system steward, it will work in close collaboration with a broad cross-section of stakeholders within the tertiary education system, including universities but also non-university higher education providers, private VET providers, TAFEs, students, academic and professional staff, employers, industry, unions, bodies representing the various professions, research end users, alumni and all levels of government. The commission will be guided by the national tertiary education objective and charged with responsibility to build and maintain a coalition of stakeholders in order to drive these sector reforms, to identify effective ways to leverage the collective resources of the tertiary education system so it delivers better outcomes and, finally, to ensure that the system itself is responding and agile to meet the needs of a changing society.

In my home state of South Australia, we have recently witnessed the product of the changing needs of higher education with the merger of the University of Adelaide and the University of South Australia to become Adelaide University, which will welcome its first students this year. Adelaide University's vision is to be a leading contemporary comprehensive university of global standing that is dedicated to ensuring the prosperity, wellbeing and cohesion of society by addressing educational inequality through both the actions of the university and the success and impact of its students, staff and alumni. By partnering with the community and partnering with industry, Adelaide University is well placed to realise its vision of conducting outstanding future-making research that has focus and scalability. In South Australia, this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. The new Adelaide University, under the leadership of Vice-Chancellor Professor Nicola Phillips, will be the largest educator of domestic students in Australia and will have the scale and resources to be sustainably positioned in the top 50 universities in the world.

Two significant investments by the South Australian Malinauskas Labor government mean that this new university will be accessible to everyone with the capacity to succeed, regardless of their background. Firstly, there is the state government's $100 million student support fund, and then its foundation as a pre-eminent and world-leading research institution will be cemented thanks to the $200 million research fund. By 2034, the university is forecast to contribute an estimated additional $500 million a year to the South Australian economy. It is forecasted to educate more than 70,000 students, about 13,000 more than both pre-existing universities do today, and it's also forecast to create an additional 1,200 jobs. A globally competitive university that is sustainably positioned to be in the top 50 universities in the world will not only be able to provide high-quality teaching to students of all economic backgrounds but, critically, will be able to secure a greater share of funding for high-quality, targeted research and to work actively and meaningfully with local businesses and industry.

Funding for targeted and meaningful research and development has never been so important. High-quality and targeted research and development, or R&D, that delivers for industry by providing outcomes that are measurable, practical and capable of meaningful execution and implementation are critical to Australia remaining productive and competitive. We know that productivity growth drives economic growth and gains in living standards. We also know that a widely accepted key driver of productivity is innovation and that R&D is a major contributor to innovation activity. R&D is indispensable in today's innovation-driven economy. It acts as the engine that propels technological breakthroughs, spurring the development of new products, services and processes. So when we prioritise R&D, we are better positioned to adapt to market changes, capitalise on emerging trends and drive long-term growth.

R&D is the catalyst for innovation. Investing in research means that new ideas can be explored and novel concepts can be worked on before they are introduced to the market. An exploration of this nature can lead to the discovery of new processes, technologies and materials that can improve and reshape industry. R&D is also a catalyst for economic growth because of the opportunities for new industries and job creation, increasing overall productivity and global competitiveness. It's a catalyst to address global challenges such as health, energy security and climate, with the ability to rapidly innovate and deploy new solutions so we can tackle these complex issues and then scale up commercial implementation and production. This is more important than ever but it's rarely a solitary endeavour.

As the new Adelaide University's vision has articulated so clearly, collaborative efforts between academia, industry and government are crucial for pushing the boundaries of research and development. Collaborative R&D initiatives enable the sharing of knowledge, resources and expertise, leading to more robust and innovative outcomes. Well funded and targeted R&D can lead to improvements in social welfare, quality of life, environmental sustainability, economic growth and job creation and, importantly, national security.

R&D must be a central pillar of national economic and innovation strategies, and these strategies must be prosecuted not only with vigour but with patience because R&D inherently involves risk. Not every research project leads to a breakthrough and many innovations may fail to reach commercialisation. We must be prepared to manage these risks and invest in diverse R&D portfolios to balance the potential for high returns with the likelihood of setbacks. When setbacks are experienced, we must learn from them and continue to invest. Because risk is not only about what could go wrong; it is about what could go right.

In order for these strategies to produce measurable and effective output, access to a skilled workforce is critical. Adelaide University recognises this and this bill, through the establishment of the ATEC, also recognises that. The ATEC will steward the tertiary education sector towards these strategic priorities to meet Australia's skills, knowledge and workforce demands. This can only be achieved with an educated workforce, which is why equity is at the core of the ATEC's work. This bill requires the ATEC to have regard to the objective of improving outcomes for persons facing systematic barriers to education, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, persons with a disability, persons from a low-socioeconomic background and persons living in regional Australia.

The debate is interrupted. In accordance with standing order 43, the debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the member for Sturt will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed if required.

The suspected murders of Leon and Otis Clune and the suicide of their parents in Mosman Park in my electorate have sent shockwaves throughout our community. It brings profound sadness but also anger, frustration and unfortunately some division. At the centre of this tragedy were two children whose lives were precious. They deserved safety, opportunity and the chance to grow into their futures. For young people living with disability who are, like all young people, forming a view of themselves, this is a terrifying story. To them, I say: this is an extremely rare event and there is no justification for it. Your life is precious. Your worth is inherent, unquestionable and equal.

For families of people living with disability, this event may stir up anger, memories of your hardest moments or fears for the future. It's clear this tragedy has reopened conversations about how our society sees disabled people, how we support families and how we can prevent anyone from feeling alone or without options.

The coronial inquest investigation is currently underway to determine the facts. This is likely to be followed by a coronial inquest so we can examine the broader circumstances that led to this crime. As we mourn the loss of this family, we must stand together, acknowledge the pain caused to so many in our community by this devastating event and recommit to protecting every precious life.

Residents across my community work tirelessly to improve the lives of those around them. Each Australia Day, through the honours list, special recognition is made to citizens who have made outstanding contributions. Today I would like to put on the record my thanks to these locals for their work in making our community and nation a better place.

Dr Bruce Moore for distinguished service to linguistics, to the scholarship of Australian English, to lexicography, to the history of language and to tertiary education.

Robert Cranston for service to the arts with Queanbeyan Arts Society and Arts National.

Mr Brett Odgers for service to history preservation, to planning and to the broader community of Canberra.

Dr Stephanie Reeder for services to children's literature, including as an author, mentor, editor and, most importantly, a Hansard editor.

Mr Paul Owens received the Australian Fire Service Medal in recognition of a 23-year operational career.

Mr Paul Ryan for outstanding public service in advancing climate smart land management in Australia.

Ms Anne-Maree Sabellico for outstanding public service in leading reforms in child protection and youth justice. Thank you on behalf of the whole of the Bean community for all that you've done to build and bring our community together.

Today I'm honoured to congratulate the local everyday heroes recognised in the 2026 Australia Day Honours list in Grey.

Ms Jennifer Holmes from Port Vincent. Jennifer has been appointed a Member of the Order of Australia. She has been recognised for her incredible work in community health.

Mr Douglas Ahola from Risdon Park received the Medal of the Order of Australia for his service to the people of Port Pirie.

Mr Bruce Green of Port Lincoln received an OAM for his service to the local government as mayor and for his community work. Bruce, thank you for your leadership.

Mr Douglas Warmington of Moonta Bay, congratulations on your OAM. You have served your local community proudly.

We also celebrate Mr Kenneth Warnes from Owen. Kenneth received an OAM for his service to conservation and to the district of Owen. Kenneth, thank you for looking after the mid-north.

From our emergency services, Mrs Sandra Gooch from Yorktown. Sandra was awarded Ambulance Service medal.

Sadly, this year, we also include two outstanding men who are no longer with us. We honour the late Mr Walter Duncan from Clare, who received an OAM for his service to horticulture. And we remember the late Mr Archibald Woods from Stansbury, awarded an OAM for his service to the Yorke Peninsula.

None of these people did the work for a medal. They did it because they were devoted to regional South Australia. To all our recipients: warm congratulations.

Recently the suburbs of Lugarno and Peakhurst Heights in my electorate of Banks experienced two power outages in 24 hours. Unfortunately, they were not isolated incidents and were part of the latest string of outages caused by failures of our local grid infrastructure. Local residents have expressed just how challenging this has been for them, including the distress of not being able to operate vital medical equipment and the frustration of interruptions to the operations of their businesses. This is why I am so pleased to have worked with Ausgrid to secure action for our local residents and businesses, ensuring repairs to the local grid infrastructure, including pole and wire maintenance, vegetation management and more frequent inspections of the lines. This is the first step in building a more resilient local network. There is plenty more work to do in this space to address this longstanding issue, and I'll be watching it very, very closely, including having conversations right here with my colleagues in Canberra to make sure they know what we're fighting for and that the people of Lugarno and Peakhurst Heights have reliable power for their families and for their businesses to ensure they have the services that they need.

I rise today to proudly acknowledge the Capricornia region and the outstanding locals recognised in the recent Australia Day 2026 honours list. Professor John Rolfe AM of Rockyview was appointed a Member of the Order of Australia for his significant service to regional economic development. Through his work as an economist and author, Professor Rolfe has helped shape policy, strengthen regional economies and deepen our understanding of the challenges and opportunities facing rural and regional Australia. Mr Rodney Green OAM from Frenchville has been recognised for his service to the Rockhampton community. His longstanding dedication to local organisations and community initiatives embodies the very best of community spirit and has made a lasting difference to countless lives. Mr Lyle Baker ACM of Rockhampton City has been awarded the Australian Corrections Medal for his distinguished service within corrective services and for preserving the history of the Capricornia Correctional Centre. These honourees, like so many before them, are a tangible asset to our community. Australia Day reminds us to recognise those who quietly serve others and who truly make Australia the best country in the world.

Six women have been murdered in the first six weeks of 2026. This statistic demands more than reflection; it demands action. When it comes to violence against women, the evidence is already clear. Frontline workers, advocates and victims-survivors have told us time and time again that they do not need more reports. We need to implement what we know already works. Last year the Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commissioner reported that there are more than 1,000 recommendations from at least eight major inquiries and reviews. Labor acted quickly. National Cabinet commissioned a rapid review at the request of the Prime Minister, and that work is now being implemented. Across the country, there are 583 initiatives under way to prevent, respond to and heal family, domestic and sexual violence. Of those initiatives, 122 are Commonwealth led, backed by a $4 billion investment from this Labor government. These initiatives are publicly reported on and transparent. The evidence is clear. The priority must be delivery. That's why Labor is moving forward with consultation on the second action plan under the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children, co-designed with frontline workers and with victims-survivors at its centre. Labor is delivering real investment and real action that saves women's lives. Labor knows there is more work to do, but we are committed to ensuring we can do all we can to stop women being murdered in our country.

Today I recognise outstanding Australians whose service reflects the very best of our nation's values: commitment, compassion, courage and care for community, culture and country. The 2026 Australian honours include four appointments to the Order of Australia and one meritorious award for people in my electorate of O'Connor, acknowledging decades of dedication across Western Australia.

Mr William Faahan-Smith of Castletown is recognised for extraordinary service to the community through emergency response organisations. Over 40 years with Esperance sea search and rescue and the state emergency service, alongside leadership in Rotary and community safety initiatives, Mr Faahan-Smith's service has saved lives and strengthened our region.

Mr Ezzard Flowers of Gnowangerup was honoured for his lifelong service to Indigenous communities. A cultural leader, mentor and advocate, his work spans Aboriginal health, land, language and the arts. He has empowered communities and preserved culture for future generations.

Mrs Betty Loxton of Kalgoorlie was recognised for her decades of charitable and community service. Her lifelong service to civic organisations and support for vulnerable people has earned widespread respect and numerous community honours.

Mr Peter Robinson of Kojonup was acknowledged for exceptional service to conservation and the environment. For more than 40 years, he has led and supported environmental campaigns and shaped policy.

Finally, the Australia Fire Service Medal was awarded to Mr John Jonker of Manjimup. With over 55 years of frontline service, his courage, technical skill and leadership have saved lives.

I am proud to be a member of this Labor government that is united and getting on with the job of delivering for all Australians. Since the start of this year alone, we've launched 1800MEDICARE, where you can get 24/7 free health advice from a registered nurse. We've rolled out our cheaper medicines. Scripts are now capped at $25 or $7.70 with a concession card. We have delivered a huge funding boost for hospitals across the country. We're rolling out historic women's health packages which deliver more choice, lower costs and better health care for all women at all stages of their lives. Yaz, Yasmin and EstroGel are now on the PBS, and we've opened new pelvic pain clinics across the country. We've also opened new urgent care clinics around Australia, including one in Kelvin Grove in the heart of the Brisbane electorate, and we're making sure that people get access to mental health support when they need it the most, including, again, in Brisbane where we opened a new Medicare mental health centre in Lutwyche last year.

But there's always more work to do, and our track record speaks for itself. Australians can rely on this government to deliver. Access to affordable health care closer to home was what we promised and is what we are delivering. This is what strong and united government looks like.

This week I've been inundated with calls and emails from frustrated constituents who have once again been negatively impacted by the closure of a main access road in my electorate, Waterfall Way. The 185 kilometre artery road sustains the lifeblood of the Dorrigo plateau region, connecting agricultural industries and communities to essential services. It's importance and natural beauty are matched only by its unreliability. These communities need a viable alternative route, and, frankly, it needed to be done years ago.

While these pathways have proven difficult to map out in the past due to the multifaceted government solutions required to effectively manage this issue, in recent years, all representatives have come together and effectively scoped the best way forward. I'd like to commend mayor Steve Allan and MPs Michael Kemp and Brendan Moylan for driving this forward at a state and local level. But now it needs to be funded properly. Funding that had been earmarked in 2022 by the coalition at a state and federal level has since been rejected with the change of government. Since then, we've had a rolling procession of ministers who are there for the pics and the platitudes but never bring their chequebooks for the solution. It's time for our isolated communities to be recognised and safeguarded. We need a solution, and we needed it yesterday.

I'm thrilled to announce that the three tram overpasses on the Glenelg line in Boothby are complete, open and operational. This is yet another example of the Albanese Labor government and the Malinauskas state Labor government working together to achieve important infrastructure projects on time and on budget. The tram overpasses eliminate three level crossings. Boom gates were previously down for up to 20 minutes an hour, and rush hour traffic backed up for kilometres. These overpasses were promised at the 2016, 2018, and 2019 state and federal elections, but it took the election of an SA Labor government and a federal Labor government in 2022 to actually get them done.

Instead of just doing our initial two bridge commitment, we got the Morphett Road overpass done at the same time. Many in my electorate thought the Morphett Road overpass would be impossible to engineer, given its proximity to the Sturt River and Glengowrie tram barn entrance. Challenge accepted! With a sneaky three-point turn on the tracks, the trams can go home at night. This is part of a coordinated plan to manage traffic in the growing southern suburbs of Adelaide, including the Majors Road on-off ramp, which opened a few months ago; the North-South Corridor, which is underway; and, in the future, the Greater Adelaide Freight Bypass to take trucks off Cross Road. The Albanese Labor government is delivering for the people of Boothby.

I rise to talk about some of the listening posts that I've done in my electorate over the summer. I did the 'Tour de Fisher' for 2025, where I rode around in my electorate, speaking to my community, taking my office to them. I also did a really very busy listening post just last week. What people were telling me is that they are hurting. They are feeling like they are being consistently and economically crushed by this government.

One of the other things they talked to me about was the unbelievable squeeze that they are experiencing in relation to road construction on the Sunshine Coast. I listened yesterday to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government talk about all of the wonderful things this government is apparently doing on road construction. Let me tell the minister that that's not happening on the Sunshine Coast as a result of this federal government. What she didn't talk to the parliament about yesterday was the fact that she cut $180 million from the Mooloolah River Interchange project. She also cut funding to the Caloundra access road, which would have provided a second access road into what is now a very busy Caloundra. Without the Crisafulli government picking up the slack in building and funding these projects, they simply would not have happened.

From the classrooms of Hunters Hill to the bright lights of Hollywood—that is quite a journey. Just a few weeks ago, one of Bennelong's very own, Rose Byrne, took home a Golden Globe for her latest film, winning best female actor for her role in the film If I Had Legs I'd Kick You. It was a remarkable achievement and one the whole community and country can be proud of.

But, before the red carpets and award nights, Rose was a student at Hunters Hill High School. She won't be the last local student to go on and do great things, because Hunters Hill High School has now been named a partner school in the New South Wales government's High Potential and Gifted Education Policy, which supports high-potential students in 33 public high schools across the state, sharing in $100 million worth of upgrades. That will mean real investment in the school. They'll be getting upgraded and additional drama spaces and a stage, upgraded and additional art rooms, a photography room, two music rooms, upgrades to science, tech, engineering and maths rooms and food tech spaces as well. This program recognises that potential shows up in different ways, whether that's creative, academic, physical or social and emotional. It's another example of how the Albanese Labor government and the Minns Labor government are working together to improve public education right across the country. Congratulations, Rose and Hunters Hill High School.

Yesterday, my community found out that the government will be selling Woodside Barracks—145 hectares, much of it environmental land that has never been cultivated. It's very important environmental land. Next year we were supposed to celebrate our 100th anniversary of our barracks. The barracks hold enormous historical significance to our community. We have 150 cadets there. We used to have a regiment, but the government moved the air regiment down to Edinburgh.

The great concern in my community is that this 145 hectares will be carved up for housing. What we need to hear from the state Labor government and from the Liberal opposition is that they agree with my community that this land should not be turned into 400—or perhaps even fewer—blocks. That would potentially be a population of 10,000 in a high-risk bushfire area. We also need mayoral candidates. We currently have a state election, but we also have a mayoral election in the Adelaide Hills. Every single one of those mayoral candidates should come out and tell the community where they stand on this. This must be preserved for future generations—it's open space; it's community space—and not turned into housing.

Guess what? Tomorrow is the start of the Winter Olympics, a global celebration of athleticism, courage and—in some cases—an impressive willingness to throw yourself down an icy mountain at terrifying speeds. As somebody who's had the privilege of representing Australia at the Olympic Games, I feel uniquely qualified to speak on this matter. Admittedly, my Olympic experience involved nice hot summer days rather than snowflakes. The closest I've been to winter sports is grabbing a beer out of an ice filled esky. But once an Olympian, always an Olympian. The Winter Olympics remind us of what makes sport so special: years of training for moments that last seconds, pushing through the pain, doubt and occasional crash—all for the chance to wear the green and gold and make Australia proud.

Let's be honest: any Australian who chooses to compete in winter sports deserves an extra bit of respect. We are a country better known for beaches than for blizzards, and most of our athletes learn their craft a very long way from home. That takes grit, determination and a level of stubbornness that we can all admire. To our Australian Winter Olympic team: we are incredibly proud of all of you. Whether you bring home a medal or memories, you carry the hopes of all Australians. I'm not going to say good luck, because luck is for those who haven't put in the hard yards. Stay safe, and remember that, no matter how cold it gets, Australia is fully behind you. Enjoy it.

This is a message for all of the small and family businesses, the sole traders and the self-employed. We just want to say, 'Thank you, and keep going.' We know that you're suffering directly as a consequence of higher interest rates because the Albanese government can't control spending and is driving inflation. We know you're living the consequences of red-tape inflation going up and stifling your capacity to grow your business every day. You're living the consequences of industrial relations inflation, where the costs the government is trying to push onto you as an employer are making it harder and more complex to do simple things like pay your workers.

Every step of the way, people in small business in this country are facing big challenges. That's why we have seen a record number of small businesses collapse under the Albanese government. Since the Albanese government was elected, 41,000 small businesses have disappeared through insolvency—and, with those, livelihoods. Last year alone, more than 14,000 small businesses went insolvent. It is a record for Australia, and it is not one that anybody should be proud of. This is the legacy of a reckless government that simply can't control its spending but can always find a way to get its hand and shove it into the pockets of households and small businesses. Now is the time for good people to stand up and call it out.

Like many families across Maribyrnong and across the nation, my family is well and truly back into the rhythm of the new year. Gweny is beaming with excitement, having started high school, and Margot is already telling me how much she loves her new grade 4 teacher. But, like households everywhere, we're back to the busy mornings and to the juggle. I want my community, in that juggle, to know this: every day that I come into this chamber, this Labor government and I are firmly focused on you, making sure you and your family get the support that you deserve. This is because we are united and focused on delivery while those opposite remain focused on themselves.

The opportunity of education is a deeply held value in our government. It starts in early childhood. It's why we're making early education more affordable and accessible with our three-day guarantee. We are focused on easing the cost of living and giving every kid the best start in life. But it doesn't stop there. We are also delivering historic, record funding for our public schools—providing more support for students and better resourcing for classrooms and backing our incredible teachers. Labor delivers because education is fairness, it's opportunity, and it's about building a stronger future for Maribyrnong and our country.

While we are focused on easing the pressure on families in Maribyrnong and across the nation, those opposite remain hopelessly divided. My community of Maribyrnong, let me tell you this: our focus is different. Our focus is on you.

This week has been a terrible week for mortgage holders in Australia. We've seen, this week, the 13th interest rate increase under this Labor government. That's obviously had a huge impact on the average family; in fact, the average family mortgage payment has gone up by over $20,000 per year because of those interest rates. So that obviously eats into family budgets and how much money they can afford to buy food and how much money they have to do many other things. As we know, many economists around the country blame these interest rate increases firmly at this Labor government's economic policy decisions.

The other issue I want to raise today is this government's net zero 2050 policy. Deputy Speaker, you know and I know that this policy is making power prices go up and unaffordable for many families. We have to remember that Labor's aggressive net zero 2050 policy is that they want Australia to lower emissions faster than three very important countries: the US, China and India. Why do I mention those three countries? It is because they are the biggest emitters in the world. China's emissions go up more every year than Australia's total emissions. Labor wants to race ahead of those countries, which is causing great economic damage to our country. Interest rates and power prices are going up, bringing economic ruin to a lot of families and businesses.

Purple is the colour of International Women's Day. It was used in the women's suffrage movement. It's a symbol of dignity and justice, and it's a motif in the artistic expression of women, from Gwen Harwood's 'The Violets' to Taylor Swift's 'Lavender Haze'. It's a symbol of women's empowerment, and that's why we wear purple with pride on this side of the House. We're a government which lifts women up, which recognises the very real ways that women are still held back in our society and makes real change to remove these obstacles. It's why we've brought in paid prac so that women in female-dominated fields are paid during their placements. It's why we've expanded the Leaving Violence Program. It's why we've brought in cheaper child care and the three-day childcare guarantee. It's why we've secured a 15 per cent pay rise for early childhood educators, and it's why we're paying super on paid parental leave.

You won't see much colour on that side of the House. Those opposite save their true colours for backroom deals—deals amongst men to undermine female leaders—and for reminding Australia, as the member for Longman did so eloquently, that women prefer hairdressing and men prefer maths. That's who they are. But it's not who we are. I'm so proud to be part of a Labor caucus that is 57 per cent women and to be part of a government that reflects modern Australia and which is making concrete change for the women of our country. That's why we wear purple today.

The Reserve Bank's latest decision confirms what Australians already know: Labor has lost control of the economy. They've lost control of energy costs. They've lost control of social cohesion. They've lost control of our borders. After 13 interest rate rises, families are hurting. Mortgages are up around $1,800 a month, rents are surging, groceries cost more every week and power bills are nearly 40 per cent higher despite repeated promises to bring them down. Australians were told that relief was coming. Instead, they got record prices. Living standards have collapsed at the fastest rate in the developed world. Families are paying 16 per cent more for food, 22 per cent more for rent and nearly 40 per cent more for electricity. These are not statistics. These are household budgets being smashed by this government. At a time when Australians are already under pressure, the government's failures are adding further strain to housing, services and community confidence.

It all flows from the same problem: an addiction to spending and a refusal to take responsibility. Labor's spending spree has driven inflation higher for longer, forcing the Reserve Bank to act. Instead of getting spending under control, Labor's answer is always the same. It is higher taxes on savings, on houses, on super and on family business, and that is not economic management. Labor spends, prices rise and you pay. (Time expired)

The Albanese Labor government is helping more Australians to realise the dream of homeownership sooner, and I'm thrilled that more than 50,000 Queenslanders have now bought their first home with the help of our five per cent deposit scheme. At my last weekend mobile office in West End, I spoke with Mitchell, a young man in my electorate who finally has a real chance to enter the housing market through Labor's Help to Buy scheme. For thousands of Australians who've been locked out for too long, this is what practical support looks like, turning hope into a genuine pathway for a home. I have seen the difference this work makes through the Brisbane Housing Company project in Stones Corner. When I first visited early last year the Prime Minister and I had to wear hard hats because it was a construction site. Late last year I was delighted to welcome the Prime Minister back and to see residents moving into 82 brand-new social and affordable homes. We met John, Jan and Karen, and heard firsthand what safe, secure housing means for their lives right in the heart of our community. John said that it was the first time in years he had been able to sleep soundly.

After a decade of coalition neglect we know there is more work to do, but I am proud to be part of a government that is the boldest and most ambitious on housing. Everyone deserves a safe place to call home. The Albanese Labor government is tackling Australia's housing crisis by making it easier to buy and better to rent, and by building more homes faster. We are focused on delivery and we are focused on delivering for the people of Griffith and the people of Australia.

In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members statements has concluded.

I inform the House that the Western Australian government has confirmed that the Western Australian Joint Counter Terrorism Team, comprising WA police, the Australian Federal Police and ASIO, yesterday charged one man, a 31-year-old male, with engaging in a terrorist act. That offence carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. I was briefed yesterday in person by the AFP commissioner, Krissy Barrett, and the commissioner of police for Western Australia, Col Blanch, on the investigation. I thank the commissioner for WA for travelling here to give an in-person briefing.

As an individual has now been charged, I will use the word 'allegedly'. On 26 January the man is alleged to have thrown a homemade explosive device into the crowd at a rally in Perth. This was a gathering of our fellow Australians exercising their democratic right to express their views and participate in a peaceful demonstration, and they were allegedly targeted because they were Indigenous. This alleged act of terrorism was deliberately aimed at Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. This was alleged terrorism driven by racism and hatred—hate that should have been banished to the dark reaches of history yet still lives in the dark corners of the internet.

The device did not detonate, but that does not change the fact that this attack was real and the intended consequences would have indeed been horrific—deaths, injuries, trauma beyond imagining. I know that First Nations people around Australia are grappling with that—the combination of disbelief, anger and real fear—and I've met with a number of Indigenous leaders in the last 24 hours about this. As a government, as a parliament and as a nation, we see you and we stand with you. We will do everything required to keep you and your loved ones safe. There is no place for racism or hatred in our nation. It is an offence against our Australian values and it is an offence in Australian law. Importantly, the joint counter terrorism team does not believe there is any residual risk from the alleged perpetrator.

Australia has been enriched by every faith, background and tradition—people all over the world united by their love of this country. Only Australia has the privilege of being home to the oldest continuous culture on earth, and we all share that privilege—people who either have come here or are descendants of people who have come here. That is a source of pride for all of us and is something that all of us have a responsibility to safeguard.

On that, let us stand united as a parliament, as Australians, in support of our nation, and let us reach out at this time—which will be difficult as some further details no doubt will come out as part of this process. It will be a difficult time for Indigenous Australians, and we stand with them at this time.

I would like to associate the opposition with the remarks of the Prime Minister. We are all deeply concerned by what has been declared by authorities as an alleged attempted terror attack on Australians gathering to exercise their right to protest. This alleged event has provoked anxiety, shock and concern in our Indigenous communities, as it has across our nation. Australia is defined by tolerance and respect, and we can never accept a situation where we turn to violence to settle our political differences. These are fragile times for our society, and it is incumbent upon all of us in this place to nurture peaceful civil debate and guard our great democracy against hate and violence. I thank the AFP, the joint counterterrorism team, the Western Australian police and all law enforcement for their ongoing tireless efforts to keep us safe. Today, all fair-minded Australians stand against any who would seek to use political violence.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Last year, the Prime Minister promised Australians that inflation was under control and that his government had 'done all it can'. Yet Australians have now been hit with the 13th interest rate increase under this Prime Minister, and the average mortgage holder is paying around $23,000 more a year just to keep a roof over their head. Prime Minister, is it still your position that inflation is under control?

I thank the Leader of the Opposition for her question. Of course, we know that Australians are still doing it tough with cost-of-living pressures. Our No. 1 focus is looking at how we can help families take some of the pressure off. Inflation had a six in front of it and was rising when we came to office, and it now has a three in front of it. But we want to get it down. We want to get it down. That is why we're very much focused on achieving just that. In the OECD annual report of January, just a month ago, they had a lot to say about inflation and about the position that Australia finds itself in. They said:

Headline inflation peaked at close to 8% in late 2022, a somewhat lower and later peak than in many other OECD economies …

They went on to say about wages:

… while many OECD economies experienced falls in real wages and real disposable household incomes when inflation surged in 2021-23 as price rises outpaced nominal income gains, real incomes—

in Australia—

have risen since 2022 …

They went on to say, with regard to the economy and the budget:

Australia's resilience during the shocks of the past half-decade fits with its … avoidance of recessions, supported by prudent fiscal policy and credible monetary policy …

Indeed, we will continue to do what we can to provide support for people. The opposition like to talk about the budget, but they never talk about what they plan to cut. We know that at the last election they planned to increase our taxes paid by every single Australian. We know that the person who has now been put in charge of being not just the shadow Treasurer but the shadow Assistant Treasurer at the same time committed some $600 billion to a nuclear plan at the last election. They wanted to sack 41,000 frontline public servants, and they wanted to increase income taxes for every taxpayer.

Honourable members interjecting—

Order. The Prime Minister was asked for his position on inflation, and he is giving information to the House for a very broad question that he was asked about. You'd like a yes or no answer, and, for the millionth time, I can't deliver that, Member for Wannon, but I will hear from you on a point of order.

It goes to relevance. The Prime Minister was asked a very direct question as to whether he had inflation under control or not—

No. Resume your seat. That wasn't the question he was asked. The question was: is it your position that inflation is under control? It wasn't asked what you got up and said, so don't make points of order if you don't even know what the question is. The Leader of the Opposition was specific with her question. It wasn't what you just rose to your feet about.

The 'Shadow Manager of Opposition Business' is a new title in this chamber! The fact is that we are getting on with being focused on the needs of the Australian people. They're just focused on each other. They're just focused on each other. The Liberals are focused on other Liberals. The Nats are focused on other Nats. People are joining the crossbench. Now, there's talk of a three-way coalition with Pauline Hanson.

Order! The Prime Minister will refer to senators by their correct title.

My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. How is the Albanese government delivering a future Defence estate for our Australian Defence Force, and what have been alternative approaches?

I thank the member for her question and acknowledge her life of service in this place and also as a police officer. Over the last six years, as a result of vandalism and theft, Defence has spent $1 million on the Penrith Training Depot, a site which has been vacant since 2016. And, at the Maribyrnong Defence site, which has been vacant for decades, in 2022 there was a grassfire which required the expenditure of $10 million in remediation. Defence simply has to stop spending money on properties that it does not need, and this is what is at the heart of the most significant reform to our Defence estate in our nation's history.

But this reform is difficult because, in relation to every Defence site, you'll find people with an attachment to it, and the difficulty was very much observed by Jan Mason and Jim Miller in their Defence estate audit, when they said:

Defence is holding more property than it needs and is carrying the burden of past indecision…

They said:

Attempts to consolidate and rationalise property holdings in the past have been stymied by a lack of political and organisational will to overcome challenges.

Those words are particularly appropriate to those opposite, because in the 9½ years, when whatever we call that was the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government, they did absolutely nothing. And what is also clear in their response to yesterday's announcement is that they have not changed.

The shadow minister has said that these properties play 'a vital role in Australia's defence capability'. But which ones? Exactly which ones? The former shadow minister, the member for Canning, has said that our reforms are both shortsighted and foolish. What is absolutely clear is that, if those opposite were the government today, they'd still be squibbing it.

Our government has the political will. The Defence estate review has also made clear that, if we do not act, governments will spend $2 billion over the next 25 years on these properties without making any contribution to our capability, and that is completely unacceptable. We win on the battlefield by virtue of capability, and that means we must stop wasting money on properties that we don't need. More to the point, we need a Defence estate which is finely tuned to the requirements of the Australian Defence Force so that it can be the foundation that our force needs to do its job to defend Australia.

I'm pleased to inform the House today that in the Speaker's gallery is Her Excellency Ms Fiona Flood, the ambassador to Australia from Ireland. A very warm welcome to you.

Honourable members: Hear, hear!

My question is to the Minister for Emergency Management. Bushfires are still burning in Victoria, and thus far over 75 per cent of homes lost and private land burnt is in my electorate of Indi. My electorate is grateful for the support provided by the government to date, but so much more is needed. Minister, what further support, beyond that already announced, can communities in my electorate expect from the Commonwealth?

I thank the member for Indi for her question, and I acknowledge her community is going through a particularly tough time at this point in time. A lot of Victorians have been impacted by bushfires that have burnt through over 415,000 hectares across Victoria, and it's had a major impact on communities right across that place.

Can I again thank the member for Indi and the member for Nicholls for inviting me into their local communities. It is really important in this role to hear firsthand from communities about what they're going to need not only in the short term but also in the medium and long term. Can I thank, in particular, the members in Ruffy who I met. I said the other day that they were so worried about their local environment, let alone their own homes. I heard very clearly from them their desire to see the Ruffy community centre rebuilt, which they lovingly referred to as the TCC. We will continue to work with your community on those things. I also heard really clearly from Strathbogie and Murrindindi shire council members about the need to make sure that infrastructure is built back more resilient and that we work on those community cohesion projects together into the future.

As the member knows, the Prime Minister announced another package of supports—$158 million going to things like extended power outages for businesses, clean-up support for community members, temporary accommodation, rebates for people who need to clean out water tanks, and mental health support in particular. We'll continue to extend support where it's needed, and we'll work with the Victorian government on that. We have enacted over $330 million in those state-Commonwealth Disaster Recovery Funding Arrangements already.

However, we recognise that the state and the local councils are best placed to identify the type and the level of assistance that is going to be required following this disaster, in accordance with their responsibilities for disaster management. The Albanese government will continue to work really closely with the Allan Labor government, and with local councils and local communities in particular, to understand where supports and assistance is going to be needed into the future, and our government stands ready, willing and able to assist when those support packages come forward. We know that recovery isn't a straight line. It's not going to be a speedy process. Our commitment is to continue to work with all levels of government and local communities to see this recovery tail through. We stand ready, willing and able to support as we can, when we can.

My question is to the Treasurer. How is the Albanese Labor government helping with the cost of living and strengthening the budget? How does that compare to other approaches?

The good people of Moore elected an absolute champion as their local member in this place. I appreciate his question. Inflation last week and rates this week were important reminders of the challenges in our economy, despite all of the progress that has been made together. Inflation at the end of the year didn't come in much higher than we expected, but it came in higher than we would like. Some of that inflation is temporary; some of it is more persistent. It's nowhere near the peaks that we saw in 2022 under those opposite, but all of it adds to the pressure that people feel around the country, and the Reserve Bank's decision will add to that pressure as well. We understand that inflation is too high in our economy. We acknowledge that; we get that, and that's why we're acting on it. We are acting on it with cost-of-living help that those opposite oppose. We are acting on it with tax cuts that those opposite oppose and want to repeal. We are acting on it with budget repair that those opposite were completely incapable of.

Inflation is one of three major challenges, but it is the most pressing challenge in our economy in the near term. We've also got a longer standing challenge with productivity, and both of those are set against the backdrop of global economic uncertainty. But we need to remember, as we confront all of this together, we also have big advantages. As the Reserve Bank governor said on Tuesday:

We are actually in a really good position.

This goes, I think, to those opposite—

Opposition members interjecting—

Well, they're now sledging the Reserve Bank governor, Mr Speaker. They're now sledging the Reserve Bank governor. So out of control is their partisanship that they're now going after the independent Reserve Bank governor, just like the opposition leader went after the Treasury secretary earlier in the week. Now those opposite want to talk to the Australian economy—

Opposition members interjecting—

Order! I'm just going to ask the Treasurer to pause. I genuinely can't hear. There's too much noise. The member for Goldstein is not going to interject any more, otherwise we won't be having the MPI today. I mean it. So no more interjections from the member for Goldstein, otherwise the opposition will lose the MPI and there'll be consequences for actions. The Leader of the Nationals and the Deputy Leader of the Nationals are getting a good go at the moment, but that won't continue if they continue to interject. The House is going to settle. I'm just going to ask the Treasurer to return to the question.

When those opposite make comparisons with the major advanced economies, they never make the full comparison. We've got stronger economic growth and lower unemployment than most of the major advanced economies. We've got stronger jobs growth and less debt than all of the major advanced economies. Every one of them has had a negative quarter of growth, and we haven't had a negative quarter of economic growth. We're also strengthening business investment. We've got near record high labour force participation. We've got a lot going for us in our economy. Our objective is to maximise our strengths and address our challenges in the economy in our usual considered and methodical way.

The member for Cowper is now warned.

We know that there is more work to do across inflation, productivity and making our economy more resilient in the face of global economic uncertainty. That will be the focus in May, and we will not be distracted by the three-ring circus over there.

My question goes to the Treasurer. Yesterday in question time, the Treasurer referred to his responsibility, and actually refused to take responsibility for rising interest rates, by quoting AMP economist Diana Mousina. But today Ms Mousina told the AFR the Treasurer had cherrypicked her comments and that she, and I quote, 'Didn't say the government was not contributing to inflation.' Will the Treasurer apologise for misrepresenting Ms Mousina's comments?

Order! Member for La Trobe, the Treasurer hasn't begun his answer yet.

First of all, I think I've said a number of times now, through the course of this week and before that, that I take responsibility for all aspects of my job, including our part in the fight against inflation. I think I've made that very clear, and repeatedly so. When I quoted the economist that the shadow Assistant Treasurer is referring to, Diana Mousina, from her interview on the ABC on Tuesday morning, I was making two points very clear, and both of these points still stand.

First of all, there is not a unanimous view amongst economists, the view pushed by those opposite, and that remains the case. And, secondly, the quote that I used from the interview that she gave on Tuesday morning on the ABC reflects the factual point that what we saw in the economy in 2025 was public demand growth making a smaller contribution to demand in the economy and private demand growth making a bigger contribution to growth in the economy.

Now, I understand that those opposite are so desperate in their current political condition, but they cannot deny the fact that the story of the economy in 2025 was the faster-than-expected recovery in the private economy. If they don't want to take my word for it, then they should take the word of the Reserve Bank governor, who said, 'Growth in private demand has strengthened substantially more than expected.' The RBA governor said, 'Private demand is growing more quickly than expected.'

Order! The Deputy Leader's asked his question.

In the Statement on monetary policy: 'Private demand was much stronger than expected.' In the Statement on monetary policy: 'The near term upward revision is driven by private demand.' In the press conference: 'Private demand has turned out to be much stronger than we had been forecasting.' In the Statement on monetary policy: 'The contribution of public demand to year-ended GDP growth has continued to ease in recent quarters.' And that's the point that a number of economists have made. It's a point that I've made. It's not a political opinion. It's not an economic opinion. It's a fact in the national accounts released in recent times.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Why is gender equality a priority for our Labor government? And why do all Australians have a responsibility to do more and do better on matters of gender equality?

I thank the member for Barton for her question. She was there this morning, along with many members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, attending the UN women's event that was held here in the parliament in the lead-up to International Women's Day. Greater equality for women is central to our government's agenda because it's fundamental to Australia's success. It's not an add-on or a nice-to-have. It's not confined to an individual portfolio or treated as a matter of special interest. It is about the national interest. This is about the investments that we make to close the gender pay gap, to boost economic opportunity and to address the national scourge of violence against women.

Equality for women is also about the standards and example we set, the culture we are part of and the language that we use. And last week the Nightly published a piece by Aaron Patrick under the headline 'Why I wouldn't marry Sussan Ley'. That headline is a disgrace, and the article is no better. I don't intend to quote from it any further. You really only need to know one thing about it: that article would never have been written about a male political leader. One of the lessons I would hope that this parliament and those who observe it have learnt from Julia Gillard's time as Prime Minister is that it is not enough to shake our heads at this stuff in private. As leaders, we have a responsibility to call it out, and today, as Prime Minister, I call it out.

This can and should be a place for passionate arguments. A contest of ideas is a healthy thing in a democracy. But we need less hatred in our national discourse. We need less polarisation. We need fewer attempts to provoke outrage or simply manufacture it. Not everything needs to be dialled up to 11. This is a great country, and we all love it. We're all here to serve it, and we should work together to set and uphold a better standard. That is a responsibility that all of us have in this place. But it's also a responsibility that people who comment on national affairs have as well.

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Minister, what date can Australian families expect their retail power bills to come down by $275?

I thank the honourable member for his question and congratulate him on hosting 1,549 cheaper home batteries that have been stored in the electorate of Wide Bay since 1 July. And I note that in May 2022 the wholesale price of energy in Queensland was $347 a megawatt hour and is today $58 a megawatt hour.

Order! The minister will just pause. The minister is about 40 seconds in, but I'll hear from the member for Wide Bay on a point of order.

The question was very, very defined. The people that can't afford to pay their electricity bills can't afford to buy these batteries. Is this guy the Duracell sales rep, or is he the energy minister?

The member for Wide Bay needs to state that it was on relevance. The minister's about 40 seconds in. He's entitled to a preamble, but I'm going to make sure he's being directly relevant. He wasn't asked about anything in the member's electorate except for a very specific question.

The honourable member asked me when retail prices are set, and they apply from 1 July, and they apply after the default market offer is released, under the normal course of events, when they're not hidden before an election by a minister. That is the normal course of events—that a draft default market offer will be released in March and a final in May. That can be changed by law, if the minister chooses to, as the member for Hume did. The average increase in Queensland that was hidden by the member for Hume was $165—11.3 per cent for households in Queensland that the member for Hume hid.

An opposition member interjecting—

Yes, the member is right. People pay retail prices, not wholesale prices. That is 100 per cent true. Wholesale prices are one of the inputs to retail prices. That's why the member for Hume set a target of $70 a megawatt hour for retail prices. When he left office, prices were more than $300 a megawatt hour. Wholesale prices feed into retail prices, and our energy market reforms ensure that they do so as efficiently as possible.

My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. What progress has been made on the investigation into the alleged terrorist attack that occurred on 26 January in Perth?

I thank the member for her question and acknowledge, as a proud Western Australian, her very personal interest in this.

The terrorist attack that was described by the Prime Minister at the start of question time in Perth was horrific. A 31-year-old man allegedly threw a homemade improvised explosive device—this is a bomb fitted with screws and ball bearings—into a crowd of people rallying in support of First Nations Australians. It is fortunate that this bomb did not detonate, but, be in no doubt, it will be alleged in court that the intention was absolutely that the bomb would detonate. This could have been catastrophic if you think about the number of Australians who were there in a tight space. Had this gone the way it will be alleged it was intended to, we would have been looking at something quite catastrophic.

The alleged offender was immediately arrested by Western Australia police, and an investigation commenced. Within 40 minutes of that arrest, the Joint Counter Terrorism Team had been engaged. That involves Western Australia police, the Australian Federal Police and ASIO. Later, they announced that they were investigating this act as a potential terrorist attack. Since that time, I've been receiving regular updates on the alleged offence, and yesterday I received a detailed personal briefing with the Western Australia police minister, Reece Whitby, who had travelled here with the WA police commissioner and with the Australian Federal Police Commissioner, Krissy Barrett.

As a result of the investigations they've conducted, they have now charged a 31-year-old man with engaging in a terrorist attack, and, as has been referred to, this is the first time an individual has been charged with engaging in a terrorist attack in Western Australia. The charge carries a maximum penalty of life in prison. It is alleged—now, there is always a gap between the action and often a period where people are saying, 'Can you call it terrorism yet?' and a period of delay. That's because terrorism is not defined simply by the action but also by the motivation. And we need to give police time to do their work, to be able to get the strongest case together with respect to motivation.

The motivation that will be alleged is a national, racially motivated, ideological cause. White supremacist ideology has no place in modern Australia and no place in our country. When someone is made to feel unwelcome and made to feel like they don't belong, the message from Australia and from this parliament has to be that we stand with you. While there wasn't specific intelligence on this occasion, at a time when the national threat alert level is at probable, there are times when people have information and are not sure whether it might be helpful. The request from the agencies is to please report it. The National Security Hotline is 1800123400 for people to use for any information they think might constitute a risk to public safety.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Today, KPMG's chief economist said that the impact of government spending on inflation was 'plain as day'. Prime Minister, every reputable economist says that government spending is having a big impact on inflation. Is it seriously your position that they are all wrong and you are right?

The RBA governor's statements were very clear. What the RBA governor said was:

… what's happened over the last six months or so is that private demand has turned out to be much stronger than we had been forecasting …

That is what the RBA governor said. If you have 10 economists in a room, I'm sure you'll usually get 12 different views, but the truth is that the RBA governor has spoken about what—

The Manager of Opposition Business!

The Manager of Opposition Business now attacks the integrity and independence of the RBA governor and says that they are not—

Opposition members interjecting—

The interjections are there on the record from this lightweight over here, who can't do his own job and is now trying to be the shadow Treasurer.

Honourable members interjecting—

Order! The Prime Minister will return to the question.

Well, we on this side of the House will stand up for the RBA governor, we'll stand up for the independence of the Reserve Bank board and we'll also stand up for Australia's national interest. Those opposite continue to try to talk Australia down. When you look at the comments before of the OECD, I accept that the OECD as well—with the secretary-general there, a fellow called Mathias Cormann, who was backed by this side for that job when we were in opposition and backed by this side, as the government, to be reappointed to be the Secretary-General of the OECD. His statements through the OECD I read into Hansard before. There are the RBA governor's comments. The IMF had this to say in November last year:

Australia is managing a soft landing amid global uncertainty …

…   …   …

The Commonwealth's fiscal strategy has been effective over the post-pandemic period …

That's what the IMF said. And since then we've provided something that would be unfamiliar to those opposite: we provided MYEFO with an additional $20 billion of savings. Now those opposite need to come clean about what it is that they think should be cut, because they didn't do anything when they were in government, and we have found $114 billion of savings.

My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. How are the Albanese Labor government's investments in 1800MEDICARE and Medicare urgent care clinics taking the pressure off emergency departments and ensuring Australians get the healthcare advice they need after a decade of cuts and neglect?

Thank you to the member for Bendigo for her question and for being such a Medicare champion. The hard work that she has done promoting our Strengthening Medicare agenda in her community means that the people of Bendigo have enjoyed some of the best results in the country. After we tripled the bulk-billing incentives for pensioners, concession card holders and children back in 2023, bulk-billing in Bendigo went up by 10 per cent, the third-best result of any electorate in this country, and our latest investments are proving just as successful in her community. Before November, fewer than one in five general practices in Bendigo bulk-billed all of their patients all of the time. Today that figure is three in five, more than tripled in just three months. The Bendigo Urgent Care Clinic that the member talks about has also seen almost 20,000 members of her community since it opened in late 2024, all free of charge, and about half of them indicate that, if the clinic wasn't available, they would have gone to the local hospital, the Bendigo hospital emergency department. As a result, semi-urgent and non-urgent presentations to the Bendigo emergency department, what they call category 4 and category five 5 presentations, are down almost 10 per cent at that hospital, freeing up the ED staff to focus on the lifetime emergencies that they were trained for and that hospitals were built for.

As the Prime Minister has said, last week he struck an historic agreement with premiers and chief ministers to provide record support to our public hospitals, 750 of them, including the Bendigo hospital, tripling the additional support that hardworking hospitals would receive compared to the agreement that they had struck under Scott Morrison. But that's on top of all of these investments to strengthen Medicare, to deliver high-quality, affordable care to people in their own community, to take pressure off hospitals like the one at Bendigo by rebuilding general practice, by driving up bulk-billing, by rolling out Urgent Care Clinics.

But there is more. As the member says, 1800MEDICARE was an election commitment we made last year. It now provides access to high-quality medical advice 24/7 at the end of your phone, as well as, if appropriate, a direct consultation by a GP on telehealth after hours, all free of charge, obviously. Since we launched 1800MEDICARE on 1 January last month, 120,000 Australians have used that helpline and 5,000 of them have been referred to that GP consult after hours. That is 120,000 in just one month, all helping to deliver the stronger Medicare that the member for Bendigo has been fighting so hard for.

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. The minister has had several opportunities in question time this week to explain when Australian families can expect the $275 reduction in their power bills promised by the Prime Minister. Will the minister finally admit the Prime Minister wasn't telling the truth and not a single Australian family has seen the $275 reduction? Minister, why can't anyone in the Labor Party accept responsibility and just say 'sorry' to the Australian people, who are struggling under Labor's cost-of-living crisis?

I thank the honourable gentleman for his question. I take responsibility for the energy system in Australia. I take responsibility, as the minister, for progress. I take responsibility for dealing with the headwinds and the setbacks. That's what a minister does. A minister takes responsibility and deals with it—doesn't hide. Electricity rises before an election, for example. That's an option. That is an option available to a minister. That's not an option that I've chosen to take. I take responsibility for the progress. I take responsibility for dealing with the setbacks. I take responsibility for the more than a thousand batteries that have been installed in the honourable member's electorate, the 1,139, that have been installed in the member's electorate since 1 July. I note that, in Victoria, the wholesale price of energy in May 2022 was $233 a megawatt hour, and today it is $37 a megawatt hour. I do take responsibility for all the above.

My question is to the Minister for Education. What reforms is the Albanese Labor government delivering to help more children from disadvantaged backgrounds get access to early education and care, and improve the safety of our early education and care system? What are the risks?

I thank my friend, the absolutely magnificent member for McEwen, for his question. A year ago today we passed laws through parliament to enact the three-day guarantee and a month ago today we delivered it. It means every child who needs it can get access to the child care subsidy three days a week.

We know how important child care is for mums and dads—it helps them to get back to work—but it's also important for our children. This is a time when most of the brain develops. We know that a child who goes to preschool is 1½ times as ready to start primary school as a child that doesn't. Ask any primary school teacher, and they'll tell you they can identify the children who have been in early education and care. This is not babysitting. That's why it was the Productivity Commission that recommended this change—the three-day guarantee.

Their advice to us is that it's children from the most disadvantaged families—the poorest families in Australia—who get the biggest benefit from early education and that they are the ones who are least likely to be there in early education and care. That's because of the old activity test that meant their mums and dads couldn't get access to the government subsidy, and so it's their children who missed out and started behind. That now changes with the three-day guarantee. It means, for affected families earning between $50,000 and $100,000, they will save about $1,500 a year, and it means that their children will get access to the same sort of early education and care that other kids can.

I've also been asked about safety, and I can advise the House that personal mobile phones in centres have now been banned, that Commonwealth compliance officers are now up and running and doing unannounced spot checks, that the national CCTV trial has started, that the Australian Federal Police is now also part of the advisory group on that, that the national educator register will start at the end of this month, and that mandatory safety training for all staff in centres will start at the end of this month.

Members will also remember that we passed legislation through this place last year to give us the power to cut funding to centres that aren't up to scratch—that aren't meeting minimum safety standards. So far, we've sent notices to more than 60 services across the country. For some of those 60 services, that deadline that we have set for them is fast approaching. I'll have more to say about that in the next few weeks.

My question goes to the Prime Minister. As property owners were slugged this week with their thirteenth interest rate rise under Labor, the Treasurer has been laying the ground for an increase in capital gains taxes on housing. At the last election, the Prime Minister ruled out changes to negative gearing, saying it would harm housing supply and be anti-aspirational. Given this, will the Prime Minister now rule out raising capital gains tax on housing?

The opposition should be well aware that, in fact, the parliament is looking into the capital gains tax discount. Why are they looking into it? In November last year, at a time when the Liberals and the Nationals were still together, they combined with the Greens—the old firm got together; the old 'no-alition' got together—and they established a select committee in the other place to look at the operation of the capital gains tax discount. There it was—the Liberals, the Nationals and the Greens. Those were the days. Those were the days of unity.

And it gets worse! The shadow minister for housing, Senator Bragg—guess what? He's on the committee! He's on the committee, as is Senator Sharma. I know there are lots of people over there not talking to each other at the moment, but Senator Bragg is not one of them. He's always talking, and, in between talking about Days of Our Lives, he went on to talk about this committee. I assume he had authorisation from the Leader of the Opposition before they set up a committee to look at all of this. So, whilst what we've been doing is getting on with supply through the Housing Australia Future Fund—

Order! The Prime Minister will pause so I can hear from the deputy leader on a point of order. The Prime Minister updated the House on the topic he was asked about—

The member for Lingiari is warned. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will take his point of order now, as he's allowed to.

On relevance, the question was very clear. It was asking whether or not the Prime Minister will rule out increasing capital gains taxes on housing. The Prime Minister has not addressed that and is dodging the question.

The Prime Minister was updating the House about the topic and what is before the parliament, so he is being directly relevant about the topic. If he was talking about another tax policy or another policy, he wouldn't be directly relevant.

I am talking about who in this parliament is currently looking at the capital gains tax. It's the Liberals, the Nats and the Greens all together, over in the other place, having a look at all that.

Every year, in the lead-up to the budget, we have this game-playing. I'll talk about what we are doing, not what we're not doing. What we are doing is the Housing Australia Future Fund, and the five per cent deposits; they've helped 220,000 Australians into their first home. We're working with the states and territories to build 100,000 new homes reserved for first home buyers. We were in the electorate of the member for Spence last weekend—7,000 homes in South Australia. We're also training more tradies, with free TAFE, to build more homes. There are the incentives for construction apprenticeships. And what we're doing with Defence land is not only good for defence capability; it'll also be good for housing and for housing supply.

Every budget, what we do is focus on how we deliver for Australians. We're continuing to do that. This upcoming budget will be consistent with budget Nos 1, 2, 3 and 4 that have all improved the lives of Australians. (Time expired)

My question is to the Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to deliver for regional Australians, and why is unity so important to delivering for our regions?

I thank the member for Lingiari for her question. If we want to see what delivery in regional and remote Australia looks like, we need look no further than the member for Lingiari. She does such an amazing job representing her communities, and our thoughts are with communities that may be impacted by the Daly River flood, which is coming soon.

I'm proud to be part of a government that's delivering for our regions. We're investing billions of dollars in remote, rural and regional Australia whilst those opposite are investing in self-interest. Just yesterday I joined colleagues to announce the Regional and Remote Airport Support Program, providing financial relief to regional councils who were impacted when Rex Airlines went into voluntary administration—and while those opposite were exercising voluntary self-destruction.

We are delivering in programs across all portfolios to help regional Australians with health, with housing and with education, from home batteries to cheaper child care to more home-care packages. We're delivering $10,000 payments to assist housing apprentices with cost-of-living pressures while ensuring Australia gets the workforce it needs to build more homes across our country. We've waived HECS debts for doctors and nurse practitioners working in our regional communities, to attract them outside of our big cities, while those opposite have waved goodbye to one another. We're delivering cheaper medicines from 1 January this year. Our plan is to make the biggest cut to the cost of medicines on the PBS—

Opposition members interjecting—

The minister will pause. There's far too much noise. Because he was on a warning and because he's continually ignoring the respect out of the House, the member for Cowper will leave the chamber under 94(a). No matter what time of the day you're warned, it carries over. I know he's a good sport.

The member for Cowper then left the chamber .

As I said, PBS medicines are now $25 or less thanks to our investment in Medicare, saving Australians over $200 million a year. The last time they were that price was in 2004. Silverchair were still together as a band—and so were the coalition! Our Medicare urgent care clinics have been a game changer for health care in our regions. There are now 122 urgent care clinics that have opened across the country, and 39 of those have been in regional, rural and remote areas. Last weekend, the latest Medicare urgent care clinic opened in Bega, in Eden-Monaro. No appointment is needed. Patients can walk in. It's all bulk-billed. Chloe from Tura Beach said: 'Excellent doctor with detailed care. Not a long wait. So easy and a relief to receive treatment promptly on the weekend without a visit to the emergency department.' Isn't that a good news story?

They hate it.

I know! They hate it. But it's good work for all of us; we believe in Medicare on this side of the House. We believe in Medicare not only for the cities but for all the regional areas too.

The other thing we did was increase Roads to Recovery funding to $1 billion a year, and 85 per cent of that is going to regional councils. On this side of the House, 24 members represent regional areas. (Time expired)

My question is to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer please inform the House of the cost to the Commonwealth budget for 2025-26 for the Commonwealth's Capacity Investment Scheme? To assist the Treasurer, I believe they should be noted within the quantified contingent liabilities.

As the member for New England should know, because the Capacity Investment Scheme involves a number of negotiations, those numbers are not typically published. But I can tell him—

Opposition members interjecting—

Order! Members to my left, I want to hear what the Treasurer is saying.

that the Capacity Investment Scheme is unlocking $73 billion in private investment in renewable energy. Now, I know that the member for New England doesn't support renewable energy. But on this side of the House we do, and we account for all of these investments in the usual way.

My question is to the Minister for Housing, Minister for Homelessness and Minister for Cities. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to build more houses in the regions and help more regional Australians into homeownership after a decade of neglect?

What a delight it is to get this fantastic question from the member for Gilmore. Partly because of her advocacy, 667 of her constituents have gotten into homeownership with the backing of the Albanese government—and there are many more to come. She's a brilliant representative.

Australia's housing challenge is significant, and it is not a burden that falls on only our city Australians. We see significant housing challenges across the regions and in the bush, and after a decade of complete neglect of housing as an issue for the country, our government is delivering with a level of ambition that we have not seen by a Commonwealth government since the Second World War. It is a huge agenda: $45 billion targeted on three big things. We're building more homes around the country, we're getting renters a better deal and we are getting more Australians into homeownership. Our government's five per cent deposit program is incredibly popular with that community of young people who are just trying to get extra support to get into a home of their own. We are now up to 220,000 Australians who have keys to their first home with the backing of the Albanese government

Of those Australians, 73,000 have been people who live in the regions and in the bush. We've got $1.5 billion in housing infrastructure funding. It's going to roads, to sewerage, to water and to all those critical aspects that make housing possible. The vast majority of that funding has gone straight into the regions. We are building homes right around rural and regional Australia. In fact, round 3 of the Housing Australia Future Fund includes, for the first time, a dedicated regional stream to make sure we're servicing that constituency. We've got social and affordable homes being built in Tamworth, South Grafton, Shepparton, Armidale, Wangaratta and many more places.

The member asked me about alternatives, and we have seen some shockers in the time that I've been in parliament. For nine long years, those opposite sat on the benches behind me and decided to do nothing about what many Australians believe is the most important issue in their lives. As you know, Speaker, they were so checked out of housing as an issue they couldn't even be bothered having a housing minister. Now, that had real consequences. We see the Nationals in the parliament this week scratching their heads about why their voters are deserting them in droves. Maybe it's because they did nothing to deliver for regional Australians when they had the levers of power.

Speaker, do you know how many social and affordable homes those opposite built in regional and rural Australia? It was none. It's a party that says it stands up for the regions, but not a single home was built in regional Victoria, regional New South Wales or regional Western Australia. It is no wonder Australians are looking for alternatives. We're united, we're delivering and we're delivering right across the country.

My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. Since the days of the gold rush, our residents have been pushing for a crossing over the Macquarie River at Dixons Long Point, in central western New South Wales. Mid-Western Regional Council wants to access the $10 million allocated to move the project forward. Have the funds been released?

On a separate note, will your government take the lead to finally build an expressway through the Blue Mountains, which has been promised for decades and never, ever delivered? The traffic jams are worse than ever, and it's just not good enough.

I thank the member for Calare for the question, and I know he's been a long-term advocate for the Dixons Long Point crossing. We know how important the safety of regional roads and connectivity in our regions are. It is why we announced the investment of $10 million into the Dixons Long Point crossing. The crossing will provide a much-needed crossing between Mudgee and Orange.

The member for Calare will remember he wrote to me about this last year requesting an update on that project. In October last year, when he wrote, I was able to advise that the Mid-Western Regional Council had submitted the final project proposal report to my department, and that then had an assessment undertaken. I am pleased to provide a further update and report that I have approved this project proposal for the release of $10 million of funding to Transport for NSW on behalf of the Mid-Western Regional Council. That money goes towards the planning works, scope, design and cost of delivering this project, so you should start to see planning work on that project. It's a project, as you have mentioned, with a very, very long history, and I'm pleased to provide that update.

My question is to the Prime Minister. What are the objectives of the Prime Minister's upcoming visit to Indonesia? Why are our relationships in the region and the world so important for Australians at home? How has the government worked to improve those relationships since being elected?

I thank the member for Moreton for her question and for her ongoing interest in our relationships in our region.

Last year in Sydney, I stood on the deck of HMAS Canberra beside my friend President Prabowo Subianto and I announced that Australia and Indonesia would take the next step in our bilateral relationship, securing a historic security agreement between our two nations. In about 40 minutes, I will travel to Jakarta to formally sign that treaty, deepening the bond that we have, honouring our long shared history and looking ahead to our shared future.

Our mutual security treaty commits our two nations to consult at leader and ministerial levels on security matters together and to consider any security responses together. It is a watershed moment in the Australia-Indonesia partnership, a partnership that is based on friendship, trust, mutual respect and a shared commitment to peace and stability in our region.

But it's also part of our broader engagement with nations in the region and our investment in our relationships: the alliance with Papua New Guinea, the parseria with Timor-Leste, the falepili agreement with Tuvalu, the treaty with Nauru and our deeper engagement with ASEAN and the Pacific Islands Forum. We live in the fastest growing region of the world in human history. Australia's prosperity and our security lie within our region, and engaging with our neighbours and partners is vital to building a more peaceful, stable, prosperous and secure future for all of us and for generations to come.

Australia engages in our region as a neighbour, a partner and a middle power. Our word matters, and our word is respected because we back it up with action. This treaty is a proud moment in the shared history of Australia and Indonesia, and it will ensure that we work together to shape a better future, securing our shared place in the world so that we can secure the best outcome for those we serve here at home. And, on that note, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.

I have a question for you, Mr Speaker. It's asked incredibly politely. Are you able to review the Hansard for the first question, including my point of relevance? I'm happy to discuss this with you offline, but it is my strong view that my point of relevance was exactly in line with the question that was asked of the Prime Minister. I'm happy to take our discussion further offline.

 I want to raise a point of order. Questions to the Speaker are for administration purposes, and we should not get to the point where we're using questions to the Speaker to second guess rulings and to relitigate issues that could have been raised at the time, which is how points of order about order of debate and issues like that are meant to happen.

I appreciate, member for Wannon, that we've already had one discussion. I understand his concern. I take that on board, and I'll ensure that we deal with points of order following the rules. I just ask all members to follow the standing orders. Perhaps, if you're going to make a point of order on words in the question, state exactly what the words were in the question—that will help—rather than relying on what you think is in the question. That would assist the House in clarifying all points of order. I thank the member for Wannon for raising it in the spirit that he did.

(): I present the Auditor-General's performance statements audit report No. 22 of 2025-26 entitled Performance statements of major Australian Government entities—Outcomes from the 2024-25 audit program: Across entities.

Document made a parliamentary paper.

At the request of the Standing Committee on Appropriations and Administration, I present the committee's report No. 34 Additional estimates 2025-26.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Goldstein proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Government's decision to punish Australian families and small business by failing to rein in reckless spending resulting in higher interest rates.

I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

If you want to see the contempt that the Albanese government has for families, households and small businesses, you just need to see the arrogance of the Prime Minister in question time. Every time we get up to ask a simple question about the survival of small businesses, he shuts down question time, and he has good reason to do so, because the simple reality is we had more small business insolvencies in the Commonwealth last year than we have had in Australian history.

I hear the heckling from the Minister for Small Business on the other side of this chamber. I would be ashamed and embarrassed if I saw a record number of small businesses crushed under my administration, but the minister sits there peacocking, proudly saying that she is proud of her record, when she should be ashamed. Forty-thousand small businesses have been crushed into insolvency under the Albanese government. This is not something to be proud of. It is something to be embarrassed about and ashamed of, because sitting behind every one of those small businesses are the livelihoods, the incomes, the dignity and the pride of Australians backing themselves to get ahead. What they are living with right now is increased costs not just from the explicit increase in interest rates and inflation but from a cost-of-business crisis. Millions of Australian small businesses are struggling to keep their heads above the inflation water level. They are experiencing costs pushed down onto their small businesses, harming their profitability.

This morning I met with people from the restaurant and food sector. Their profit margins have simply collapsed. The capacity for a small business to be opened to serve Australians has declined so much that one in nine Australian small businesses in the restaurant and hospitality sector has closed. It is an extraordinary record of this government and something that it should be ashamed of.

But it's not just the inflation impact. With state governments indexing so many of their taxes to inflation, we're seeing a direct hit from increases in inflation, a second hit through interest rates, a third hit through the cost of taxation inflation and, in fact, a fourth hit directly as a consequence of the Labor government's industrial relations agenda, which is pushing on inflationary costs further for small business and making it harder not just for small businesses to get ahead but for households to stay ahead. So many are being pushed to the wall.

What is going on with that? It isn't just a small business, as critical as that is. Sitting behind those millions of small businesses are employees—young Australians who are getting their first job, people who depend on small business for an income. When a small business collapses, the wage disappears. It seems like a simple truth, but, when you have a small business collapse, the jobs go with it. There are no taxes paid, there is no income and there is no super on a job that doesn't exist, and this is the lived reality under the Albanese government.

We know that, as of 2 February of this year, 41,749 businesses have gone bust under the Albanese government. In construction, it's 10,757. It's 6,487 in accommodation and food services; 2,046 in manufacturing; 1,168 in health care or social assistance; 541 in agriculture, forestry and fisheries; and 406 in education and training. While the minister on the other side of the table likes to boast about her record, she cannot hide from some simple facts. The 33,426 fewer employing small businesses in Australia—

Maybe they were dodgy.

I will take the interjection from the Minister for Small Business, because what she said was, 'Maybe they were dodgy.' Just like the Treasurer, her response to the challenges Australian households and small businesses face is to punch down on Australians. This is not the type of country they want to be, and it is certainly not what they want to see from this parliament.

Honourable members interjecting—

Order! I'd appreciate it if everybody stopped yelling, actually. I can barely hear the member for Goldstein speaking.

This exposes the underbelly and the motivation of this government. There is a pure contempt for those people who make the effort, strive and back themselves to the point where they create opportunities not just for themselves but for others. The response from the minister—we just heard it in the chamber, and then she defended her comment—was, 'Maybe they were dodgy.' The simple, broad-brush allegations and criticism of small business—the demonisation of small businesses—because of the attitude of this government are why we have seen record insolvencies. Now is the time when those small businesses and those households need Australians to back them. They need this parliament to back them, but the contempt that we have from the minister shows something entirely different. That is why Australians are feeling the very real consequences of inflation and declining standards of living.

Today we heard direct warnings that inflation was going to continue to eat into the wealth of Australian households. People are going to have lower standards of living, less capacity to support their families, less capacity to go and employ others—all under this government. We have had a record of economic vandalism par excellence if you call that a standard under the Albanese government. We've had Labor's economic vandalism, where households are now paying 16 per cent more for food, 18 per cent more for health, 22 per cent more for rents, 39 per cent more for insurance and nearly 40 per cent more for electricity, and every one of those costs—every single one of those price rises—goes to a small business, eats into their profit margins and increases their capacity to find their way to the ATO and ASIC to the point of insolvency.

Why would a government be so proud of shutting down the pathways for Australians? We are in the business of backing small businesses to open their doors, to welcome their customers and to grow the opportunity in the economic base of our country. Any government, state or federal—the Albanese government in particular—that looks at small business as simply an ATM to cover the costs that they face because they are unable to manage their reckless spending will continue to drive small business to the wall. We know that is happening, because the analysis by the Australian Industry Group clearly shows eight in 10 jobs created in this country right now are coming from direct and indirect public expenditure. We have a crisis of collapse of private investment and private jobs, despite what the Prime Minister and the Treasurer say. The problem of inflation that we have in this country comes directly from fiscal recklessness. The Chalmers interest rate rise cycle has, sadly, only just begun. We have had quotes from the retail sector. We have had quotes from so many different people in the small business sector that they know how bad this is going to be and how Australian small businesses and households will pay.

We need them to rein in their spending. People on the other side of the chamber often ask, 'Where are you going to see cuts?' I can tell you where we would cut expenditure: we would cut the cartel kickbacks that go to organised crime and to bikie gangs through the CFMEU and find their way into union coffers and into the coffers of the Australian Labor Party. I make no apology about that, because they are pushing up the cost of a new home for young Australians, they're pushing up construction costs and they're contributing to the problems of inflation. Now is the time that people and Australians are looking to this parliament to stand up and make decisions in the national interest. Now is the time that they're looking at how this parliament is going to back them to prosper and to grow, and instead they are seeing and hearing the sneers of the Minister for Small Business, saying things like, 'If a small business goes out of business, it must be because it is dodgy.' This is a disgrace, and it is nothing short of contempt.

The minister can throw whatever barbs she wants, but I can tell you the small businesses of this country know exactly who is on their side. They know that the Liberal Party has always stood up proudly, backed them in and made sure the laws of this country say: 'Chance your hand. Go for your life. We back you because you back yourselves.' What they don't deserve is a prime minister and a minister for small business who punch down on them and try to deny them their economic opportunity and their pathway for growth. We back small business. They want to hate on them.

I actually really do want to thank the shadow minister and member for Goldstein for bringing this—

Opposition members interjecting—

Sorry, Minister. I ask members to please leave the chamber quietly.

No, I'm giving the call to the—is this a point of order?

Well, then you do not have the call. The minister has the call.

I ask the member opposite to withdraw the reflection on members. It was unparliamentary.

Who? Do it correctly, please. I asked you that at the beginning.

I ask that the member for Wills withdraw his unparliamentary remark.

Did the member for Wills say anything unparliamentary?

I made no remark.

I'm sorry. I asked because I couldn't hear what was going on in this chamber, despite requesting several times for interjections to stop. I don't know. He's saying there isn't anything to withdraw. I apologise for that interruption, and we will go back to the Minister for Small Business.

As I was saying, I actually welcome this MPI. I really do want to thank the member for Goldstein, the shadow minister, for bringing this because it gives us an opportunity here to speak about a really important issue. So far I've been the Minister for Small Business for nine months, and I've spoken many times in this place about small business. I know that the member for Goldstein started his contribution by talking about the lack of opportunity to ask questions about small business. I can tell you that in the nine months that I have been the Minister for Small Business in this place, I have not received a single question from the Liberal opposition about small business. They don't care about small business. They want to pretend that they care. They want to stand here and confect outrage, and they want to bang on the table and talk about small business. But do they actually care about small business? Look at their actions. Look at how many times they've sought to ask questions.

Member for Goldstein! Seriously, are we just going to have this slanging match all through the MPI? I hope not, because there'll be people leaving the chamber shortly.

I actually welcome those opposite finally focusing on something important to Australia and to Australian communities and to the Australian economy, and that is small businesses. I can't help but wonder though, given the shadow minister's recent performance, whether it was a job interview or perhaps all of this is just another distraction from the chaos, discord and infighting that we're seeing over the other side. I do welcome them actually asking a question about small business and focusing on something other than themselves for once. So I will take this opportunity to talk about small business.

First of all, though, I want to thank the many small businesses I have visited, whether in the member for Wills's electorate, the member for Moore's electorate or the member for Aston's electorate, who have taken the time to sit down with me and to go through some of the issues that they're experiencing. I can't tell you how valuable their feedback and their input is into the work that we are doing here as a government—real work that is built on Australia's very first National Small Business Strategy, a strategy that those opposite didn't have in the whole time that they were in government—and into things that we take to the small business ministers meetings, meetings that those opposite didn't convene once when they were in government. Since we've been in government, we've had seven small business ministers meetings, and I'm really pleased to say that I've convened two of them. The previous minister had convened five before that. How do you work with small businesses and deliver for small businesses if you don't talk to the states and territories, if you don't bring together small business ministers meetings, if you don't go out and talk to small businesses and listen to them?

Before I continue, I want to address a piece of misinformation. I hope that it is not purposeful, though I doubt that it isn't purposeful. I think that perhaps the shadow minister was being very purposeful in his selective use of the statistics and the figures around the number of insolvencies. I want to clarify the number of insolvencies and address specifically the point that the shadow minister made, because he is correct that the number of corporate insolvencies has increased compared to the previous 12 months; however—and here's the important bit—the level of corporate insolvencies as a proportion of total companies was 0.41 per cent. That is lower than the long-term historical average for insolvencies. So it is quite disingenuous of the shadow minister to stand here and say it's the highest number of insolvencies ever and to yell and scream like a banshee, banging on the table about the number of insolvencies when he should know how to read statistics. And if he doesn't know how to read statistics, there's a 'Statistics 101' course that he can take.

Minister, I've asked you to direct your comments through me to the chair.

My apologies, Deputy Speaker Claydon.

I want to talk a little bit about our National Small Business Strategy. The fact is you cannot deliver and you cannot say that you deliver for small businesses if you don't have a strategy. Our small business strategy, which I again remind the House is the very first national small business strategy, looks at three pillars. It looks at how we help businesses grow, it looks at cutting red tape and it looks at creating an even playing field for small businesses. These are the three things that small businesses always raise with me when I speak to them. They tell me: 'We just want an even playing field. We just want a fair go.' They tell me, 'There's too much red tape,' and often that red tape is over different levels of government, which is why it's important to speak to states and territories. And they tell me that they want to be able to grow and they want to be able to thrive. And if you have those three pillars as the basis, the principles, upon which you base the work that you do in small business, then you are able to deliver for them.

Under those three pillars, there are a number of things that we have delivered. I want to talk a little bit about the instant asset write-off, which we extended. It's a $20,000 instant asset write-off. It allows small businesses to purchase the equipment that they need to keep going.

I want to talk about the many supports we have for businesses around digital solutions. A lot of small businesses are a bit reticent to uptake AI, to utilise digital solutions. I want to tell small businesses that there is help out there, to help you utilise digital solutions, to grow your business and to keep your business going.

I want to talk about the targets that we've set for government procurement. We've increased the target of government procurement for businesses under 20 billion to 40 per cent, and that means that any government contracts under 20 billion, 40 per cent of them must be small or medium enterprises. That really gives small businesses a fair go and an even playing field when it comes to getting government contracts.

One of the greatest issues that a lot of small businesses talk to me about is red tape. We've got states and territories committed to reducing red tape, getting rid of the clutter, so that small businesses can continue to get on with their core business and run the businesses they need to run. I've heard some pretty interesting stories about red tape, but we're also going to be looking into white tape—that's something that ASBFEO, the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman recommended. We are looking at white tape, which is that regulatory burden between corporate business and small business.

I'll go back to the fact that those opposite like to say they care about small business. They like to talk about small business, but the proof is really in the pudding. The proof is very much evident in the fact that in the nine months I've been the small-business minister, not once have they ever asked a question about small business. Not a single time. Not a single question.

Not a question! What have you been doing?

Assistant Minister Khalil, sitting at the table, not helpful. Shadow minister responding, not helpful. Please desist.

I will not sit here and watch the shadow minister, with his confected outrage, when he has never ever brought up the subject of— (Time expired)

'The proof is in the pudding,' as the Minister for Small Business said just then. Let me give the minister some proof: nearly 15,000 small businesses were insolvent across the country last year. The proof is in the pudding. That's up 33 per cent on the previous 12 months. That's a big statistic; it's a big number. But behind those 15,000 proof-is-in-the-pudding failures of this minister is a family. It is a husband and a wife who have risked it all to chase their dream. They've put it all on the line to provide a better life for their family, for their children. They have taken risks, they have risked it all, and 15,000 small businesses have become insolvent. They've had to go broke and potentially lose their house.

And what is the comfort that the Minister for Small Business just gave to those business owners that lost it all in the last 12 months? 'Maybe they were dodgy'! So, if you were one of those small businesses in Casey that took a risk and gave it all and unfortunately it didn't succeed in the last 12 months, the Minister for Small Business in the Albanese Labor government wants you to know that maybe you were dodgy. Maybe it was your fault. There's no-one to blame in the Albanese Labor government. It couldn't have possibly been this minister. It had to be you. What does that really say about this government? This is a minister that is supposed to be responsible for helping the Australian people, for helping small businesses that risk it all to get ahead. And her answer to you is that you're dodgy. It's your fault. Why is the Minister for Small Business even the minister if she does not care about Australian small businesses?

Small businesses give so much back to our community. I'm very lucky to have so many sporting clubs in the electorate of Casey. On the side of all those sporting club fields are sponsorships, and they're not sponsors from big business. They are sponsored by small businesses right across the country that are the heart of the community. They give back. So, if small business is not strong, our communities will not be strong. And, if our communities cannot be strong, then our country will not be strong. But this government does not care about that. Let's be clear. There is a reason that this government does not care about small businesses in Australia.

Exactly right! They cannot unionise a small business. The secret given by the minister who has such disrespect for small businesses is that there is a compact between big business in Australia and the union movement, and the union movement then supports the ALP. The small businesses of Australia cannot be unionised, so the ALP and this government do not want to support them. They want to run them out of business so they can centralise it with unions. We know this and we see this, and, as the minister herself said, the proof is in the pudding. The proof in the pudding is 15,000 small businesses becoming insolvent in the last year alone. Australians have suffered.

The real question and the real fear for the Australian people is that it was bad in 2025. We saw an interest rate rise this week. It's going to get a lot worse for small businesses across the country. The reason it's going to get worse is that input costs are up, led by energy. Inflation is up, and interest rates are up. Rule No. 1 with any addiction and any problem is to recognise that you have an addiction and that you have a problem. And we have seen this week that this prime minister and this treasurer refuse to acknowledge the spending addiction that they have when it comes to public spending, which is going to make the situation worse for every Australian and every small business. It is going to send costs up. Their borrowing costs are going to go up. The cost of their raw materials is going to go up. That means they have two choices: put their prices up and make it more expensive for consumers, or they are going to have to go out of business. It is not their fault. It is the failure of this government. But just remember, small business owners, that if you go out of business this year it's not the government's fault. Maybe you were dodgy. What a disgrace by this minister that doesn't— (Time expired)

We know that Australians are doing it tough, including small business, and I want to thank the Minister for Small Business for setting out so clearly all that we have done to deliver for small business in this country. We know that families are juggling bills, students are worrying about debts, renters and first homebuyers are feeling locked out and people are making impossible choices about their health. When Australians are under pressure, this parliament and this minister have a choice: we can step up and deliver relief, or we can stand back, point fingers, call people names and play politics. This Labor government and our small business minister have chosen to step up and deliver. We have heard today all she has delivered in such a short amount of time for small businesses in this country. Yet, day after day, the opposition stands up in this chamber and calls and calls cost-of-living relief 'reckless', and today is no different with the wording of today's MPI—reckless. Well, if helping small businesses is reckless, if helping Australians see a doctor when they're sick is reckless, sign me up. If easing pressure on students, families and first home buyers is reckless, sign me up. If backing Australians through a global cost-of-living crisis is reckless, then this side of the House is proudly guilty.

Opposition members interjecting—

I would like to hear the member for Bonner.

What would be truly reckless is doing nothing, which is exactly what we see from the other side—nothing, no policy, no ideas. They don't even know who their leader is anymore!

Let's talk about what Labor is delivering, and let's start with health. Labor has delivered 120 urgent care clinics so Australians can get free walk-in care when they need it, closing the gap without paying any out-of-pocket fees. Locally, in my community of Bonner, we have seen not one but two Medicare urgent care clinics in the last two months. The Carina-Carindale and the Capalaba urgent care clinics are now open. We've delivered 51 Medicare mental health clinics and 41 more are on the way, with 10 to come in Queensland alone, because mental health care should not depend on your postcode or your bank balance. We've strengthened Medicare with $25 PBS medicines—real relief every single time someone walks into a pharmacy, saving Australians more than $200 million a year. In my electorate of Bonner, that's $14.2 million saved since 2023. These aren't abstract policies; they're fewer dollars at the counter, they're early intervention and they're peace of mind for all Australians.

Under Labor, Australians with student debt have received a 20 per cent reduction, wiping an average of $5,500 off what they owe—21,000 people with student debt in Bonner are now better off. That's money back in the pockets of nurses, teachers, social workers and small-business owners. That's relief that flows straight into the economy and straight into household budgets. All of these were, shamefully, opposed by those opposite.

Let's talk about housing. Labor is helping first home buyers get a foot in the door with five per cent first home deposits—not a handout, but a hand up. In Queensland alone, more than 50,000 people have taken up this opportunity—50,000 Queenslanders who are now homeowners or on their way to becoming one, including hundreds in Bonner. Many of those, I'm sure, are also small-business owners. If empowering that many people to buy their first home is reckless then sign me up every single day of the week. That's what Labor governments do—we deliver.

Labor is delivering cost-of-living relief. We are delivering for small business. We're not reckless; we're responsive. We're not irresponsible; we're realistic. And we're not here to play games while people are doing it tough. That's what governing looks like. It's delivering real relief to people who need it most, not playing politics and calling people names.

I thank the shadow minister for small business for putting forward this MPI, because it's not only giving me an opportunity to voice the concerns of the thousands of small businesses across my electorate of McPherson on the southern Gold Coast but it has also given this chamber and the Australian people an insight into the arrogance of the Minister for Small Business and, in doing so, an insight into the arrogance of this Albanese Labor government. The member for Bonner has just given us all these reasons for why we should end this MPI and, in effect, congratulate Labor. She started talking about the things that Labor has supposedly delivered. Well, what have Labor delivered? They've delivered 13 interest rate rises, they've delivered the highest government spending outside a recession in the last 40 years, they've delivered the sharpest fall in living standards across the developed world, and they've delivered budget blowouts left, right and centre. This is the record of this government, and it's affecting small businesses in my electorate of McPherson and across the country.

If you actually look at what this minister said—and this goes back to the arrogance—her interjections, when the shadow minister for small business was raising legitimate concerns felt by small businesses across this country, went to the fact of 'if you're a small business that's going out of business, it's probably because you're dodgy'. That is absolute contempt for small businesses in this country, and it's consistent with—

A point of order, Minister?

If I may, I've heard time and time again the quotes from those opposite as they're using them through their speeches. I just want to clarify that that's not what I said, and I think that those—

That's not a point of order, but there's another opportunity to do that and correct the record.

I will take that opportunity, then, thank you.

This is consistent with what we're seeing from ministers in this government. We've also seen the Treasurer ditch his responsibility to admit to the Australian people that he should be taking responsibility for this most recent interest rate rise. Labor have presided over the biggest collapse in living standards in the developed world. This government's inability to rein in its spending means that, now, Australian families and Australian small businesses have to. The government know that their spending was directly impacting inflation, but they don't care. This is not a global trend, because, while other countries are seeing inflation return to pre-COVID levels, we are the outlier. And we've seen, as I've said, the 13th rate rise under this government.

The member for Casey mentioned that the first step in fixing a problem is acknowledging that there is one, and that is what we are calling for today as the opposition. This government needs to sit up and acknowledge that it is the problem. Its reckless spending over the last 3½ years has contributed to the situation that we're in. I think that we in this place should be subject to the same levels of fiscal constraint that we expect of the people we govern. If this place can't do that and if this government can't do that, then we are disrespecting the people who have put us here. We're disrespecting the small businesses and disrespecting our constituents. This government should be stronger and better than that, because Australians deserve better and the people in my electorate of McPherson deserve better.

When I go and speak to small businesses across McPherson on the southern Gold Coast, they tell me about the real effects they are feeling of the decisions that are being made in this place. They're telling me about the increases in what they're spending to lease their venues. They're talking to me about the difficulties that they've got in the industrial relations space. They're talking to me about the impacts of interest rates on their family homes. These are real and genuine concerns. For those opposite to just sit there and call things out, not take note and listen, is disrespectful.

This is all because Labor can't show budget restraint. Those opposite may not share the values that we do, but what they should do is take into account where they are sending this country and where they are sending the people in this country. They need to stand up for them—for small businesses—rein in expenditure and get this economy back under control.

Those opposite have raised the topic of reckless spending. It's a breathtaking exercise in political amnesia from those opposite. I assume that the first example of reckless spending that they will want Australians to know about will be the $600 billion that they want to spend on nuclear power plants, which they took to the last election. I assume that they will want Australians to know about the near decade of deficits that they produced, which left Australians with higher debt, higher prices, collapsing services and absolutely no plan to deal with inflation when those opposite walked out the door. I assume that they want Australians to know about the thousands and thousands of dollars that they gave to their mates in Qantas and Harvey Norman. I assume that they will want to talk about the cost that Australians were left with from serving the trillion dollars of Liberal debt that we inherited from our predecessors.

But what about where Labor's allocating our resources? Labor is investing prudently in Australia's greatest opportunity—its people. We have delivered cost-of-living relief that is targeted, responsible and real. And it's making a tangible difference to my constituents in Hughes, with things like cheaper child care that's already putting thousands of dollars back into the pockets of families and suburbs of my electorate from Bundeena to Bardia; things like cheaper medicines, with all PBS medicines now $25 or less, saving families across Hughes hundreds of dollars a year; things like tax cuts for every taxpayer, including another tax cut coming in July this year benefiting local workers and small businesses alike. They were tax cuts that those opposite voted against.

Those opposite should have to answer this question: which part of that spending is wasteful? We on this side don't think that making child care more affordable so that parents can be part of the workforce is wasteful spending. We on this side don't think that the senior heading down to the pharmacy in Illawong being able to afford all of the medicines prescribed to him to keep him out of the hospital system is wasteful spending. But those opposite should have to answer: who do you think is the wasted investment, our children or our seniors? We on this side don't think that Australians earning more and keeping more of what they earn through our tax cuts that they voted against is reckless. It is money that's going back into the pockets of Australians right across the country.

Those opposite want Australian wages to be lower. Under this government wage growth is finally moving again after a decade of deliberate wage suppression by those opposite. They said that lower wages were a design feature of the economy under them, and that's exactly what they got. And who paid the price for it? It was Australian workers. On this side, we back Australian workers. On this side, we want Australians earning more. We are investing in Australian skills.

We're now celebrating the third birthday of free TAFE. Those opposite don't believe in free TAFE. The Liberals and the Nationals don't agree on much at the moment. There's not much they agree on. But one thing they do agree on is they hate free TAFE. They hate the idea that Australians are able to get the skills that they need for the jobs of the future without having to go into enormous debt. We are cutting student debt. We've cut student debt by 20 per cent right across the country. That's money going back into the pockets of young people across Australia who are just starting out, who are just trying to get ahead. Those opposite have talked them down every step of the way.

Those opposite have claimed that the interest rates are going up as a result of the of reckless spending. They clearly haven't bothered to read the statement by the RBA's monetary policy board, which highlighted that growth in private demand was strengthening substantially more than expected, which was partly driving inflation. We wouldn't expect those opposite to be able to read any sort of economic document based on the leadership that they showed when they were in power. But it shows the gall of them, that they then have the audacity to come here and complain about what we're doing on this side of the House.

Those opposite claim to support small business but they didn't produce a national small business strategy; we did. We're the first ones to do it. We believe in investing in Australian jobs. That's what we're doing, and those opposite have failed to do that over their near decade in office.

As the member for Casey rightly pointed out earlier, the first steps to solving a problem is to recognise that you have one. Indeed, this government do not recognise a problem that is right in their faces. Inflation is rampant. It has increased by 3.8 per cent just recently. Again, we see another interest rate rise hurting families, hurting small business, crushing our economy. Government spending right now is the highest it has been in 40 years outside of the pandemic. It is a big-spending government. As the government gets bigger, we as a people become more dependent on said government and lose our freedoms.

Now, if you have the unfortunate nature to live in either the great state of South Australia, as I do, or Victoria—let's look at the debt that we've carried in both of these states. In South Australia, we reached a milestone last year. If you divide the debt of both the federal government and the state government by the workforce in South Australia, it is over $100,000 per worker and increasing. Your children and your grandchildren are going to be paying off that debt. That is what these big numbers mean. We have gone from 24 to 27 per cent of government spending as a percentage of GDP. Again, that is big government territory.

The Treasurer likes to present himself as a specialist, an expert in diagnosing the nation's finances with precision. He wants us to trust his credentials. But if you went to the doctor who ignored your symptoms, refused to make you a treatment plan and told you everything was fine while your fever spiked and kept rising, you'd be worried. That is exactly what we have in this Treasurer. He is running the economy with absolutely no plan to fix the patient. But we wouldn't be surprised, really. After all, he has no academic credentials. He does, however, have a PhD in political science, a PhD in spin.

Amongst the many complaints my office receives daily about inflation and rising costs, I was recently contacted by John McGahan, a retail worker from Port Augusta. John acknowledges that he was lucky to grow up in a time when things were affordable, but he can see things are now totally out of control. John rang my office to let me know about his deep concern he has for his niece and nephew, who he fears will never be able to afford their own home thanks to the spiralling cost of living under this government. The last figures from the ABS confirm what every Australian knows, what Graham from Port Augusta knows, and that is that under Labor the cost of living is totally out of control. This is just not theory or economic modelling. This is the weekly shop. This is the power bill. This is the rent and the mortgage. It is happening. It is real.

Inflation rose 3.8 per cent in December, accelerating over Christmas at the worst possible time for families. Let's take another look at the run sheet, at the facts and the figures. Insurance is up 38 per cent. Energy prices are up 39 per cent. Rent has climbed 22 per cent. Health costs are up 18 per cent. Education is up 17 per cent. Food is up 16 per cent. These are the things people need to survive, but the pain does not stop there. The average mortgage holder is paying around $21,000 a year more in interest than they were under the coalition—$21,000! And the rates have risen yet again. That is money stripped away from the family budget. Why is this happening? Because inflation is being driven by government spending. Labor's spending is the problem, and it's clear as day. Spending is an addiction. Spending is now at its highest levels outside of a recession in 40 years. Former head of the RBA Philip Lowe made it clear that inflation lasted longer in Australia because of Labor's spending addiction. We all know that when Labor spends, Australians pay.

The Treasurer's thrown out the rule book. He has given himself a credit card with no limit—borrow, borrow, spend, spend. In the last three years Labor has added $100 billion to national debt. The debt will reach $1 trillion in the coming months and $1.2 trillion by the next election. This is out of control. Like everyone else, the Treasurer must spend within his means.

Let me begin by saying that the only thing reckless in this debate is the sheer nerve, the utter gall, of members of the Liberal Party standing up to lecture anyone on the economic responsibility of the cost of living, particularly when their record left Australian families and small businesses worse off. In the 47th parliament, the Liberal Party along with their then partners, now ex-partners, the National Party made it their mission to block every single cost-of-living measure introduced by this government, measures that would have supported households and the 2.6 million small businesses that employ nearly 40 per cent of the workforce. That was not responsible or principled; that was reckless. Had our cost-of-living-relief measures not passed, that is what would have hurt Australian families and the small businesses that rely on their spending. After nine long years of cuts, chaos and neglect, those opposite left behind a system that was fundamentally broken, where inflation was rising, wages were going backwards, productivity was stagnant and essential services—which small businesses depend upon—were hollowed out. That is their legacy.

However, this second-term Albanese Labor government has chosen a very different path—one grounded in responsibility, fairness and targeted relief for working people and the small businesses that form the backbone of our economy. The measures we have passed through this place are not reckless; they are deliberate. They have been thought through and they are changing lives in households, shopfronts and workplaces right across Australia.

Yesterday, the independent Reserve Bank monetary policy board increased the cash rate by 25 basis points. We understand this will come as difficult news for millions of Australians with a mortgage and the pressure this puts on families and small-business owners juggling repayments, rent and cash flow. While the decision was widely expected, that doesn't make it any easier. That is why we continue to roll out responsible cost-of-living relief, including a further tax cut later this year and another one next year—tax cuts that benefit 1½ million sole traders and which put real money back into the small businesses that power local economies. This stands in stark contrast to those opposite, who went to the last election promising higher taxes and have opposed every measure designed to support small-business confidence and consumer demand.

In government, those opposite shamefully suppressed wages. They in fact made it a cunning design of their economic plan, undermining the spending power of customers that small businesses rely on to survive. Since coming to office, our Labor government has delivered pay rises for minimum and award wage workers, lifting annual incomes by more than $9,000. What happens when wages increase? People spend a bit more. This means local economies are strengthened. All kinds of small businesses like restaurants, cafes, gift shops, shoe stores—my favourite!—and bakeries benefit.

We expanded paid parental leave to 24 weeks and ensured superannuation is paid on government funded parental leave, recognising that small businesses benefit when workplaces are fair, modern and able to retain skilled staff. We delivered $300 energy bill relief in financial year 2024-25 and $150 off power bills in the financial year to December 2025 for every household and around one million small businesses, while investing in long-term cost reduction—including 30 per cent off home batteries. That is structural reform that helps small businesses manage costs and to plan for the future.

We made the biggest-ever investment in Medicare since its creation, easing pressure on small-business owners, who know that a healthy workforce is a productive workforce. We opened Medicare urgent care clinics, including one in my electorate, in Bayswater, which is very popular. Right across the country we opened these Medicare urgent care clinics, with more than two million Australians already receiving free urgent care. We cut student debt by 20 per cent. We have done so much to help Australian households and small businesses; I could go on, but I don't have a lot more time. It is targeted, and it is responsible and it is certainly not the kind of spending you could call 'reckless'.

The Minister for Small Business interjected when the member for Goldstein was delivering his speech on his MPI. I'd like Australians to know that what she said was that small businesses are dodgy. I say the Minister for Small Business is dodgy, I say the Treasurer is dodgy and I say the Prime Minister is dodgy.

Member for Moncrieff, I ask you to withdraw that comment.

I didn't think it was an unparliamentary word.

It's not open for debate. Please withdraw that comment.

I withdraw. This week we saw interest rates rise again, and we saw the Treasurer's 13th interest rate rise since he became the Treasurer. Not happy, Jim! We saw the Prime Minister's 13th interest rate rise since he became the Prime Minister. Labor has been responsible for the economy for four years and has been responsible for 13 interest rate rises—and Australians are buckling under the stress.

Australians should be very unhappy with the Prime Minister and with the Treasurer's very poor performance. Families were already hurting, and with the Treasurer's 13th rate rise, they are going to be hurting even more. And, as the shadow minister for youth, this pain then rolls down to the young, who feel the pinch too, because retailers and small businesses can't afford to employ them, and there have been 41,000 insolvencies since Labor came to power that can no longer employ young people on their books. As the shadow minister for youth, I often talk with young people about what impacts them. Whilst they are sometimes uncertain about what career or what job they might want to go to next, they're very clear on the financial pressures they face and their families face.

Last week, I was in Hobart talking to young people. They were unanimous in detailing how hard it is to get a doctor's appointment, never mind a job in small business. If they can find a doctor with availability, then the next hurdle for them is the cost. They also said that the doctor who might have an available appointment is definitely not a bulk-billing doctor. They also said that they have to pay $120 upfront, with approximately $70 for the out-of-pocket fee. Now, that's not one Medicare card; that's two—a Medicare card and a credit card. And guess what? Young people can't get a credit card. Therefore, they don't go to the doctor in Hobart, so their health is suffering, and, as a consequence of their health suffering, so too is their mental health, because they cannot access a GP and certainly cannot access a bulk-billing GP.

With the Treasurer's interest rate rise, there will be less money for families, which means going to the doctor just became even more out of reach for young people. Interest rate rises also impact young people in other ways, and the consequences are that landlords will now put rent up because interest rates have gone up, making it even harder for people, particularly young people, to afford housing. Home loan repayments and small business loans for families are making it harder for employers to employ young people and more employees.

Who is going to pay for Labor's addiction to spending? Who is going to pay for it? Well, it's the taxpayer. That's why this budget that's coming this year is a blow-out. That is why Australians are now having to pay for this government's reckless spending on our economy. Labor can put spin on their 13th interest rate rise, but Labor's squeeze on Australians is being felt, and will now be felt even harder. We're not happy with Labor, just like we're not happy with Jan—not happy, Jan; not happy, Labor. Just ask any young person and they'll let you know that too.

Labor spends, prices rise and you pay for it. They spend, prices go up and you get the bill. Insurances are up 39 per cent; energy is up 38 per cent; rent is up 22 per cent; health is up 18 per cent—that's if you can get a doctor's appointment; education is up 17 per cent; food is up 16 per cent. The more they spend, the longer inflation stays higher, and the more you have to pay the bills. They keep spending and keep asking you to tighten your belt while they spend your taxpayer dollars.

Living standards have gone backwards under this government. We've got a $1.2 trillion debt that is going to punish the next generations. You will have to pay for this government's spending, so don't believe a word they say. They spend, prices go up and you pay.

I would like to thank the member for Goldstein for bringing forward this important issue in his own special way. The fight to bring down the cost of living is front and centre for my constituents in Bean every day, and I'm happy to tell them that the Albanese Labor government is right alongside them in that fight. That is why the Albanese Labor government is introducing real, practical assistance in approaches that work to help local families every day. We have delivered tax cuts for every taxpayer, with a further tax cut coming this July. We have consistently supported pay rises for all minimum-award-rates workers and re-energised enterprise bargaining for fairer pay for all workers and their families. We have changed the architecture of workplace relations.

We have also made generational investments into affordable and accessible health and education. In December, the Woden Valley, in my electorate, welcomed the opening of the ACT's newest Medicare urgent care clinic. It's located at 33 Colbee Court in Phillip and offers free, GP-led health care, without an appointment, seven days a week. This clinic joins pre-existing clinics in Tuggeranong, Weston Creek, Dickson, Belconnen and Gungahlin, across the territory. Labor's Medicare urgent care clinics have already seen more than 2.2 million presentations since the first sites opened in June 2023. This new clinic in Woden will ensure that those numbers continue to climb and that all those who need medical treatment are able to receive it without having to worry about the cost.

Our commitment to the health and wellbeing of Australians doesn't stop there, with agreements reached last week that will see the ACT receive an additional $557 million boost to hospital funding, alongside additional funding of $75 million to assist with the challenges of being a smaller jurisdiction. This is part of a package of over $4 billion in the ACT, allowing affordable and timely access to quality health care for all. It has already been one month since the Albanese Labor government made medicines on the PBS just $25—the biggest cut to the cost of medicines in the history of the PBS. This means that people in my electorate of Bean are now paying less for medicines they rely on every day. That is real, practical assistance.

We are also backing Australia's students and young people. Labor promised to cut student debt, and now the Albanese Labor government is delivering. Australians with student debt, including HECS-HELP, VET and TAFE loans, will have seen a 20 per cent reduction—no applications, no forms, just real cost-of-living relief. We have made free TAFE permanent, opening the door to secure work for more young people, and increased the HECS and HELP loan repayment threshold so students get to keep more of what they earn before repayments kick in.

We are paying students on prac for key degrees such as nursing, midwifery and social work, so they are able to complete their training without economic stress. We are boosting support for apprentices, delivering a $10,000 bonus to housing-construction and clean-energy apprentices so that more tradies can finish their training, as those cost pressures can flow through to the construction sector. These are real, practical measures that are assisting those in my community and those right across Australia.

I would like to remind the member for Goldstein and those opposite that, at every moment they were presented with an opportunity to assist the Australian people with the cost of living, they said no. They said no to Medicare urgent care clinics, they said no to lower HECS debts and fee-free TAFE, they said no to tax cuts for all Australians and they said no to energy relief. When the Albanese government first came into power, inflation had a six in front of it and interest rates had begun to rise. If only those opposite had cared so deeply about this issue when they were last in government! It took the Albanese government to get these pressures under control, and we are focused on continuing that work with the Australian people.

On this side of the chamber, we are united in the face of the challenges that affect the Australian people and are taking concrete steps to address the rapidly changing international economic climate. There is more work to do in 2026, and I hope those opposite will join us rather than talking endlessly about themselves and opposing every practical measure that is helping take pressure off the Australian people.

The time for this discussion has now concluded.

I rise to associate myself with the remarks of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition at the beginning of question time. For 45,000 years, the Whadjuk people of the Noongar nation have cared for Boorloo—that is, what is now known as the electorate of Perth. On 26th January 2026, in Forrest Place, they and thousands of others gathered peacefully. Minutes into the gathering, there was an alleged attack on First Nations people, driven by racism and hatred. That is not who we are, nor is it what we will allow Australia to become. This was an alleged attack on all Australians and on Australia's democracy. A homemade explosive device that did not detonate was thrown into a peaceful crowd. There were First Nations leaders, children, people from all walks of life. I had friends who were there. My children had their friends there as well. Today's news confirming this was an alleged terrorist act is another level of devastation.

I thank the AFP, WA police and ASIO officers who've worked tirelessly. I thank the civilians who responded swiftly and alerted police to the threat. We can all walk in the footsteps of these everyday heroes. If you see something, say something. The National Security Hotline is open every minute of every hour of every day on 1800123400.

I want to speak directly to those who feel the pain and heaviness of this news today. To the First Nations community in Perth, I stand with you. This parliament stands with you just as we stand with First Nations people across Australia who are hurting. Every Australian has the right to a shared sense of safety. I thank the Prime Minister, the Minister for Home Affairs, the Minister for Indigenous Australians and all colleagues who've offered support to people affected in both my electorate and their electorates. Australia must continue to walk together to build a country free from terror, a country free from racism, a country where we are free to exercise our fundamental democratic rights.

I move:

That the amendments be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

The bill also provides the ATEC with the function of preparing reports and providing advice and recommendations on improving higher education, access, participation and outcomes for those facing systemic barriers to education.

We are at a generational juncture, and this is the moment to design an enduring higher education system that serves Australia's interests for decades to come. In building on the strengths of the current tertiary education framework, the ATEC is part of a system that will underpin Australia's economic and social prosperity. The ATEC must cement public confidence in the higher education system and become a longstanding and trusted source of tertiary policy expertise and stewardship and be a strong, independent body operating under the strategic direction of government, facilitating the mission of universities to be places of high-quality teaching and research and development that drives innovation, productivity and economic prosperity. I stand with the Prime Minister and Minister for Education as they prosecute this agenda, and I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned.

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee's Advisory report on the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025: also reporting on Review of Division 3 ofPart III of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 (compulsory questioning powers).

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee's Advisory report on the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025. This report also completes and reports on the committee's review of ASIO's compulsory questioning powers under the ASIO Act, which was commenced in the previous parliament, and draws on the evidence provided to that review.

ASIO's compulsory questioning powers have been reviewed multiple times since their commencement in 2003. The minimal use of the questioning warrant provisions in recent years means there are limited examples of use against which the operation and effectiveness of the powers can be assessed. Nevertheless, the committee considered the experience of ASIO with the provisions to date and concerns about the powers raised by submitters. The committee's combined review then considered amendments to those powers proposed in the ASIO Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025.

The committee has concluded, as it did in 2018, that ASIO's compulsory questioning powers are necessary. The powers were originally granted in recognition of the fact that ASIO had no ability to question an individual who would not engage voluntarily, and, in the context of the heightened risk of terrorism following the events of 11 September 2001, without the questioning warrant regime, this gap in ASIO's intelligence collection capabilities would still exist.

The rapidly changing and increasingly complex security threat facing Australia today is a powerful signal to the committee that ASIO's ability to question persons who may hold valuable national security intelligence, whether willing or not, must remain in the law. Nevertheless, the committee remains cognisant that compulsory questioning is an extraordinary power for an intelligence agency to have and is therefore pleased that ASIO is using these powers sparingly and judiciously. The committee does not accept the argument made by some that infrequent use of the regime by ASIO shows that it's not needed. In fact, the committee hopes that these continue to be powers ASIO rarely needs to invoke. The committee is satisfied that the compulsory questioning framework is necessary and also largely fit for purpose and therefore endorses the proposal in the bill to repeal provision for the periodic sunsetting of the powers. This will make the powers permanent, subject to any future amendment or repeal by the parliament.

The committee's report makes four recommendations to further strengthen safeguards and accountability in relation to the granting and use of the powers and their oversight by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security. With the entrenchment of the compulsory questioning powers, regular review, including parliamentary oversight by the committee is more important than ever. As per the proposed amendment in part I of the bill, the committee considers that it is appropriate for the committee to undertake another statutory review within three years of the commencement of the amendments. The report recommends that, subject to the committee's recommendation, ASIO Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025 be passed by the parliament. I commend the report to the House.

I rise to speak on the Universities Accord (Australian Tertiary Education Commission) Bill 2025. I support an Australian Tertiary Education Commission, or ATEC, in principle. The universities accord's final report makes a compelling case that our tertiary education system has lacked long-term stewardship, coordinated planning and a strong evidence base. It's a system that's too important to run on chaotic political and short-term policy. But here's the problem: this bill does not establish the ATEC the accord recommended. It establishes a body called ATEC, but it doesn't give it the independence, the authority or the capability that would justify setting it up at all. In its current form, it risks becoming a lightly rebranded branch of the department—additional bureaucracy for no reason—constrained, dependent and unable to do the hard, long-term work the accord envisaged. I support ATEC in theory, but I oppose this legislation as drafted.

I'm not alone. My position has been shaped by consultation with higher education experts and university groups, and by close reading of the submissions made to the Senate committee inquiry. There's a consistent message across many of them: yes to an ATEC in concept, but no to an ATEC that cannot act independently, cannot publish freely and cannot build its own capability. In other words, if ATEC is not meaningfully different from the department then why bother? I'll be moving amendments to attempt to fix these defects, and if the government will not accept these essential changes then I'm unlikely to support this bill in its current form.

Firstly, why do we need an ATEC at all? The universities accord's final report is blunt about the nature of the challenge. It says:

Our tertiary education system lacks the coordinated, future-focused and evidence-based, decision-making capacity necessary for Australia's future success. This must change.

This is not a theoretical complaint. The accord documents a pattern of policy drift, fragmentation and failure, not because universities are incapable but because the system has lacked an enduring steward with the remit and capability to plan across electoral cycles.

Let me give some specific examples of fragmented and short-term policy that the accord identifies that a future ATEC would help deal with if designed properly. First is the failed Job-Ready Graduates scheme. The accord says plainly that this needs to be replaced. The central premise—using price signals to shift student course choices—has failed. It left some students facing extremely high contributions and debts that don't reflect their future earning potential, and it shifted the funding burden further onto students and away from government. At the same time, it reduced funding available to universities to deliver disciplines critical to future jobs and innovation, including science, engineering and mathematics. This is what short-term, politically driven policy looks like: a major reform implemented with insufficient evidence and follow-through, producing outcomes that undermine national objectives. A second example is a funding model that no longer delivers for Australians. The accord identifies that the current funding arrangements are limiting enrolments of students from underrepresented backgrounds, and are not able to support growth in the tertiary sector in order to meet our nation's skill needs.

These examples point to the need for long-term, evidence based stewardship of the tertiary education system focused on outcomes for students and for Australia. This is why ATEC matters. But if ATEC is to solve these problems, it must be built as the accord envisaged—independent, expert and able to work across electoral cycles, not constrained to speak only when invited and not prevented from publishing uncomfortable truths.

Let's look at what the bill actually does. It establishes ATEC as the steward of the higher education system. It will be led by three commissioners—a chief commissioner, a First Nations commissioner and a part-time commissioner—appointed by the minister and collectively expected to bring balanced experience across higher education, VET, governance, engagement and regional Australia. ATEC's functions include: negotiating mission based compacts with universities and tertiary education providers; consulting widely across the tertiary system; and providing advice and recommendations to Commonwealth and state and territory ministers about the tertiary education system on request of the minister. These mission based compacts between the ATEC and higher education providers are the main mechanism for sustained engagement with the sector. They allow each provider to show how its unique mission aligns with national, state and local priorities, and they set a limited but meaningful set of performance objectives agreed collaboratively. The ATEC will take a good-faith, proportionate approach, supporting improvements, varying terms where needed and only escalating if performance remains below expectations.

There are some good parts of this. The most positive outcome of this bill is that it recognises that the ATEC is needed in principle. It accepts the accord's logic. But the accord did not call for another advisory unit inside the machinery of the department; it called for a steward that could provide robust advice, support evidence based decision making and planning, and work across political cycles with a long time horizon. If the bill doesn't deliver that then it fails its own justification.

Now I want to talk about the amendments that were moved. I oppose the bill as drafted because it doesn't create the ATEC that Australia needs. Firstly, we need to provide the ATEC with autonomy and independence. The ATEC should have the ability to initiate and publish advice and recommendations on its own initiative, rather than solely at the request of the minister. Without this independence, there seems little point in creating a new organisation that largely duplicates the department's work. If it can only speak when asked and can only publish when approved then it's not an independent steward; it's an adviser on a leash, and this matters because the hardest issues in higher education reform are often politically inconvenient. Job-ready Graduates is a clear example.

Operational autonomy matters too. Currently, the department controls the ATEC's staffing and contractor engagement, which could undermine the ATEC's capacity to build expertise and undertake independent analysis. That's not the design of an independent steward. This issue has been raised by a huge number of stakeholders, including Universities Australia, the Group of Eight, the Regional Universities Network, Science and Technology Australia, Professor Andrew Norton and Professor Julia Horne. As a result, I'll move amendments to: firstly, omit the requirement that the ATEC may only prepare reports and provide advice at the request of the minister, and ensure the ATEC can initiate and publish reports and advice itself; secondly, require the ATEC and the department to enter into an enforceable agreement that will specify minimum staffing levels and standards.

The second area of reform is around the number of commissioners. As drafted, there's significant concern that three commissioners will not have the expertise across a diverse range of fields and areas such as higher education, VET, tertiary education, governance and administration, stakeholder consultation, engagement, regional Australia and other important areas as well, including research, equity and access, and learning and teaching. As such, I will move amendments to introduce two additional part-time commissioners to bring the total number of commissioners to five. Again, this change is backed by a number of stakeholders: the Group of Eight, Regional Universities Network, Professor Andrew Norton and Professor Julia Horne.

Thirdly, I'm going to introduce an explicit focus on research and research training. Research is central to Australia's economic strength, innovative capacity and international competitiveness. The accord identifies that our research system is under strain. We have low national R&D investment, weak innovation outputs, inadequate research training stipends and a need for a pathway to fund more of the full economic costs of research. The accord also explicitly calls for the ATEC to be a steward of the research sector yet the bill doesn't make the ATEC's research stewardship role explicit in the functions and advice framework. This is a serious omission. And, again, it's a problem raised by a large number of stakeholders. So I'll move amendments to allow the ATEC to prepare reports and advice in relation to research and research training to ensure the commissioners collectively possess experience in research and research training.

The fourth area of amendments would allow the ATEC to consider student contributions. As it stands, the ATEC can provide advice on the efficiency and cost of higher education programs but it can only consider the cost of courses and programs borne by the Commonwealth not borne by students. You can't meaningfully talk about course costs and funding sustainability if you only look at the Commonwealth side of the ledger. Students pay a significant share and they need to be considered as well, so I'll move an amendment to allow the ATEC to consider student contribution amounts as well as Commonwealth contribution amounts.

I also want to address the issue of international student caps. This bill provides the ATEC with the function to allocate international student caps for different universities and providers at the request of the minister. As I understand it from discussions with the minister's office, further legislation is required to provide the minister with the power to set enforceable caps for international students before ATEC can use this function, so this bill paves the way for future legislation that will allow those student caps. The government tried to introduce this power in—

The debate is interrupted. The member for Curtin will be granted leave to speak in continuation when this debate is resumed.

I'm in the House to talk about something a bit unusual, something I never thought I would be talking about in the House, which is one of my favourite biscuits: Tim Tam. But I do want to explain why that is relevant and, I think, extremely relevant to the business of the House. The government has established a host of specialist investment vehicles to direct public funds into priority areas, like renewable energy, housing, agriculture and exports. The $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund was established in 2023 to diversify and transform Australian industry. But the question I ask, particularly in the economic times that we have right now, is whether these funds are actually doing what they were sold to do—filling funding gaps, crowding in private capital, addressing market failure and building sovereign capability that would not otherwise be built by the private sector. And, when I look at recent decisions, I struggle to see it.

Take Arnott's. The National Reconstruction Fund contributed $45 million to a $1.75 billion refinancing. There was no obvious funding gap. Government provided less than three per cent, and the rest came from private markets on commercial terms. The deal was oversubscribed, suggesting public funds actually crowded out private capital rather than attracting it. Market failure? It's hard to identify. Arnott's has operated successfully since 1865. Supporting Australia? Arnott's has not been Australian owned since 1997 and has been owned by US private equity firm KKR since 2019. So what are taxpayers actually getting? It seems that, since the 2019 KKR leveraged acquisition, Australians are actually paying 60 per cent more for homegrown Tim Tams. 'Timflation' is outpacing the consumer price index threefold. The NRF says that investment will expand production, but the funds merely refinance existing debt tied to past investment. But the terms of the deal have not been released, so scrutiny is limited.

This is part of a broader pattern that does concern me: questionable investments across specialist investment vehicles, unknown contingent liabilities under the Capacity Investment Scheme and increasing industrial bailouts such as Whyalla and Tomago. There is a role for government in industry policy, but it has to be extremely disciplined, targeted at genuine market failures like climate change, where the market is not already operating effectively, and opportunities for technology spillovers that build national capacity. I am concerned, and not just about the price of Tim Tams. I'm concerned that discipline is slipping. I have competitive businesses and sectors coming to my doors and asking for money. Someone this week said to me: 'Allegra, other sectors are getting money. We employ people too. Why aren't we getting any?' That is of extreme concern to me. When businesses believe that their competitive advantage is not innovation or productivity but their ability to secure government cheques, capital shifts away from doing what it does best, which is allocate efficiently to opportunities.

Government capital, where it is trying to solve market failure, should be directed to those areas in which the private market otherwise wouldn't invest or wouldn't invest at the scale of the opportunity. And this is where we want private capital and public capital really to work in concert, but only where it's actually going to make a real difference. We do not want the private sector moving away from investment in R&D, electrification, digitisation and capacity building into how it can more effectively lobby in Canberra. That weakens productivity and distorts the economy.

The Productivity Commission has already outlined clear guardrails for modern industry policy. We should be following them. With deficits forecast for a decade and households under pressure from inflation and interest rates, every dollar needs to be tested. Does it expand productive capacity? Does it unlock innovation, or does it entrench unproductive investment? This is a cost-of-living relief government has to be focused on. The cost-of-living relief will only come from improving productivity and, really, effectively, supply-side changes. Undisciplined spending today only makes Australians worse off tomorrow. And, again, who pays for it? With government predicting deficits for the next 10 years, the generation who will pay for it are the generation who are coming—that generation where they have fewer workers compared to the working-age population, where they are already more indebted when they finish university and education, and where housing is more out of reach. We should not be burdening them with investments that do not benefit the public.

I am pleased to rise today to talk about some of the incredible progress that the Albanese Labor government has made in delivering our promises of cheaper health care for all Australians. We promised cheaper medicines, more bulk-billing and better access to mental health support, and we're delivering them all.

As a government, we believe that access to quality health care should not depend on your bank balance. So just last week we reached a landmark agreement to deliver record funding for public hospitals. We are delivering an additional $25 billion to the states and territories over the next five years, bringing our total investment in public hospitals across Australia to $219.6 billion. This is three times more in additional funding for public hospitals than under the last five-year agreement. Additional funding support for public hospitals from the Australian government will improve care, will cut wait times and will help to address ambulance ramping. I know that health ministers right across the country have worked incredibly hard to reach this record deal, and I'd like to acknowledge the work of Minister for Health and Ageing Mark Butler and New South Wales minister for health, the member for Keira, Ryan Park for their strong determination and dedication to improving outcomes for patients right across New South Wales.

In my electorate of Cunningham in the Illawarra, bed block at Wollongong Hospital is a massive issue, as Minister Park is well aware. This money will go a long way towards alleviating some of that pressure while we continue the hard work of delivering better access to aged care across our region, something that I am working on very closely with the Minister for Aged Care and Seniors. I was delighted to deliver more than $17.4 million in funding to the Illawarra Retirement Trust to upgrade its Marco Polo aged-care centre in Unanderra. This will deliver an additional 48 residential aged-care beds for the Illawarra by 2027.

Our dedication to improving access to affordable health care is part of Labor's DNA. We created Medicare, and we have fought for years to protect and to strengthen it. The Albanese Labor government has made the single biggest investment in Medicare history, with our $8.5 billion package to deliver more bulk-billing and more doctors across the country. From 1 November last year, for the first time, bulk-billing incentives will be paid to GPs for every patient they bulk-bill, supporting GPs and reducing costs and barriers for patients.

In my electorate of Cunningham, we now have 24 fully bulk-billing clinics, 14 of which were mixed billing before our changes were announced. That means we now have nearly 2½ times more bulk-billing clinics in my electorate alone, thanks to the Albanese Labor government's investment.

Clinics like the Corrimal Medical & Dental Centre and King Street Dental & Medical in Warrawong have told me what a difference this is making for their doctors and their patients. Corrimal Medical & Dental Centre switched away from bulk-billing a few years ago, due to increasing overhead costs to their GPs, and they have proudly switched back thanks to this investment that is backing the hard work that they do. No-one wants to see their patients avoiding a check-up because they can't afford it or, worse, ending up in hospital because they didn't get early intervention by their GP.

King Street Dental & Medical estimates that the switch to fully bulk-billing will see 17,000 additional patient visits each year delivered with no out-of-pocket costs. This has taken real dedication from every doctor at the practices that have signed up, and I want to take this opportunity to thank each and every GP in our community for the work that you do every day.

But that's not all. From 1 January, we have reduced the maximum cost of all PBS listed medicines to only $25 and frozen the cost for concession card holders at $7.75. Medicines have not been this cheap for more than 20 years, and this is on top of our 60-day dispensing and the lowering of the PBS safety net threshold.

We've launched 1800MEDICARE, a new advice and out-of-hours Medicare telehealth service, which has already been accessed by tens of thousands of Australians since its launch on 1 January. And we've introduced the new Medicare mental health check-in so that all Australians can access free digital mental health support without the need for a GP referral. Our government is committed to supporting our community with access to more affordable health care.

And a very happy birthday to the member for Cunningham!

In 1982, the Caboolture PCYC that we've all come to know and love was opened on Toovey Street. For more than 40 years this building has been home to programs and activities like youth development, crime prevention and community engagement through low-cost gymnastics, boxing, volleyball, trampolining and the opportunity for our youth to engage with the Queensland Police Service in a low-stake environment. More recently, services extended to include after-school care, free driving lessons for disadvantaged young people and group fitness classes for over 50s. Because of these programs, the PCYC has played a role in shaping the lives of our local youth. In fact, I can recall taking my own kids there during the 1990s and early 2000s, particularly to blue light discos, when Sergeant Dale Hennessey was in charge. I still have the sounds of 'MMMBop' by Hanson and 'Nutbush' ringing in my ears nearly 30 years later!

The support provided by the PCYC was a staple in the lives of many locals, and I have personally seen the positive impact that it has had on my own kids. Yet, as the years passed, it became increasingly obvious that this facility was no longer suitable for our growing region. As many locals will know, the building suffers from flooding issues, which sometimes disrupts services. Furthermore, its location on the outskirts of Caboolture, in an area with limited transport options and proximity to extensive bushland, was a deterrent for many would-be members.

So, after 40 years, the time came to say goodbye to the Toovey Street facility. In 2019, when I was first elected, the officer in charge of the Caboolture police station   , the legendary Mick Brady, was my first appointment. Mick, in no uncertain terms, made me aware of the PCYC's ambitious plan to build a new state-of-the-art facility in the heart of Caboolture on King Street. The initial bill cost was set at $11½ million, and it soon became clear that this would need to be a joint project between all three levels of government if we were ever going to get it across the line. Mick was never going to leave me alone until there was federal funding forthcoming, so the journey of advocating for this facility began.

Over the years, due to circumstances like COVID, the initial figure would change—and not downwards. With the support of the community, I was able to push for funding. We reached our target of $5 million through the then coalition government's Community Development Grants Program. This, combined with state government and council funding, with moneys from the PCYC themselves, meant that after years of dreaming this dream was about to become reality.

This new building, which is conveniently placed next to the Caboolture police station and directly behind a serviced bus stop, features a 24/7 gym, a purpose-built gymnastics facility, a dedicated youth hub, multipurpose recreational areas, an outdoor basketball court and, as I'm sure anyone who has ever visited the old facility can appreciate, dedicated parking. No more parking in the mud and dust!

More than 1,000 local families were already members at the old building, and this is expected to double over the next few years in one of Australia's fastest-growing communities. In fact, with the early opening of the 24/7 gym just days ago, we're already seeing new faces. The gym members have already expressed positive reviews, and many of them have had an early glimpse at the rest of the building, which officially opens on Thursday 26 February this year.

The Caboolture PCYC team has changed lives for more than 40 years, and I know they will continue to do so for many more. In the words of the PCYC, 'When our young people thrive, so do our communities.' I very much look forward to seeing the impact this new facility will have on our region going forward, particularly as we edge closer to the 2032 Brisbane Olympics. I know that our hardworking program manager, Sergeant Mark Haestier, is super excited, and I know he will achieve even greater outcomes for our community than he does already now he has this wonderful new, modern facility. As a bonus, the old facility is being refurbed by the council, which will benefit local organisations such as Spiders Boxing Club, the U3A and the local men's shed.

I'm glad that the federal and state governments and the local council were all able to work together on this project. It would not have been possible without their cooperation. This facility is a testament to what can be achieved when we put people before politics.

Last week I was joined by the Minister for Education to officially open Uni Hub Playford, our very own suburban university study hub located right in the heart of my electorate of Spence. This journey started quite some time ago, when I was a newly elected MP. I visited schools, speaking with students, teachers and principals. I spoke with families who wanted more for their children. I spoke with workers who were looking to upskill but didn't know how they could fit that around their busy lives. And I started listening to reports and statistics, some of them quite sobering. A Jobs and Skills Australia report stated that nine out of 10 new jobs created in our economy will require some form of postschool qualification and that over half of those will require a higher education qualification. Locally, only 9.7 per cent of people in the electorate of Spence held a bachelor's degree or higher—the kind of gap that doesn't close on its own.

In mid-2023, the interim report of the Australian Universities Accord was released. As its first priority action, it recommended the establishment of what were then called tertiary study hubs. From that point, my goal was obvious: bring one of those hubs to the north. Now, I can proudly say that we have delivered that. South Australia's first and only suburban university study hub is proudly at its new home at the Elizabeth TAFE, all thanks to the Albanese Labor government's $66.9 million investment in this program—a program that makes it clear that your postcode isn't going to put a ceiling on what you can do in life. Uni Hub Playford brings uni closer for students in the north, making tertiary study more accessible for our community.

For a long time, the path to university has been much harder than it should be, not because people in the north lack talent and not because we lack the ability to put in the hard yards but because the barriers have been real. In Elizabeth, where the hub is located, only around 7.2 per cent of people have a degree. If people don't have access, they don't get the same outcomes. By making study feel achievable for people living real lives—real life in our community looks like shiftwork, it looks like raising kids and watching every dollar, and it looks like people who are already doing a lot and trying to add study on top. That's why Uni Hub Playford matters. It doesn't ask people to magically create more hours in the day; it gives students time, support and space to focus.

It also sends a message, especially to young people in the north, that higher education isn't some narrow, linear path. It's about people studying in different ways, at different times and for different reasons. It's for someone fresh out of school trying to get a start. It's for someone working full time and trying to retrain, upskill or pivot to a new profession. But too often in the north the issue isn't motivation or ability. It's whether study is actually convenient, reachable and able to fit around the day-to-day lives of students.

The most obvious barrier for people in the north is travel, the tyranny of distance. An hour or so can be lost travelling from the north to university campuses every day—hours that could have been spent studying, spending time with the kids or working an extra shift. Over time, it all adds up. That's why this place was designed to bring study closer, bring support closer and make tertiary education feel less distant, because that support matters most when things get hard—not on the first days of O-week but when there's a major assessment due. Fatigue sets in, the kids are sick, the car's broken down, and many begin to think about giving up on the dream. Having a place like this is how people push past that.

This place is about encouraging more people to enrol in a university course and helping more people complete them too, because, when more people finish their qualifications, our whole community benefits. Local industry benefits, local services benefit and families benefit. That's why the Albanese Labor government has invested in this program, recognising that opportunity shouldn't exist only in a few pockets across the country. It has been built around where people live, where people work and where people are raising their families. That's what this place represents—a practical investment in people and a recognition that potential exists everywhere, even where opportunity does not, unless we choose to build it.

In closing, I want to give a massive shout-out to the City of Playford council, who worked tirelessly to ensure that this was able to be delivered in the centre of our community. Thank you for all your hard work.

Inverloch is one of the most beautiful parts of my electorate. It's where Australia's best soil meets jewel encrusted seas. But, like many parts of Australia right now, Inverloch has an illegal tobacco and vape outlet in town. I've had local residents reach out to voice their concerns. Despite being raided by federal authorities just days ago, this outlet continues to allegedly sell vapes to children. Members of the Therapeutic Goods Administration raided the outlet in late January and removed hundreds of vapes from the shelves, according to the Herald Sun. While the TGA continues to consider what to do next, the outlet remains open for business. This is not an isolated incident. Despite the tobacco wars terrorising our community for years now, it only occurred to the Victorian government last week to do something. The 14 inspectors from the Tobacco Licensing Victoria agency are expected to cover the entire state to dish out fines but not shut down illegal shops. When the Victorian Labor government minister was asked why, he said the government was still considering whether such laws were even possible. What he should have said was, 'We're going to roll out new laws to pull down the shutters on illegal tobacco shops, give lease termination powers to landlords and stop them selling illicit products.' That would have been the responsible thing to do.

Gangland thugs like Kaz Hamad are directing their cartels from here and abroad, terrorising small-business owners, assaulting retail staff and short-changing the tax office. Hamad was arrested in Iraq last month, where a court declared him to be one of the most dangerous men in the world. He has been named by the gangland taskforce, looking at a spate of violent home invasions and arson, as directing those crimes from overseas. Martin McKenzie-Murray has written very thoroughly on Hamad in the Saturday Paper. He has noted the AFP's identification of Hamad as a national security risk. I quote:

The AFP's interest in Hamad intensified when it began to suspect his involvement, on behalf of the Iranians, in organising the torching of a Melbourne synagogue in December 2024.

Since 2023, there have been around 200 firebombings of grocers and tobacco shops that are related to this. The retail industry estimate they have lost $2 billion in legal sales to the illegal racket over the last four years. A growing number of legal retailers are now not selling cigarettes at all. Just a few days ago, a machine that can produce up to 3.6 million illicit cigarettes a day was seized by Australian Border Force. Australian Border Force data for the final quarter of last year reveals that officers seized more than 467 tonnes of cigarettes and tobacco before it entered the country. The black market cigarettes and vapes would have been worth more than $1 billion in evaded excise that would have gone towards funding roads, schools and hospitals in Australia. It's time for radical reform at a federal level.

Up another five per cent last year, government price increases on cigarettes are driving up crime and smoking. That effectively taxes $28 out of every $50 pack of smokes. Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission wastewater statistics show that more nicotine was consumed by Australia last year than eight years ago, with an illegal pack of smokes now at around $12. One of the biggest losers has been the ATO. Since 2013, under the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government, the excise started to rocket up and has since then increased by 282 per cent. New South Wales Labor premier Chris Minns has consistently called out his federal Labor colleagues for not doing enough and not addressing the excise issue. To those who argue that reducing the excise encourages smoking, the Laffer economic curve disproves this. It demonstrates that, by driving taxation of tobacco beyond a reasonable level, it actually encourages people to a black market of illegal tobacco. This is where we see an uptick in smoking. Taking the excise back to 2018-19 levels would help to address this.

I also think we need to look at an AFP taskforce, with teams in each state, particularly Victoria, where the illegal trade is flourishing. We should combine that with landlord termination powers, licensing and a fit-and-proper-person test, and then Australia would have a plan that works.

Illegal tobacco is putting all Australians at risk. It's about time the federal government and this minister got serious about addressing it.

Access to safe, secure and affordable housing is one of the most fundamental foundations of a fair society. It is not simply about shelter but about dignity, stability, opportunity and wellbeing. When people have a secure place to call home, children can focus on learning. Parents can focus on work and caring, and individuals can plan for the future with confidence. When housing is unstable or out of reach, it affects every part of our life—health, education, employment and mental wellbeing. We know there is a housing crisis in this country. For too many, particularly young Australians, they have found themselves locked out of the market. Rents have risen. Supply has fallen. And for many the dream of homeownership has felt increasingly distant.

This is why this government has an ambitious housing agenda, the most ambitious that we've seen for generations. It is why we see housing as one of our central priorities—investing in social and affordable housing, boosting supply, working with the states and territories on planning reform and recognising housing as essential national infrastructure. Through the Labor government's Housing Australia Future Fund, we are delivering thousands of new homes across the country, with more than 5,000 social and affordable homes completed or underway and more than 25,000 in construction and planning. This is part of our broader commitment to deliver 55,000 social and affordable homes for the Australians who need them most. A roof over your head should never be a privilege. It should be an expectation for all Australians.

Locally, I'm proud to see the Albanese government backing major projects that will deliver—and are already delivering—new social and affordable homes in Melbourne's north-west. In December of last year, I welcomed Minister O'Neil to Kensington in the southern part of my electorate to see firsthand the successful completion of a new housing project as part of the Swift Walk redevelopment. This massive injection of housing into our local community, the largest that Housing Australia Future Fund has completed to date, has delivered 362 new homes, including 272 social and affordable homes. For locals in Kensington and the surrounding suburbs, moving into Swift Walk has meant leaving behind long-term overcrowding and finally having a space of their own.

Thangjam and Kristine and their new baby have just moved into their new home in Swift Walk, a fantastic two-bedroom unit. The minister and I got to say g'day to them. Before, Thangjam and Kristine were living in shared accommodation with nine others. They were making the best of it, but, as their family was due to expand, it was clear this was not the environment that would have given them the best chance at living their most settled and successful life. Now, they have a place to call theirs, a place to create memories, opportunities and stability for their beautiful new family. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank them for welcoming both the minister and me into their new home. It was such a delight to see them settling in and thinking about the future that they have for them and their young child.

Stories like this remind us that housing is not just policy; it has real life impacts. It's not abstract; it's about families finally having a space to breathe; children having a quiet place to sleep, to play, to study; and parents feeling the relief that comes with security. It's about dignity. While local projects make a powerful difference, they sit within a broader national effort to address decades of underinvestment in housing supply. The Albanese government's reforms recognise that housing is essential to economic participation, social wellbeing and equality of opportunity. For young people especially, access to secure homes shapes the entire course of their lives. They can pursue education, build savings and start families of their own and remain connected to their communities.

When we allow housing insecurity to become the norm, we entrench disadvantage. But, when we invest in affordable, accessible homes, we open doors to stability and to a fairer future. Addressing Australia's housing challenge will not happen overnight. It requires sustained effort, cooperation across governments and a willingness to treat housing as a public good, not just as a market commodity. Every Australian deserves the dignity of a safe home, and, when we strengthen housing security, we strengthen the nation itself.

House adjourned at 17:00

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Boyce ) took the chair at 09:30.

I rise today on behalf of my community in Fowler and, in particular, a constituent from Wakeley, Narkis, who has written with deep concern about the rising cost of living and the Reserve Bank's latest interest rate increase. For families in Fowler, this is more than a policy debate or a blame game about interest rate rises. Rates have risen. What matters now is what the government will do to reduce the pressure families and small businesses will face moving forward.

Every 0.25 per cent rise in cash rates means higher mortgage repayments, higher rents and even greater strain on households struggling to afford groceries, power bills and basic necessities. People in my community were clinging to the hope that meaningful relief was finally on the way. Instead, they're met with slogans and announcements that do not match the reality they're living, while being told, yet again, that interest rate rises are not the government's responsibility, when governing means taking responsibility for the consequences, not deflecting them.

My constituents tell me our community is hurting. Families are lying awake at night worrying about keeping a roof over their heads, managing energy costs and making ends meet from one week to the next. They're not economists or political strategists. They're mums and dads, carers, pensioners, small-business owners and young people trying to build a future. They're exhausted by uncertainty and worn down by constant pressure—bracing for the next bill, the next bank notice or the next letter from the landlord.

Narkis also shared a growing frustration across my electorate. While families and small businesses are doing it tougher than ever, this parliament is distracted. Too much energy is spent on messaging and political manoeuvring, and too little on delivering stability and relief for people carrying the real burden. These are people who love this country. They believe in fairness and the dignity of hard work. They are not asking for special treatment; they are asking for focused, grounded leadership that understands their reality and acts on it.

The message from Fowler is clear. People are not asking for handouts; they're asking for action. Cost-of-living relief is not a slogan. It's the difference between paying the mortgage and falling behind, between keeping a small business open and shutting the doors, between keeping the lights on and being forced to turn them off and between filling a prescription and going without. So, today, on behalf of Narkis and thousands of others in my electorate, I urge the leaders in this House to wake up to reality, to listen to the voices of ordinary Australians in Wakeley, Cabramatta, Liverpool, Warwick Farm and across south-west and Western Sydney. Their struggles are lived every single day.

My community believes in a fair go. With rising interest rates and no real relief in sight, it is now up to this parliament to prove that the fair go still means something, and to ensure that families in Fowler and across south-west and Western Sydney are not left behind in the upcoming budget. Thank you.

Access to health care is top of mind for people in my community of Jagajaga. We're fortunate to be home to some of Melbourne's best medical institutions, including the Austin, the Repat, the ONJ, the Mercy and many more. Local health care matters, and that's why investing in local services and strengthening Medicare locally is so important for my community. Because for the families, the seniors and the young people I represent, access to affordable health care is not a luxury; it is essential. That is why this government, the Albanese Labor government, has put people and access at the heart of our reforms to strengthen Medicare, and it's why we are already seeing a difference in communities in Jagajaga.

For the first time in decades, we are making bulk-billing viable again after it was allowed to languish under those opposite. We have expanded the bulk-billing incentives for GPs so that these incentives apply across the board, encouraging more GPs to make sure that people can see the doctor for a bulk-billed visit. We are seeing this have an effect in Jagajaga. More practices in Jagajaga are now bulk-billing patients, and I'm encouraging even more of our local GP clinics to take up this incentive so that this becomes the norm rather than the exception.

I recently visited Greensborough Medical & Dental Centre in Greensborough, which is one of our wonderful local practices and was one of the first clinics in our community to switch to full bulk-billing for GP visits. It was really heartening to talk to Alicia, the practice manager there, who told me that every day she is seeing how this change is making life easier for local families. People are not having to choose what in their budget they have to take out to pay to see a GP, and that is how it should be in Australia. That is how health care works in Australia. It is why Labor set up Medicare, and it is why we continue to strengthen and back Medicare. So, as I said, I encourage more GP practices across Jagajaga to take up this opportunity and to further expand access for our community.

In Jagajaga, we are also benefiting from a new Medicare urgent care clinic in Eltham. It's making a real difference for people in that part of my electorate. This is walk-in care for when you need it urgently—those times when your child might have had an accident at sport, it's late at night and the other clinics aren't open. I've had such positive feedback about this clinic. One local told me she had a fantastic experience and had avoided waiting at the Austin Hospital in emergency for the hours that, unfortunately, often takes. So this clinic is a wonderful addition to our local health care. The one in Eltham joins the one that we already have in Burgundy Street, in Heidelberg. As I said, I consistently get good feedback about this investment we are making locally for access to good, affordable health care and the work that this government is doing to strengthen Medicare.

Excuse me for reading this document out, but it's one of the rare occasions that I'm going to do it. What's happening in our northern waters right now should worry every single person in this country. Illegal boats are coming into our northern waters in numbers we have never seen before. They're coming quietly, they're coming regularly, and they're coming because nobody is watching the gate anymore. And why aren't we watching? Because governments have regulated our fishing industry out of existence. Australia has the longest coastline of any country on Earth, yet it has the lowest per kilometre fishing effort of any coastline on Earth.

For generations, our commercial fishermen were the eyes and ears of the north. They knew every tide channel and every strange light on the horizon. If something moved that shouldn't have been there, they knew about it. But they've been pushed off the waters. We strangled them with paperwork, bans and city based ideology, we shut down gillnets, we sidelined trawlers, and we told the very people that protected our coastline for free to stay at home. Now, Australian seas are empty—no, they're not empty. They're filled with people who are not Australians.

Karumba had over 240 boats licensed to operate and probably another 240 boats on North Queensland's east coast. Now, I doubt whether there are 200 licences in the gulf and the east coast. Carl von Clausewitz's chilling aphorism is that 'a people without land will seek a land without people'. Similarly, people without seas will seek seas without people. Ask the First Australians how they fared, or ask the Red Indians, the Aztecs or the Zulus. When you don't have Australians on the water, someone else will fill the void. Illegal fishing boats, people smugglers, foreign interests testing how far they can push—they're not stupid.

We need our trawlers and our netters back doing the job our Border Force is clearly not resourced to do. Every Australian fishing vessel is a moving surveillance platform. Every skipper is a sentry. Every crew is a deterrent. And where is Border Force? Where is our biosecurity? We have 14 patrol boats with no armaments on them to cover the longest coastline on Earth. It's a joke; nobody is there. There's no meaningful presence, no real defence, no boats, no boots and no eyes. Let me remind this country it was only two years ago that we found out China has control of Yam Island—which is halfway between New Guinea and the tip of Cape York, Australia—and the mouth of the Fly River and was then in the process of purchasing Pajinka, at the tip of Cape York. So we've given it three key control points. (Time expired)

I'm extremely proud to say that the 2026 Young Australian of the Year for Tasmania was awarded to Braddon local Alyssia Kennedy, a remarkable young woman who has turned her own lived experience into meaningful change.

After leaving school, Alyssia discovered gaps familiar to many young Australians. Despite strong academic results, she found herself without the practical life skills needed to navigate adulthood: budgeting, managing bills, completing a tax return. She learnt these lessons the hard way, but she was determined that others shouldn't have to. Alyssia created the Upturned Tasmania program Life After School, an initiative designed to bridge the gap between classroom learning and real-world skills. She now works with schools and youth groups to empower young people with the confidence and capability they need to thrive as adults. Alyssia's vision is simple but also powerful: every young person deserves the tools to succeed in life, not just in school. Her dedication is helping build a more capable and confident generation of young Tasmanians. I want to congratulate Alyssia on this outstanding achievement and thank her for the profound contribution she's making to young people right across Tasmania. Her work is transforming lives today and strengthening our future but also the future of our young people.

On 26 January I attended the 128th annual Mount Lyell Strahan Picnic, at West Strahan Beach. This event is one of the West Coast's most enduring and treasured community traditions. For more than a century, the picnic has brought together workers, families and visitors from right across the region, and it continues to reflect the resilience, camaraderie and deep sense of belonging that define the West Coast community of Tasmania. It began with mine workers travelling from Queenstown to Strahan Beach by train in 1897, and that tradition has continued every year. From traditional games and footraces to the food stalls that local volunteers prepared with such pride, the day once again showcased the spirit of a community that support one another through good times but also through tough times. It is this spirit that has ensured the picnic not only survives but thrives generation after generation. I give a big thanks to the Mount Lyell Strahan Picnic Committee and volunteers who make this event possible each year. Their dedication keeps an important part of West Coast history alive. Events like the Mount Lyell Strahan Picnic remind us of the importance of local traditions that bring people together. I look forward to continuing to support this remarkable community and the events that reflect its proud history.

Australia's dream of universal health coverage has been lost. Australians now face an impossible choice, as they cannot access or afford to see medical specialists in this country. We know that one in three Australians are postponing medical care because of cost, and that increases to one in two Australians in the regions, where markets are impossibly thin. Recent figures from RedBridge suggest that 75 per cent of gen Xers in the regions are deciding not to seek the medical care that they need, because they cannot find or access an affordable specialist. In a cost-of-living crisis, healthcare costs are increasing disproportionately to those of other parts of the economy.

I hear constantly from constituents who tell me that they've had private hospital and extras cover for years. They've paid thousands of dollars every year for what they thought would guarantee timely access to care, choice of practitioner and protection from large, unexpected medical bills. Instead, they're encountering extreme out-of-pocket fees to receive specialist care, including costs sometimes multiple amounts more than the Medicare schedule fee. They're getting bills for surgery a day or two before. I heard this morning from a constituent who, as they entered the car park of a private hospital, had been contacted by the surgeon's assistant with a demand for a fee that they didn't anticipate they were going to have to deal with. They're being asked to pay full fees upfront, even those portions that will attract later reimbursement.

Since 2010, private specialist fees have increased by 73 per cent. Over the last five years, out-of-pocket costs for common procedures have increased by 300 per cent. People who are vulnerable and seeking urgent medical care for sometimes life-threatening conditions should not be expected to deal with unexpected costs through the private healthcare system. They need to be able to put themselves in the hands of medical professionals they can trust, and it is heartbreaking when they realise that they cannot afford to do that.

I'm asking the government to urgently commission a health committee inquiry into the cost of specialist care in this country. All Australians need to be able to access medical specialists, whether they live in the city or in the regions. They shouldn't have to wait three or four years to see a paediatrician or for a hip replacement or to see a cardiologist. All of us should be able to afford affordable care through the private healthcare system. It's a matter of urgency and something that this government needs to address immediately.

This week, the government released our response to the Defence Estate Audit. This report recommends a divestment of RAAF Williams Point Cook and a significant part of RAAF Williams Laverton. The government's response to this audit has rightly been made on the basis of its assessment of the national interests and the needs of the ADF in changing strategic circumstances in which Australia finds itself today.

The world has changed a lot since these bases were established and Australia needs to make hard choices to ensure that locations of our defence bases are fit for purpose and that the ADF has the facilities and capabilities it needs to keep Australians safe. But these recommendations will also have significant local implications for our community in Melbourne's west. So I want to reassure my community of a few things.

Despite the breathless media coverage this morning, no decisions have been made about what will happen to land divested as part of this audit. The process for deciding how this land is used will be a long one. It will take years and our community will have plenty of opportunities to be heard. As the local member, I'll work with all levels of government to ensure two things along this journey. First, that the heritage value of Point Cook as the birthplace of the RAAF is preserved. Point Cook has been on the Commonwealth Heritage List since 2004. Julia Gillard fought for its preservation as the local member then, and I'm not about to squander that legacy as the local member now. Done right, this process is an opportunity to increase Australians' access to this heritage site, which is currently severely constrained due to the significant limitations of public access to an active RAAF base. Second, I know full well the strains that development in Melbourne's west is putting on our local infrastructure. I live it. Point Cook has grown to become Australia's biggest suburb by population and our community needs infrastructure to keep up with it. So, should any part of these estates be made available for housing in the future, putting in place the necessary infrastructure to support it before any construction occurs is essential.

At the last federal election, the federal Labor government committed $55 million to duplicate and upgrade Central Avenue between Lunn Court and Skehan Boulevard, leading into the intersection at Point Cook Road, which is currently being reconstructed with state government funding. We also made $3.5 million available for a business case to upgrade Point Cook Road between Jamieson Way and Dunnings Road. Both of those projects will make a real impact on the current congestion on Point Cook Road, but I understand that more will need to be done in the coming years.

I welcome the engagement I've had with my state and federal colleagues on these heritage and infrastructure issues to date, and I'll continue to pursue them as this process unfolds in the coming years.

I'm very pleased to note a significant win for my electorate made possible through investment under a former coalition government initiative, the Hinkler regional deal. I was yesterday informed that detailed design investigations for the Bruce Highway and Buxton Road intersection upgrade at Isis River—a stretch of road just south of Childers, which I travel most weeks when I'm not here in Canberra have been—have been completed. The design will keep the speed limit to 80 kilometres per hour at this spot and includes dedicated right and left turn lanes into Buxton Road and the local service station and improved access for nearby property owners. Construction on the intersection upgrade should start by the middle of this year.

The milestone development follows years of community pressure; strong advocacy, including by our state member for Burnett, Stephen Bennett; and extensive consultation, culminating in a design that reflects the needs of the growing Buxton community. I've been working with residents in calling for this upgrade for a long time, and this final design strikes the right balance between safety, access and efficiency on one of my region's most important transport corridors. This wouldn't have happened without the announcement made by the coalition government in 2020 and the commitment from the Queensland LNP's Minister for Transport and Main Roads, Brent Mickelberg. There has been a contribution of $10 million in federal funding, and now the job is finally getting done to ensure this stretch of the Bruce Highway is safer for travellers and, importantly, our local Buxton residents.

I'd like to highlight some of the many great Aussies from the electorate of Hinkler who were acknowledged in our local Australia Day awards. I've had the privilege of meeting with the Citizen of the Year award winners from Hinkler, including Hervey Bay's Bernard Whebell who was named the 2026 Fraser Coast Citizen of the Year. Bernard was recognised for years of dedicated service to the community, particularly through his leadership with the Hervey Bay Neighbourhood Centre. His contribution has helped guide growth, strengthen services and create meaningful outcomes for thousands of people across the region. I toured the ever-expanding services of the neighbourhood centre with Bernard and CEO, Tanya Stevenson, only last week, and I witnessed the amazing community hub and all that it offers. Bernard's work colleagues stated he is someone who leads with integrity, generosity and quiet confidence, always focused on people, not recognition. Congratulations, Bernie.

The Bundaberg region Citizen of the Year, Jo Leveritt, is the founder of Wide Bay Advocacy and Bundaberg Street Law. Jo is a highly respected human rights lawyer and social justice advocate who provides free legal service and systematic advocacy for vulnerable members of our Hinkler community. Jo's leadership and community involvement support people facing poverty, domestic violence and mental health challenges. Her work has created lasting impacts and strengthened social justice across the Bundaberg region. Jo's dedication has changed lives and reflects the true spirit of service recognised through this award.

I commend these Hinkler heroes and all those who are nominated for various Australia Day awards. They are the heart and soul of our community.

I rise to congratulate eight-year-old Darcy Uttley from Googong who is a true local hero. Darcy is a scout, and he's been raising money to buy bedding and shelter for the homeless in our community to earn his Creating a Better World badge. His amazing fundraising efforts have earned him the Australia Day Hero 2026 Young Person of the Year Award by the national charity Backpack Bed for Homeless. The charity gives out awards every year, but, this Australia Day, Darcy was the only person to receive this honour. Other awards went to organisations such as schools and businesses. Darcy raised over $2,000 for the charity by selling Play-Doh and holding lolly guessing competitions. The amount raised equated to 15 backpack beds for the homeless in the area, which have been distributed by the Salvation Army. Backpack Bed for Homeless founder and CEO, Tony Clark, said, 'Darcy's amazing fundraising efforts have resulted in almost $50,000 in taxpayer savings for the Canberra and Queanbeyan communities.' These backpack beds are a great comfort for people that are living on the streets or sleeping rough and have helped to improve the dignity, health, sleep and warmth for people across our communities. It is an honour to have young constituents like Darcy in the electorate of Eden-Monaro, so a big congratulations to Darcy.

I'd like to give a plug to one of my favourite times of the year. Country shows have kicked off right across the mighty Eden-Monaro. We're in the midst of the 2026 country show season, which kicked off with Pambula and Candelo in January and will continue with the Nimmitabel show this weekend. Country shows and ag field days are much more than a great day out; they are the heart of regional communities. I want to encourage everyone in this place to take your families and to support a country show. In fact, if any members of parliament are here for the weekend, Nimmitabel is only an hour and a half down the road, so come down and have a look. You can get a full list of New South Wales country shows on the AgShows NSW website. There will be shows across Eden-Monaro in February and March, including the 150th anniversary of the Bega Show at the end of February this year. Showgrounds are always buzzing with competitors, volunteers, judges, sponsors, families and communities coming together to celebrate the very best of regional life. So, from Cobargo to Bega, Goulburn to Bombala, I'd love to see you there.

Finally, I'll give a quick shout out to the Terry Campese Foundation. The former Raiders captain and New South Wales and Australian representative created a foundation to mentor youth at risk in our local community. It's major fundraiser every year is a Special Forces challenge, which ADF personnel do in their private time. About a dozen recruits have already raised over $200,000 to support youth at risk. Last year, they built a school in Tonga with those youth. I look forward to seeing what the foundation will do this year. (Time expired)

This week Australian mortgage holders and small business owners were slugged with the 13th interest rate rise since this government came into power—an unlucky number for what increasingly feels like an unlucky country. Once upon a time, we considered ourselves the lucky country, the land of the fair go, where, if you worked hard, you got ahead. Now, we're the country of the most rampant inflation problem of any major advanced economy. Since May 2022, gas prices are up 42 per cent, electricity is up 38 per cent, milk is up 24 per cent and eggs are up a whopping 37 per cent. These are the basic household goods that our people pay for.

In my electorate of Cowper, the average household income is certainly on the low side of the national scale. They're small business owners, farmers, retail workers and modest retirees. Every day I hear about the choices they're being forced to make to keep their heads above water—choosing between mortgages and medicine or electricity bills and groceries. I hear from businesses who can no longer afford their input costs but can't put their prices up because their customers can't afford to pay for it. It's no wonder the insolvency rate reached its highest level in 35 years. And how did we get here? It's because this government is more focused on ideology than sound fiscal management. There's a Treasurer more concerned with headlines than households. And it's those that can least afford it that ultimately pay the price.

For the next decade, the federal budget is a sea of red because Labor keep spending with reckless abandon on their own pet projects. In fact, they've added $50 billion of discretionary spending this year alone. Public spending is currently growing twice as fast as the rest of the economy. The government sector is getting fat while the taxpaying private sector and small businesses are starving. This government's answer to everything is more debt. Take our housing affordability problem. Labor's answer is a five per cent deposit scheme a scheme that has driven up prices and encouraged our would-be first home buyers to take on the maximum amount of personal debt to acquire one of the few remaining homes over the past disastrous four years of rampant, irresponsible immigration by Labor. The repayments on a 95 per cent loan over 30 years are simply criminal.

I say this: we are now paying $3 million an hour, $67 million a day and $24 billion a year in interest. That is your money. That is not the government's money. Don't be fooled by a tricky Treasurer deflecting responsibility. This is his mess, and we have to live with it. (Time expired)

I rise today to speak about the Albanese Labor government's commitment to early childhood education and, more specifically, what this commitment means for the families and communities in my electorate of Lyons. The Albanese Labor government believes that every child deserves access to the benefits of quality learning. The research and evidence are unequivocal: the early years are a vital time in a child's life and form the foundation for their physical, emotional, social, language and cognitive development. When we invest early, we set children up not just for school but for life.

That belief is being realised on the ground in communities like Saint Marys, Bothwell and Westbury. Each of these towns will benefit from Labor's investment in new childcare centres. I acknowledge the advocacy of Tanya Greenwood, Kristy Scott, Rebecca Scarr, Janet Drummond, the Break O'Day Council and many more for providing the strong local leadership that helped secure $4 million in federal funding to build a new early learning centre in Saint Marys. This new centre will be co-located with the St Marys District School, supporting transitions and strong collaboration between early learning and kindergarten to year 12. What began 10 years ago as an effort to create more opportunities for local children quickly revealed something deeper—that expanding childcare access would also strengthen local businesses and local services and benefit the wider community. From 2027, a new 24-place early learning service will be built on the St Marys site, providing families with greater access to quality local early education at lower costs, while children are given the best possible start.

I also want to turn to the community of Bothwell in the Central Highlands, where determination and grassroots advocacy have delivered an outcome that will make a real difference. Lisa, in Ouse, had to drive 144 kilometres every day to keep her son in temporary care in Brighton. That trip takes two hours each way. Another family in Bothwell described how child care would 'give us financial security and improve our family's mental health—it would allow me to get out of the house and to be a productive member of the community'.

Many families have to take their kids to work with them. Recently, a local mum spoke of the challenge of driving a tractor with a toddler and a baby in the cabin with her. In Bothwell, a highly motivated community group led by Susan Dabbs and Joanne Barwick worked tirelessly to highlight the childcare challenges that have been impacting their town for decades. With support from the Central Highlands Council, they launched a community survey and gathered data, and they posted it on social media, community noticeboards and in the school newsletter and illustrated the need. The findings were clear. There was a critical absence of long-day-care and childcare services in the region.

As a result of that work, from mid-2027, 20 places will be made available at a new purpose built childcare centre, co-located at the school site at Bothwell. This investment will transform families' lives and provide access to affordable and reliable child care close to home. This is what it's all about, and I'm proud to have been able to work with such strong advocates to deliver these outcomes for our communities.

Last December, the Western Australian Cook government announced a 21-month ban on recreational boat based fishing for demersal species and a permanent ban on commercial fishers from Kalbarri to Augusta. And, for the Kimberley and Pilbara, the commercial catch limit has been halved. In already tough times, many fisher men and women in my electorate of Durack were unable to enjoy the festive period and are now wondering how they can provide for their family and community. This ban not only impacts the fishers themselves but also impacts local hospitality owners and workers, the tourism industry, tackle shops, bait suppliers and consumers. While all acknowledge that we need to preserve and protect our fish stocks, this ban from the WA government has been heavy-handed and rushed with less than a month's notice—yes, one month's notice—between the announcement and implementation of the plan.

I'm incredibly proud of the resilience and courage shown by those impacted, despite the emotional and financial toll on them, particularly those multigenerational fishing families who are now having to pull their nets, sell their boats and find new employment.

Despite being the richest state, the WA government could only manage a meagre $29 million compensation package, which will not compensate deckhands and those below management level. It is really disgusting. In comparison, the federal and Queensland governments have committed more than $160 million to phase out gillnet fishing in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. Why is it that WA families have drawn the short straw? My WA fishing families are just as deserving as Queensland fishing families. Inflated egos and bulldozing through legislation without proper consultation processes mean you get hardworking Western Australians who've been left behind by the Cook government and further abandonment of regional WA by Labor.

I, together with over 30,000 Western Australians who've signed the e-petition, am calling for an urgent parliamentary inquiry into WA fisheries to examine the need for a clear, long-term plan for sustainable fisheries that supports all stakeholders. I also call on the federal minister for fisheries to step in and provide greater compensation alongside the WA government.

This is a matter of urgency. This is urgent, and those impacted deserve to be respected and acknowledged. So to Premier Cook and to Minister Collins: please get together and decide on a much better, fairer, more equitable compensation package. Regional Western Australian men and women in the fishing industry deserve nothing less.

On 26 January, at a Survival Day rally in the Perth CBD, there was an attempt to cause a mass-casualty event using an improvised explosive device filled with nails and ball bearings, thrown into a crowd that had gathered peacefully to support justice, voice, treaty and truth for First Nations Australians. It is immensely fortunate that the IED failed and, as the Prime Minister has rightly noted, it's entirely appropriate that the incident is being considered as a possible terrorist event. I was grateful this week to be briefed by the WA Minister for Police, Reece Whitby, and the WA Commissioner for Police, Col Blanch.

What occurred was a frightening moment that could have been a catastrophic tragedy. I acknowledge all the attendees who responded calmly and safely in a bewildering and fraught situation, including the police. It is vitally important that our civil and political rights and freedoms are maintained, both for their own sake as human rights and because they are intrinsic to our shared wellbeing. The ability of our community to be involved in political life, to debate important and difficult issues, to protest injustice and the misuse of power, to campaign for environmental protection, refugee rights, changing the date of Australia Day or in support of people suffering unconscionable harm in Myanmar, Iran or Gaza is fundamental to our democracy. Yet this vital aspect of our democratic system is undermined by the threat of prejudicial violence like what was seen in Perth, and it can be undermined by poorly calibrated responses to terror.

As I've observed before, by far and away the most harmful prejudice in our history is racism directed against First Nations Australians. I find it shocking that when, as a local member, I draw attention through social media to the availability of NAIDOC Week grants, there follows a torrent of deeply racist responses—responses that are devoid of compassion or courage or common humanity. Among the emails I received this week was a message from a Whadjuk Noongar member of my community who, rightly, said that good thoughts by themselves are not enough. That's absolutely right, and it's why the Albanese government has continued to deliver clear and properly resourced measures to combat prejudice, to strengthen cohesion, to close the gap and to reduce the dangerous proliferation of guns while emphasising the importance of harmony, shared wellbeing and reconciliation.

It's an incredible mercy that the attack which occurred at the Survival Day rally in Perth did not have its intended effect. This is a time for us all to reflect on the contribution we can each make to tolerance and understanding, to resisting the rush to division and the rush to outrage and accusation that is so prevalent in social media, and to practising moderation in our language and peacefulness in our conduct.

After the 2022 election the federal Labor government ripped $100 million of infrastructure funding out of the Goldstein community for worthy and important projects, particularly those to promote our use of public transport and to green our community. It was devastating because that money then had to be filled by councils—who simply don't have the resources—when federal Labor came after Bayside and Glen Eira's cash. As a consequence, we have less community infrastructure in Goldstein than we need, particularly a lot of sporting facilities that simply don't have the changing room facilities for women to be able to play games like sport and cricket. I can't believe that a federal Labor government, with a choice between its priorities chooses to take back money from the community, from women's cricket and women's footy and other important social infrastructure.

Despite $100 million being ripped out of the Goldstein community, the then member simply waved it through. Well, in the 2025 election the community made a different choice, which was to make sure they had a member who stood here in Canberra and fought for the community and for the infrastructure. That's why we submitted a community budget submission to the budget process. I implore the federal Treasurer to start to return some of the $100 million for the community that we desperately need, because our community budget submission steps through some really basic information.

The federal Labor government provided an MRI licence to Sandringham Hospital, but what they haven't got at Sandringham Hospital is an MRI machine. In fact, from freedom of information documents, the community has been engaged in a hoax by this federal Labor government, claiming that services would be available to them which were not delivered, because they didn't have the equipment to do so. The first thing we ask for is around three million bucks so we have an MRI machine for a community hospital.

We know of the rise of antisemitism over the past couple of years. How about we get the community safety grants our community needs for Moorabbin Hebrew Congregation, L'Chaim Chabad youth centre and the South Caulfield Hebrew Congregation. For women's sporting facilities, as I said already, there's Peterson Reserve, Brighton Beach Oval Pavillion and Dendy Park Pavilion—so women can have toilets and change rooms. We need them in Highett, we need them at Brighton Beach, and we need them at Dendy Park. We need other important facilities, like for victims of sexual violence and those on low incomes who need support, like the redevelopment of BayCISS community support centre, as well as many other important pieces of infrastructure, like the EMC Fox Pavilion in McKinnon, which also needs women's change room facilities, park lighting upgrades at Allnutt Park and Hodgson Reserve and, of course, an open amenity in Glen Huntly. We should be able to support important infrastructure like Moorabbin Bowls Club. These are simple requests. Treasurer: deliver, because Goldstein is depending on it.

[language not transcribed] Happy New Year to Melbourne's Chinese and Vietnamese communities. On Sunday I had the pleasure of joining the local Vietnamese community at the Lunar New Year festival along Victoria Street in Richmond. The festival was an enjoyable reminder of what this season represents: renewal and good fortune, community, family and traditions shared across generations. Victoria Street was alive. Families and friends gathered to join in the celebrations and enjoy the atmosphere, while local businesses opened their doors to share food, music and culture.

The event was organised by Victoria Street Business Association. Thank you to the team for making it happen. The business association's commitment to supporting local traders and bringing the community together is vital to the success of the festival and to the ongoing revitalisation and strength of Victoria Street throughout the year.

The Vietnamese community has shaped Richmond in lasting and meaningful ways, from small family businesses to community organisations and from food and culture to civic life. Their contribution is woven into the fabric of our city. As a local to Victoria Street, I regularly dine at the restaurants, and I'm grateful for the warmth and welcome I receive.

In a few weeks I will also be attending the Chinese Lunar New Year celebrations in Melbourne's historic Chinatown. Melbourne's Chinatown is the oldest continuous Chinese settlement in the Western world, and Lunar New Year celebrations are more than a cultural event; they are a must-see highlight on the city's calendar.

This year we welcome the year of the horse, a symbol of strength, energy and forward momentum. The horse invites us to move forward with confidence and optimism. It is a fitting symbol for Melbourne, a city that thrives when it embraces change and turns diversity into strength. It reflects the leadership, contribution and cultural confidence that the Vietnamese and Chinese communities bring to Melbourne every day.

Together, these celebrations remind us that multiculturalism is not an abstract idea; it is lived, it is shared, and it is built year after year through people showing up for one another. I am proud to be part of a government that understands the strength that comes from diversity and backs it with action. The Albanese government invests in multicultural communities, supports small businesses and works to ensure that every person from every background feels seen, respected and included in our national story.

At a time where social cohesion matters more than ever, Lunar New Year is a reminder that Australia is stronger when we celebrate who we are together. When we make space for culture, language and tradition, we build trust. And when people feel they belong, our community is stronger. Happy New Year, and I wish you a prosperous new year.

I rise today to give voice to the Western Australian families who were shafted by the WA state Labor government's decision to close down the demersal fishing industry, commercially forever and recreationally for some 21 months, with the ban curiously being lifted just out from the next state election in 2029. I'm sure it was on the basis of robust scientific advice.

But that's where the plot thickens a little, because on 31 October last year the Commonwealth certified the demersal fishery in Western Australia as sustainable for the seventh time. So the Commonwealth's science, for the seventh consecutive time, suggested that the fishery was perfectly sustainable, and 33 days later the Western Australian fisheries minister stood up and described the industry as being on the brink of causing extinction for species like dhufish.

Being locked out from fishing some 900-kilometre of closure is impacting 80 per cent of the Western Australian population, particularly in towns like Bunbury and Augusta in the electorate of Forrest, home to multigenerational fishing businesses. This has stripped them of their livelihoods and their family businesses, built over some 100 years of experience in those particular fishing grounds, with less than a month's notice.

This was particularly brought home to me when, standing on the fishing wharf in Bunbury, I met a young guy of about my age, mid-30s, who had stepped out from the family fishing business, gone to the bank, got a very substantial loan of some hundreds of thousands of dollars and bought his own fishing boat. The Western Australian government processed the licence transfer so that he too was a commercial shark fisherman, and 10 days later the government announced the permanent closure of the fishery. There have been no details on the compensation package. There is no future for him, his business or the new employees he'd just taken on, and, of course, that boat that he'd just bought is now worthless because nobody in Western Australia can buy a shark fishing boat.

Why is a shark fishing boat caught up in a demersal fishing ban? It's because 0.4 per cent of the dhufish and snapper caught in Western Australia is bycatch of shark fishing, and 0.4 per cent was enough for the Western Australian minister to cancel their licences permanently. I don't know whether they've jumped the shark—whether their science is wrong and the Commonwealth's is right or vice versa—but there are clear questions to answer, and I've written to the federal minister to ask her to intervene and sort this mess out. Unfortunately, in the first response, she's denied any responsibility or any concern about the science. This has a long way to go.

At the ecumenical worship service for the opening of the 2026 federal parliamentary year, there was a call for peace throughout the world. Every day, billions of people struggle through life living in extreme poverty, violent conflict, war and oppression, none more so than the Palestinians, who have never known peace in their lifetime and who only know a life of daily survival and misery. With so much else going on in people's lives here in Australia and overseas, and with people tiring of the decades-old Palestine-Israel conflict, the daily sufferings endured by Palestinians hardly rate a mention in mainstream media here in Australia. That has been even more noticeable since the announcement of a ceasefire in October, when, for most outsiders, the conflict was supposedly settled.

Yet the shootings, the bombings, the air strikes and the suffering did not stop with the announced ceasefire. Credible sources report that, since the ceasefire, over 500 Palestinians, including innocent women and children, have been violently killed. The Israeli land grab continues. Journalists are barred from the region in an attempt to prevent the truth from being reported. International aid to desperate and starving Palestinians is restricted by the Israeli military. And even with the recent opening of the Rafah crossing to Egypt, on-the-ground reports claim that very little aid is now getting through.

Aid workers who risked their lives to save people are pleading for international intervention to force the Netanyahu government to ease their restrictions over Palestinian people, and now the Jewish Independent reports that the Israeli Knesset is considering legislation that would make the death sentence mandatory for intentional killing by Palestinians, but not by Israelis.

Since October 2023, around 72,000 Palestinians, including over 20,000 children, 1,700 health workers and 259 journalists and media workers, have been killed; 182,000 people have been wounded; 870,000 have been displaced; and 10,000 Palestinians have been taken prisoner. Whilst some will dispute those statistics, credible reports, including from aid workers and UN observers on the ground, who have addressed MPs in this place, confirm that the situation for Palestinians is horrific and their ongoing oppression and the widespread loss of life is very real. Yet the world turns a blind eye whilst Palestinians lose their lives, their homes, their lands and their rights. Accusations of war crimes, ethnic cleansing, apartheid and genocide against the Netanyahu government are now regularly raised with me. History will judge this period harshly, but that will be of no use to the desperate Palestinian people, who, right now, are pleading for help as they struggle to survive. For them, peace is an elusive dream.

I would like to respond to some of those comments of a moment ago, but I realise this is constituency statements and so I will stick to that.

Under Labor the cost-of-living crisis is getting worse, not better. Families in my electorate of Hume don't need economists or modelling to tell them that there is a cost-of-living crisis—that their standard of living has been trashed by a Labor government that has mismanaged the economy. They feel it every single week. They see it at the checkout when they pay their grocery bills. They see it when their power bill arrives. They see it when they fill up their petrol tanks at the bowser. They feel it when their rent goes up again or when they're left trying to pay their mortgage every month. Under Labor, the cost-of-living crisis is getting worse, not better, and families in Hume are paying the price.

This Treasurer promised that we'd beaten inflation—that it was all over. And what do you know? Up it surges. In fact, the Reserve Bank this week has told us that it is on its way up again—a huge increase in their forecasts. The Reserve Bank raised interest rates, of course, on Tuesday this week, and there's every expectation that there will be more increases in interest rates because of the failures of this government. Labor have treated Australians' money like it was their own, overspending on policies that did not ease the cost of living in any meaningful sense for Australians. And they've left the Reserve Bank to do the heavy lifting. We've got the government with the foot on the accelerator, and so the Reserve Bank has to put the foot on the brake—and that wrecks the engine, and that is exactly what has been happening under this Labor government.

Meanwhile, the supply side of our economy is completely broken. They've clogged it up. They've clogged up the private sector with more regulation. They're driving energy policy based on ideology, not based on affordable, reliable power—and it's good to see the energy shadow right here, who knows this better than better than anyone. They are allowing the construction sector to be held to ransom by the CFMEU. This is how you end up with an economy that's sending out the red lights and the warning bells by saying that inflation is going up and interest rates are going up.

And Australians are suffering. Our standard of living is going backwards, at exactly the time when other countries around the world are seeing theirs improving. This Labor government has failed hardworking Australians.

Last week I joined the Minister for Multicultural Affairs, Anne Aly, in my electorate for a visit to the Brotherhood of St Laurence, where, together, we heard directly from young people in our community who have participated in their Youth Transitions Support Pilot Program.

The YTS Pilot Program supports young refugees aged 15 to 25, providing guidance and practical support to help them participate fully in our community through work, education and sport. The program delivers pathways for young refugees to connect with employers, gain work and volunteer experience, and access career guidance, mentoring, training, coaching and support, often at moments when it is needed most.

Among those we met was Jawid Noorzai, a 21-year-old originally from Afghanistan, who was connected to the YTS program through another local institution, the Kangan Institute, during his studies. Jawid was initially uncertain about his education and employment pathway. With encouragement and support from YTS, he was accepted into a Diploma of Information Technology at RMIT University. Since then, Jawid has pursued a full-time career in the insulation industry and is giving back, through his involvement as a casual youth adviser, to support other young people along similar settlement journeys.

We were also introduced to Dina, a 20-year old who came to Australia from Iraq with her family five years ago and now lives in Craigieburn. Dina faced challenges engaging with the education system due to earlier disruptions in life. After connecting with YTS, she was able to develop her skills, build confidence and pursue her aspirations, securing work as a youth adviser with the Brotherhood of St. Laurence, followed by full-time employment in the hospitality industry. Similar stories were shared by other participants, including Lencho and Sandra, who connected with YTS activities while undertaking their Adult Migrant English Program studies at local institutions in my community.

I want to congratulate these young people not only for their personal achievements but for their generosity in giving back as youth advisers when given the opportunity. Their stories are a powerful reminder of what is possible when we invest in people. The Albanese Labor government is committed to community led, place based programs that provide early, practical support, meeting young people where they are and backing their potential. That's because, when we invest in young people in their formative years, we are investing in the skills, confidence and potential that strengthen communities for the long term, reducing disadvantage, increasing participation and supporting better outcomes across education and employment.

I rise today to thank everyone who kept the communities of western Victoria safe over this summer and who are still doing so. We have had an incredibly difficult period since Christmas in western Victoria. We've had the Otway fires, which still continue to burn, plus we've had fires in particular at Skipton, Streatham and Carranballac which destroyed homes and vital infrastructure. We saw not only that but also flooding. This was flash flooding, the like of which we hadn't seen for years, and it led to serious safety issues. Yet, in the end, fortunately no-one lost their lives. For all the natural disasters that we've been through, that has been the telltale thing. Fortunately, we haven't seen any loss of life. We have unfortunately seen people lose their houses and key community infrastructure lost. That can be repaired and needs to be repaired. The fact that we haven't had loss of life in western Victoria from these fires and from the floods is nothing short of a miracle.

That goes to where I want to start today. That is thanking everyone who was involved in fighting the fires and dealing with the floods. There were local heroes who warned people about the flash flooding that was coming. That saved people's lives. We saw, whether it was through our professional firefighters or through our volunteer firefighters, their willingness to put themselves on the frontline save lives and save even more damage to housing, to property, to livestock and to key community infrastructure. I say, again, thank you to our CFA volunteers, to our professional firefighters and to everyone else—all the community groups who came together to help and support those who had to move out of those homes, where relief centres had to be set up. Organisations like the Lions Club moved in and made sure that they were helping and supporting those people who had to move away from those homes. Then, of course, there's the support for those who have lost their homes.

We're not out of danger yet. We've still got a potentially trying six to eight weeks to go. But what we've done in the face of such adversity in western Victoria is an absolute credit to everyone and particularly to all those hard working volunteers.

I want to recognise two outstanding contributors to the Cowan community. They're also the recipients of the City of Stirling's 2026 Community Citizen of the Year Awards, and their work reflects the very best of who we are. The first is the Perth Rhinos Basketball club. It's more than just a sporting organisation; it's a lifeline for young people seeking connection, belonging and opportunity. The club was originally established to create elite pathways for South Sudanese youth, but it has grown into a truly inclusive club that welcomes everyone. For many young people who have experienced disengagement or social isolation, the Rhinos offer something that cannot be measured on a scoreboard: a sense of inclusion and safety, mentoring and a place to grow with confidence. Through mentors from diverse backgrounds, the Rhinos are building resilience and leadership in the next generation, and their recognition as winners of the Active Citizenship Award is well deserved. It reminds us that grassroots organisations are often the quiet engines of social cohesion. What they give these young people is dignity, empowerment and a sense of belonging that strengthens our entire community.

I also want to acknowledge the remarkable Vicky Young. She's the president and co-founder of Dandelions WA, and she's been named Community Citizen of the Year by the City of Stirling. Vicky's work is grounded in compassion and action—the kind of combination that really has an impact on changing lives. This year alone, Dandelions WA will provide 17,000 backpacks to children who might otherwise start school without the essentials that many of us take for granted. But the impact of Dandelions WA goes far beyond backpacks because, under Vicky's leadership, they now support people experiencing homelessness, women and families fleeing violence, individuals in hospital and others navigating hardship. Vicky ensures that people in crisis feel seen and that they are supported and treated with dignity, and she shows us that leadership doesn't always come with grand gestures. Often it's the steady, thoughtful work that makes the greatest difference.

Both worthy recipients embody what it truly means to lift others up. Their commitment to inclusion, dignity and opportunity speaks to values that we should all hold dearly here, and together they remind us of the extraordinary power of community and what is possible when we choose to lift one another up.

In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' statements has expired.

I rise to associate myself with some wonderful remarks commemorating the life of a great Australian, Nick Bolkus—those remarks made by the Prime Minister; the Leader of the Opposition; my friend the Minister for Multicultural Affairs, very powerfully last night; and, of course the very moving tribute offered by the Minister for Health. I rise to make a few brief remarks associating myself and reflecting on the Hon. Nick Bolkus's legacy, and in doing so I remember that in December last year I had the opportunity to meet his daughter Aria in her capacity as South Australian Labor's candidate for Colton. I reflected then on some similarities that appeared to me and how wonderful it was to see a legacy continue in that family. It's tragic that only days afterwards Nick passed away. Beginning my remarks, I, of course, think mostly of his family—of his wife, Mary, who I had the privilege of working with in former capacities, and the daughters: Aria, who I mentioned earlier, and Mikayla, who gave a wonderful tribute that has been reflected on in this place already.

For me, I find it difficult to overstate the significance of the influence the Hon. Nick Bolkus had on the Australian Labor Party, particularly its Left; on the state of South Australia; and indeed on the shape of our country. He leaves an indelible mark on the country that we live in today, and I want to touch on that through the lens of the role that he played as a minister, as a very significant part of the more than 25 years he spent serving diligently the people of South Australia in the other place—a time marked by an unusual adherence to a really clearly defined set of principles through which he approached his tasks in politics, but ensuring that those principles were always given a practical application, which I think is the very best of the movement that I'm proud to be a part of.

Nick Bolkus's most significant impact was in portfolios that I had the privilege of holding for a period of time. Thinking about his impact, I want to touch on those three lenses of citizenship, multicultural affairs and immigration very briefly. In terms of citizenship, what Nick Bolkus did was to transform or, perhaps, realise Australian citizenship as that common bond that unites us all and to think about how we could celebrate the moment of acquiring citizenship as something that is as nation building as the construction of physical infrastructure, recognising that, in our country, our greatest strength is the unrivalled capacity of the Australian people.

His elevating of citizenship takes me to the role that he played and his responsibilities in what was first called ethnic affairs and has since been reframed as multicultural affairs. What Nick Bolkus did was see our country as it is—or, indeed, as it was—see that recognised in our institutions and our cultural understanding and see ourselves through a clear-eyed lens, not looking back, not elevating nostalgia, but seeing us as we are. But he did more than that. He sought to imagine how we might be, how we could be a country in which everyone belongs, a country characterised by inclusion, belonging and respect. By putting down these markers, he made an extraordinary contribution to the country that I'm so proud to live in and to represent in this place today. His work carries on in this government through Minister Aly's great work, and, right across this nation, its imprint is felt. There are many Australians who have many reasons to be grateful for his contribution in that role.

The Prime Minister and others have touched upon how he went about his work as minister for immigration, and it would be remiss of anyone not to reflect on the important series of actions he took in the aftermath of the horrors of Tiananmen Square. He combined, again, a sense of principled compassion and respect for human rights with a determination to see these principles put into practical effect, and I challenge anyone to think about how our country would be but for the decisions he made in 1989 and the years following. This is one example of how he carried out a very significant role and, I can say, a very challenging role—but also a rewarding role, as others have said. Perhaps the immigration portfolio is unique in that I believe it does contain within it an ex-ministers' club, all of whom reflect on the significance and the weight of individual decisions that we have made, difficult decisions that shape lives and shape communities. I think, in how Nick Bolkus went about that work, he set a standard that all have aspired to follow but few have emulated successfully.

In touching on those three things, I don't wish to think that his life should be defined by them. However, they have all left a really significant impact on this place and on the lives of all Australians. As others have recognised, Nick Bolkus made an extraordinary contribution to my party, the Australian Labor Party, in South Australia and around the country. His surname was also remarkable when he entered the Senate. As my friend Steve Georganas—I should use that name in this context—knows, our parliament looks and sounds very different today because of the trail that Nick Bolkus blazed. Nick Bolkus made a huge impact on behalf of the people of South Australia. He transformed the South Australian Labor Party and opened up my party as a better party of government of the centre left through his role organisationally and through encouraging so generously a generation of talented politicians, many of whom have made contributions in this debate. As a minister he changed lives and, in many ways, changed our country. He deserves to be remembered in this place.

But the last point I want to make—again, turning back to those who loved him the most: his family and his friends—is that, if we are to pay tribute to a life lived like Nick Bolkus's was, it's not so much the words we offer in tribute to him; it's how we conduct ourselves, those of us who sit in this place and the other place, and how well we follow his example in seeing our country as it is, imagining how it could be better and seeking to chart a path between those two things. Vale, Nick Bolkus.

It's actually an honour to follow the member for Scullin. They were fine words, indeed. I'm sure Nick Bolkus's family will very much appreciate reading and hearing those words you've just uttered in your speech.

You might find it perplexing to understand why a National Party member is standing to rise to speak on somebody he never met—somebody from the Labor Centre Left—but I was reminded when I walked into the chamber by the member for Adelaide, who is a very good friend of mine, about Nick Bolkus. Steve Georganas reminded me that he worked for Nick Bolkus for 10 years and said that but for Nick Bolkus he wouldn't actually be in this place. So Nick Bolkus does have a little bit to answer for! I say that with genuine warmth, and it is meant, because Steve and I are great mates. I know Nick Bolkus was great mates with people across the aisle in the parliament. He was also of Greek descent, just like the member for Adelaide and me. We've both, fortunately, made sure all the necessary arrangements with the citizenship test are in place such that we are very much Australian and have very much renounced any Greek descent status that would perhaps prevent us from taking our places here.

As Steve reminded me as well, Nick Bolkus was a good friend of multicultural Australia. He was somebody who strove to make Australia a better place. Often, when Labor luminaries pass away, I refer to my predecessor Kay Hull to see what she thought of them and to get an understanding of the part they played in the parliament and in the life of Australia. I messaged Kay yesterday, and she said, 'He was a decent person.' She said, 'We did disagree on the South Australian water view.' I'm not quite sure how many members for Riverina would ever agree with a South Australian on the water situation; we always agree to disagree in that context. She said: 'To be honest, he was a decent backbench senator when I was there. He was so diplomatic and loyal to the Labor party.' She said, 'I always felt so much respect for how he accepted the fact that he had been overlooked towards the end of his political career in November 2001.'

He'd served as the shadow Attorney-General; it's not an easy position. It really isn't. Shadow Attorney-General is one of the toughest jobs in parliament because you don't get all of the resources that a cabinet minister would get. You don't get all of the briefings, all the departmental help, the staff or the resources, but you are expected—as somebody who is making the first law officer of the land accountable—to be across every legal matter that comes before the parliament. He was also shadow minister for justice. Again, that's a complex, intricate and difficult role, but he filled that role with great aplomb. He filled that role with all of the fervour and gusto that you would expect of someone of Greek descent—where of course they invented democracy, didn't they, member for Adelaide? I'm looking for an interjection—yes. I'll just note for the Hansard that he nodded!

Nick Bolkus took his role very, very seriously, according to Kay. As she said, he did not have a bad word to say about his party or about anyone. That, I think, is the measure of the man, as well. He was somebody who, as the member for Scullin quite eloquently described, saw a bigger picture. When he had the ability to change the country and make a difference, he took that with both hands and fulfilled that role admirably. From somebody whose parents came from—as the member for Adelaide reminded me—the Kastellorizo came somebody who entered this parliament and gave of his all from 1981 through to 2005. It's a long career. Not many parliamentarians get 20-plus years in the Senate, in the parliament, and he made use of every one of those 24 years to make a difference and to make this country a better place.

To that end, I say, we say, thank you to the late senator Nick Bolkus. Thank you for your endeavours; thank you for your efforts. Very sincere, heartfelt and genuine condolences to your loved ones, to your family and to your wide circle of friends—particularly in the Greek community, who would be feeling your loss very appreciably. Vale, Nick Bolkus. Well done.

A month or two before Christmas last year, I got a call from Nick Bolkus. He was at an aged care facility, actually, and he was struggling. His voice was barely more than a whisper, but the clarity of what he was saying to me and what he was asking me about was very much there despite the difficulty in hearing what he was trying to say. He was interested in the policies that we were implementing. He was asking questions about social cohesion and multiculturalism. He was asking me questions about the new ministry position that I have. He was engaged, he was wise, he gave me some good advice, and he cared.

We are all standing here, today, to pay our respects in this condolence motion to a man who gave so much of himself in public service—obviously to the state of South Australia but also to the entire nation. I want to offer my sincere condolences to his wife, Mary, and his children, Aria, Mikayla and Nicholas, plus the wider, very large community of friends and family that have been touched by the contribution that he's made—even to, right beside me, the member for Adelaide, Steve Georganas, who worked for Nick for 10 years. Now, Mikayla has worked for Steve. The amount of wisdom that Steve probably benefited from Nick and his experience in his career and as a mentor to so many talented politicians—I'll put you in that category—who serve their community faithfully and who do everything they can to give people a better life—that was Nick at the national policy level but also at a community level, at a local level.

We've heard that he was a pioneer of progressive politics. That's certainly the case. He was the architect of modern multiculturalism. We call him one of the fathers of multiculturalism, and that's certainly true. He had a long and distinguished career in politics. He was elected to the Senate in 1980, and his life was a life of public service and of literally giving himself to the nation and to his state of South Australia, his beloved South Australia. He actually began his career as a lawyer—we won't hold that against him—before he moved into politics and had a great political career. He served his home state of South Australia, which he loved so much, and he served all of this nation for a political career that spanned 24 years.

He is known, very much, for his contribution to modern multiculturalism, but we should not forget that Nick became the first Australian cabinet minister of Greek descent. That's a significant step within the context of multicultural Australia, but, more than that, what Nick did as a cabinet minister should be remembered and recalled. When Prime Minister Bob Hawke elevated him to the cabinet, it was as the minister for consumer affairs. In that role, he introduced watershed legislation to protect the privacy of Australians from data credit agencies. He also set up the banking ombudsman to provide a dispute resolution mechanism for bank customers. He did some really remarkable policy work—Steve, that was probably a bit of work that you did when you were working for him as an adviser; I'm not sure—that was significant and made a difference. Nick insisted on protecting all Australians equally and, in many respects, embodied the Labor values that we hold dear in every role that he held.

On the multicultural space and the advocacy that he was known for—obviously coming from a migrant background himself—when he became the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, as well as the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Multicultural Affairs, he worked in those roles with not only compassion and empathy but also practicality. He got real and tangible things done. We've heard from previous speakers about the moment—I think most of Australia knows the history—when Bob Hawke, our then prime minister, provided refuge to thousands of Chinese citizens in Australia after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. It was actually Nick who was very much part of that decision. He was, alongside the PM, exceptionally proud of that moment in our history.

Back then was a time—which maybe one could argue is not too dissimilar to today—where there were people who were deliberately trying to divide us, as Australians, through fear and differences in our ethnicity and backgrounds, and that fear and division could have triumphed at the time. But, due to decisions like this, and people like Nick Bolkus who stood tall and firm against hatred and prejudice, we triumphed. He stood for the idea that our diversity is a strength and that, regardless of our backgrounds, who we are, where we come from or what our faith is, we can embody the Australia that we live in. We can be part of the Australia that we live in, and we can contribute to the Australia that we love so much. That is modern, multicultural Australia.

Nick stood up courageously and compassionately to do what was right, despite what was, at the time, a very high political risk. It would have been much easier for Bob and Nick to just fold, go with the polls and go with the loud voices that were, at the time, sowing that fear and division. But, they said, 'No, we are going to stand up and do what is right morally, ethically and politically.' People give politics a bad rap, but when you take political actions like this, the way that Nick did, that is I think the core element of politics—the ability to engage in that public space to make decisions that make a difference to people's lives around us. Nick very much symbolised but also practically delivered on that idea of political action.

We know he's of Greek background. He would have claimed to be the holder of the flame of democracy. Apparently the Greeks invented democracy. I think that's true and he handed it down. Nick certainly was someone who was proud of his Greek heritage and proud of the fact that democracy sprung from his homeland. He carried that torch with great courage and compassion throughout his political career. He understood that Australians and Australia should be proud and confident in our differences, and we should recognise that we are multifaith, multiethnic society—one that he helped build.

It's not just about tolerating others, it's about those democratic values and the democratic participation that he loved so much. It's about social responsibility in doing things for others and contributing. It's about the shared values that bind us together. Even when we might disagree, there are threads that bind us together and make up the society that we cherish so much.

He left an extraordinary legacy of dedication, service and foresight, and he will be remembered for his service by not just those in the Labor Party but all of us in this place. I think his spirit lives on in many respects through not only many of my South Australian colleagues but all of us in the party and all of us in this place. It was an absolute pleasure to engage with him and for him to give some time to me and advice to me over the many, many years from the beginning of my political career. I'm sure he was a great mentor to so many South Australian politicians in this place as well. It is so sad to see him go, but he left us with something very, very special, and we'll carry that flame on for him. Rest in peace, Nick.

I rise today with deep sadness to acknowledge the passing of former senator the Hon. Nick Bolkus. Nick was a towering figure in South Australian public life, a formidable parliamentarian and a man whose contribution to this nation leaves a lasting imprint on the character of our country. And while his public contributions are well known, his private contributions are equally important. He was a much-loved husband to Mary and a father to Nick, Aria and Michaela. He was a colleague and mentor to many in the Labor movement across Australia, particularly SA Labor, and he was a valued friend to many. I'm lucky enough to be able to count myself as one of those.

For many Australians, and particularly for those of us from South Australia, Nick Bolkus was more than a senator. He was a reformer, a strategist, a Labor legend and, above all, a believer in the power of public service to improve lives. Nick was born in Adelaide in 1950 to migrant parents from the island of Kastellorizo in Greece, and his parents ran a greengrocer shop in Adelaide's West End. He was educated at Adelaide High School and Adelaide University—a true local. He showed his interest in politics early, fundraising and hand-delivering letters supporting Don Dunstan in 1965 and 1966 at the tender age of 15.

After a brief career as a lawyer, he unsuccessfully ran for the seat of Torrens in 1975 and for federal Senate in 1977 before being elected as a federal senator for South Australia in 1980. Entering parliament at just 30 years of age, he quickly developed a reputation that would follow him throughout his career. Nick was intellectually sharp, politically courageous and never afraid to engage in the contest of ideas. His wife, Mary, says he was always certain of his position, and she wondered how it was that two people who were always right ended up married to each other!

He understood that democracy is not a spectator sport. It requires conviction, resilience and a willingness to stand up for what you believe is right, irrespective of the cost. And Nick brought those qualities in abundance. He was a key minister in the Hawke-Keating governments: Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister Assisting the Treasurer for Prices and Minister for Administrative Services. But he's perhaps best known as having been Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. In this latter role he reviewed the Migration Act and the Australian Citizenship Act and established the Refugee Review Tribunal. He was instrumental in allowing thousands of Chinese students to remain in Australia after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Thousands of lives were changed.

At Nick's state memorial service we heard from Dr Hang Quach, a professor of haematology from St Vincent's Hospital in Melbourne. She told the story of her father being sentenced to life in prison as a political prisoner in Vietnam after the war and how her mother fled in fear to Australia as a refugee with two small children. Dr Quach was aged four at the time. They didn't know if her father was dead or alive or if they would ever see him again. As a 15-year-old, she wrote to Senator Nick Bolkus. One day she answered the phone at her home, and, to her great surprise, it was Senator Bolkus. It took a couple of years, but he performed the miracle. He managed to negotiate for her father to be released from prison and deported to Australia. At the state memorial, she showed a photograph of Nick and her father meeting for the first time, her father as a free man. Of course, she and her mother re-met the father that she couldn't remember, having not seen him for the best part of a decade and a half. Her father lived out his years in Australia, and his daughter is now changing the lives of Australians through her clinical research. She spoke of being forever grateful for the compassion and the second chance her family got in this wonderful country thanks to Senator Bolkus.

It's impossible to know how many hundreds of thousands—maybe millions—of Australians' lives have been changed for the better because of the work Nick Bolkus did in immigration, citizenship, multicultural and ethnic affairs fields. He approached legislation with rigour and seriousness, always conscious that the decisions made within these walls ripple far beyond Canberra into households, workplaces and communities across Australia. But what truly distinguished Nick Bolkus was not simply the positions he held but the principles that guided him. He believed in fairness. He believed in opportunity. He believed in multiculturalism and that diversity makes us a stronger and greater nation. He believed that government, at its best, could be a force for dignity, particularly for those whose voices were too often unheard.

Those who knew him personally speak not only of his intellect but of his loyalty and warmth. Politics can be an unforgiving profession, yet Nick forged friendships across factions and across the aisle. The capacity to disagree without disrespect is a lesson all of us in public life would do well to remember. The Nick I knew was sharp, witty and very, very softly spoken, but you always leant forward to hear what he was saying because it was always worthwhile.

Nick died on Christmas Day last year after a long illness that tried his patience. My heart goes out to my dear friend Mary, to Aria, to Mikayla, to Nick and to his sister, Ana.

Nick believed future generations deserve a nation more just, more prosperous and more compassionate than the one they inherited. He was not one who believed in pulling up the ladder after himself, and he demonstrated that through his work and through his life.

While political careers eventually conclude, bodies age and memories fade, the impact of public service lives on. It lives on in stronger institutions, fairer laws and expanded opportunities for others. It lives on in the lives of those you have impacted. Nick's legacy lives on in individuals like Dr Quach and all the patients she helps, in the SA Labor Party, forever changed by his guidance and support, and in the multicultural Australia he helped shape.

Nick Bolkus understood that legacy is not measured in titles but in the difference one makes and in the lives you change. May he rest in peace.

Today I speak to honour the life and service of a man whose contribution to the Australian Labor Party was profound, enduring and deeply principled: Nick Bolkus. Nick Bolkus was not a loud figure in Australian politics, but he was one who left a lasting impact on this country—a thinker, a reformer, a believer in Labor values and a man who devoted his life to public service with integrity and quiet determination.

Nick entered political life driven not by ego or ambition but by a belief that government could be a powerful force for fairness and opportunity for everyone. He joined the Labor Party as a young man, and from the very beginning he understood that politics was about fair representation for the people of Australia. He represented South Australia in the Senate with distinction, and later served as a minister in the Hawke and Keating governments during one of the most transformative periods in our nation's history. Those were years of big reform, years that reshaped Australia's economy, our education system and our place in the world, and Nick Bolkus was there, working thoughtfully, diligently and often behind the scenes to help make that change possible.

As the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and later as the Minister for Administrative Services, he approached his responsibilities with seriousness and care. He believed that public administration mattered, that institutions mattered and that the way government treated people said everything about the values it stood for. He had a deep respect for multicultural Australia and a clear understanding that our diversity was not a weakness to be managed but a strength to be embraced.

In every role he held, Nick brought a sense of fairness, balance and intellectual rigour. He was not interested in shortcuts. He believed policy should be well-considered, evidence-based and grounded in Labor's enduring commitment to social justice. Nick was also a strong believer in education, both as a policy priority and as a personal calling.

Nick Bolkus represented a particular kind of Labor figure, one defined by substance rather than spectacle. He did not seek the spotlight. He did it because he believed in the hard work of reform, the patient work of persuasion and the enduring importance of institutions. Within the Labor Party, he was highly respected, a thoughtful contributor and a colleague who brought reason and principle to every discussion. He believed deeply in party unity and in the idea that Labor, at its best, is stronger when it listens, debates and moves forward together. For many members and colleagues, Nick was also a mentor. He gave advice freely, offered encouragement generously and was always willing to share his experience with those coming up behind him. That generosity of spirit is one of the great quiet gifts of public life.

In South Australia and across the Labor movement nationally, his passing will be felt deeply, not just because of the offices he held but because of the values he embodied: decency, thoughtfulness, service. Nick Bolkus acts as a reminder that good government is built on patience, preparation and principle. Condolence motions ask us to reflect not just on a life lived but on a legacy left behind. Nick Bolkus leaves a legacy of service, of reform and of belief in the Labor cause—a belief that Australia can be fairer; that opportunity should be shared; and that government, when guided by values, can improve lives.

To his family and his friends and all who had the privilege of working with him, I extend my deepest sympathies. To his daughter, Aria: I wish you the best of luck in the upcoming South Australian election as the Labor candidate for the seat of Colton. I know you will carry the Bolkus family name with pride while representing the Labor Party, and that your dad's example will continue to guide you as you follow in his footsteps.

Nick Bolkus served Australia with honour, he served the Labor Party with loyalty and he served the public with integrity. Vale, Nick. May you rest in peace.

It's with great sadness that I stand here today to honour the life of Senator Nick Bolkus, who was a giant in Australian politics, a giant in South Australian public life and a groundbreaking national leader. He was a wonderful mentor to me, a friend, a colleague, and someone that taught me so much about politics, and a man whose service left an undeniable mark on the state of South Australia and our nation. Today, our condolences go out to his wife, Mary; his two daughters, Aria and Mikayla; his son, Nicholas; and his sister, Anna. As I said, it is with great sadness that I stand here today.

Nick's political rise was marked by a complete determination, intellect, and an unwavering belief in the possibilities of public policy. He was elected to the Australian Senate in 1980, at the 1980 federal election, beginning a remarkable 24-year tenure as one of South Australia's longest serving senators and ministers. Prior to that, he had worked and assisted many of Labor's greats, like Clyde Cameron, the industrial relations minister in the Whitlam government; Reg Bishop, who was Postmaster-General; and many others. He was a natural-born leader. He was empathetic, understanding, and he would always take the time to speak to people and learn and question and probe and grasp exactly what that particular person was and what he could learn from them. And that happened to everyone he came across. He showed me, personally, what it was like to represent a community.

I was lucky to be given a place in his office to work for him. It was an opportunity that I will always be grateful for. In fact, I wouldn't be standing in this place as a member of the House of Representatives if it wasn't for Nick's probing and encouraging me to run for a seat back in the late nineties. I remember clearly the discussion we had about running for Hindmarsh back in 1998, and, I've got to say, if it weren't for Nick, I wouldn't have made that move. No doubt, without his support, his encouragement and his guidance throughout not just those years when I was a candidate and then elected but continuously, right up until recently, I know I wouldn't be here. So I thank him for the opportunity, and I'll always be grateful to Nick for that.

Nick was entrusted with some of the nation's most important portfolios. He served as Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Administrative Services, Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Multicultural Affairs, where he actually helped shape modern multicultural Australia. Then, in opposition, he was shadow environment minister and shadow Attorney-General, still contributing to the nation's policies.

It was during this period, the Hawke-Keating era, that Nick made his most considerable and most compassionate and far-reaching decisions, allowing thousands of Chinese nationals who were in Australia before the 1989 Tiananmen Square issue to remain permanently. Overnight he made the decision to grant visas to them along with their families, and it was a decision rooted in humanity. It gives you an idea of Nick's thought process and his beliefs. This was a decision he made that was, as I said, rooted in humanity, moral clarity and a deep belief in Australia as a nation that stands with those seeking safety and integrity. Nick was always a supporter of refugees and of making the right decision to ensure that people who were without a home and had fled their nation, their country—whether it be through war, famine or destruction—would always have an opportunity to go through the system here in this nation to be given refuge. He was a true believer in that.

I think that comes from his background as well, when you look at Nick's history. His parents migrated from a little island in the eastern Aegean called Kastellorizo. They came out in the mid-twenties or thirties and made a home for themselves, first in Port Pirie, and then they moved to Adelaide, where Nick grew up in the inner city, in west Adelaide. A lot of his beliefs were grounded in, and came to fruition through, the migrant community in the western suburbs. There was a very large Greek community and Italian and Lebanese communities in western Adelaide. Nick grew up in that environment, going to Sturt Street Primary and then to Adelaide High School. If you look at his background, his parents came from this little island that had been occupied for hundreds of years by the Ottoman Empire and had then sought freedom—then it went to the Venetians and to the English. People left this island in droves, including his parents, and therefore he grew up in this environment understanding what it's like to flee or leave for a better life, and that formed his beliefs, I believe.

Nick was not simply just a minister; he was also a reformer, a thinker, a principled advocate who understood the machinery of government. I had many conversations with him about these issues and policies et cetera. He used the machinery of government to deliver meaningful change. He modernised our consumer protection laws, advanced transparency in political funding and strengthened the foundations, of course, of multicultural Australia. He also achieved a milestone of profound symbolic importance: Nick Bolkus was the first Greek Australian to serve as a federal cabinet minister. It's not to say that there weren't other politicians of Greek descent before him, like Senator George Georges and some others. But Nick actually was a cabinet minister, and this was an incredible message not just to the Greek community but to many, many migrant communities who had settled in Australia. It showed that, as a son of migrants, you could be at the top level, forming policy with outcomes in legislation that benefit the community. For countless families—Greek, migrant and multicultural families—this was a very important message.

We were so proud of him as a Greek community. I recall the many times when Bob Hawke, the Prime Minister of Australia, or Paul Keating or cabinet ministers would come to a Greek festival, an event of the community; these things just didn't take place prior to that. You would have rarely ever—well, never—seen a prime minister at an ethnic event prior to the late seventies and early eighties. So this was a big message saying, 'Yes, we are a government that respects you, we're a government that honours you and we're a government that understands your contribution as a migrant to this nation.' And Nick had a big influence on leaders of this nation to actually take migrant communities seriously and to take them on board and understand the importance of our multicultural communities. For countless families, as I said, of Greek migrants in Adelaide and all over Australia, it was a huge message, and it said: you belong, your contributions matter, and your story is part of Australia's story. This is the time when the thinking of Australia changed and we became a truly multicultural nation.

Beyond titles and portfolios, Nick was known for his generosity—generosity of time, generosity of giving advice and generosity of just catching up and giving you his views on what he thought would be a way forward for any issues or problems that you may have had. This reached out across the political aisle. He was respected as a formidable intellect, a strategic mind and a man of deep integrity. When I say he was respected across the aisle here in this place—he was also respected internationally. I visited Greece many times, and Nick was one of the first executive members of the World Hellenic Inter-Parliamentary Association, which is a group of MPs from around the world that are of Greek descent. This was formed in 1996. Nick was on the very first executive. Through the contacts he had made—every time I visit Greece and I see politicians and have meetings, one of their first questions to me is: 'How is Nick? How's Nick going? Give him my regards.' That was especially from George Papandreou, former prime minister of Greece. I've met with him on a number of occasions. He was the former foreign affairs minister as well. His first words to me every time I'd see him in Athens were: 'How's Nick going? Give him my regards.' This is the level of respect that he had internationally.

In South Australia, Nick's imprint is absolutely everywhere—in the multicultural institutions that he strengthened, the young leaders that he mentored, the families whose lives were changed by his decisions and the political landscape he helped shape over four decades. At the heart of Nick's life, of course, was his family. He leaves behind his wife, Maria; his comrade and friend Mary Patetsos, a respected community leader; and his three beautiful children, Nicholas, who is practising law and doing very well in South Australia, Aria, his daughter who is the candidate for the seat of Colton—and we wish her the very best—and Mikayla, who has gone back to legal work but worked in my office for a few years as well. All of his three children share his strategic mind, his deep generosity and his integrity. Today, we remember the man who rose from Adelaide's western district to the highest level of national leadership and a man who championed fairness, dignity and multiculturalism before those values were widely celebrated; a man who mentored generations, including myself, transformed policy and lived his life in service to others; a man who was a personal friend to many and the leading light for change. South Australia lost a dedicated servant, and Australia has lost one of its great champions.

I rise to honour a former holder of the immigration portfolio, a Labor giant and a personal friend in Nick Bolkus. Nick and I first met at a time when I was working for the Australian Republic Movement and he was the shadow Attorney-General, which I think means I owe Malcolm Turnbull for the first time that I met Nick Bolkus. Back then was when the Senate was dealing with whether or not there would be a vote for a constitutional convention, which ultimately did happen. We did really well in the convention vote and then really badly in the ultimate referendum vote. That was the first opportunity I had to meet with Nick. And then, some years later, after I was preselected, he remembered the earlier meetings and, effectively, to some extent, just adopted me. We were from different states, different factions—we got along well, and that was enough. To now be in a situation where I'm the custodian for this government of one of the portfolios that he advanced so brilliantly for the Hawke government and the Keating government is a really significant honour.

When I was first preselected, it was Nick who knew parts of my electorate better than I did, even though I'd lived there my whole life. On visits, like to Saint Basil's nursing home, I'd find myself—as a lifelong resident, having grown up only a few kilometres away from a site—being introduced, by someone from a different state, where the personal relationship that Nick held with people was deep and real and valued.

He offered to do a fundraiser for me—and, actually, when I heard that Aria was running in the state parliament, I desperately wanted to go and do a fundraiser for her, but they're not legal in South Australia, so the intention was there but I wasn't able to help Aria in the way that Nick had helped me. But he said to hold a different sort of event, because he recognised—I was running and the previous speaker, Steve, was running at the same time—it was the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square decision, the immigration decision. And, because it was Nick, we had those students coming—not because it was an event for me; they just wanted to see Nick again—to probably one of the biggest events I've ever held. But the amazing thing was: almost everybody just brought flowers, and there was a presentation, like you were at a wedding, of flowers, with student after student wanting to go forward to basically just give a gesture of thanks to Nick Bolkus. If you think about how significant it was for them: of course, the protesters themselves, with the tanks coming down, were students, and, therefore, to be a student in Australia at the time—people were really scared, and that decision from the Hawke government was life-changing for them, and fundamentally a good thing for Australia to do and a real part of nation-building.

In opposition, as shadow Attorney-General during the Howard government's changes to native title, he played the leading role in what, to this day, is still the longest-ever debate in the Senate. It went for more than 100 hours—although that was largely Nick's fault, because 900 of the amendments had been moved by him.

I've always had a large Greek community within my electorate. Boundaries have changed, but there's always been a big Greek community. No-one should underestimate the extent to which Nick Bolkus is loved—absolutely loved—and admired. And it's not simply because of the story that he tells: the story of being the first Greek Australian to serve in cabinet—of course that's huge—and of being the son of Greek migrants who came to Australia between the two world wars, travelling in steerage for a months-long journey. Of course that matters. But it also was just the values and decency of the man.

Because of the nature of elections and Senate timetables, there was a brief window, of just over six months, when I was in the same caucus as Nick Bolkus, when I was first elected, as the Senate time started to wind down—

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 11:23 to 11:43

I'll begin my remarks by extending my condolences to Nick Bolkus's wife, Mary; to his children Aria, Mikayla and Nicholas; and to his sister, Anna.

When you're speaking last on a condolence motion, there's not much left to be said, especially having listened to the contributions of all my colleagues here in this place over the last day or two, where I believe that they all have beautifully summed up Nick's life.

I wasn't able to get to the funeral service for Nick at the Greek Orthodox Church, otherwise known as the Cathedral of Archangels Michael and Gabriel, in Adelaide on 21 January, because parliament here was sitting, but I was able to get to the state memorial on 22 January at the Allan Scott Auditorium in the Hawke Building at the University of Adelaide. Again, the collective contributions there on the day, beginning with Daniela Ritorto, Premier Peter Malinauskas, former deputy premier John Rau, Mary, Aria and Mikayla, and the Minister for Health, Disability and Ageing's contribution in this chamber yesterday, I believe perfectly encapsulate the life of Nick Bolkus and the person he was—the husband, the father, the friend, the politician and the community man that so many others have spoken about in their contributions about him.

The number of people who were at the Allan Scott Auditorium state memorial service also provided a glimpse of the respect that Nick was held in by people from across the country. The number and diversity of people who had come to know him and the impact that he had had on their lives were well displayed on the day by the presence of those people.

I first met Nick Bolkus shortly after the dismissal of the Whitlam government, when I took a job working as research officer to Senator Jim Cavanagh. Nick was then working for Clyde Cameron. The federal MPs and senators at the time predominantly worked on the 15th floor of the AMP building, which was located directly across the road from the state parliament house.

The senators and members had their offices up there, but the staff of the federal representatives were located in a shared room where I, Nick, Paul Holloway and Malcolm Dixon also worked—Paul working for Ralph Jacobi, the then member for Hawker, Malcolm Dixon working for Senator Reg Bishop and Nick, as I said, working for Clyde Cameron. Within that shared space there was a private office. Unsurprisingly, Nick Bolkus took the private office—he was the most senior of all of us at the time. He took the office, and I'd still see him every day as we worked, effectively, alongside each other.

What was noticeable was that Nick didn't seem to do a lot of work as a research officer but, in fact, spent most of his time networking with people within the political system and outside of it—building relationships with MPs, community leaders and business people and with whomever else he was able to. In fact, it would be fair to say that I can rarely recall Nick without the phone glued to his ear, such was his interest in trying to make connections with people in and around the state, and interstate as well.

At the time, whilst he was a young person, every Friday the MPs would come back from Canberra—people like Reg Bishop, Jim Toohey, Mick Young and, sometimes, Senator Don Cameron, Clyde's brother, and state members Jack Wright and Geoff Virgo, who were considered to be some of the more influential MPs of the day, and my friend the member for Adelaide would probably remember many of those MPs—and would gather for lunch at one place or another, and I'm pretty sure that, at those lunch meetings, they would try to sort out the issues of the country and the internal issues of the Labor Party. Chinatown and Hindley Street were popular venues. It was interesting that Nick was already embraced by that group so early in the piece. My view is that they embraced him because they saw the qualities in him that would make him a future leader, and they were absolutely right. They backed him, and he ended up as a senator in this place in 1981, after having been elected in the 1980 election.

In 1981 Senator Jim Cavanagh, who I worked for, retired, so my connection with Nick became somewhat more distant after that. He was elected to the Senate. I went back into my own private life and so on. But we always kept in touch. It wasn't until pretty much the time that I got elected to this place that we once again came together, you might say, and regularly contacted each other over a whole range of matters.

The interesting thing about Nick's career is that he went on to be a minister and—again, as the member for Adelaide pointed out—the first Greek person to become a cabinet minister, which, in its own right, was a huge achievement. But he was someone who was absolutely committed to policy work. I'm pleased that the Minister for Home Affairs, in his remarks before they were cut short, touched on his contribution to Indigenous land rights and, in particular, the debate that took place after the Mabo decision in the High Court where legislation was brought into the parliament, and, subsequently, the debate in terms of amendments to land rights when the Howard government took office.

As someone who had taken an interest in land rights—because former senator Jim Cavanagh, who I worked for, was in fact the first minister to bring legislation relating to land rights into this parliament—I listened with interest to the very long debate that took place when Labor was in opposition and there were amendments to the land rights act. Yes, it was a long debate, but, again, Nick Bolkus played a leading role in that debate—as he did in the debate under Paul Keating when Labor introduced legislation following the Mabo decision. It's one of the achievements of Nick that has not been given, I believe, sufficient airing or sufficient credit for.

Whilst we talk about multiculturalism and his contribution to that, which I entirely agree with and I concur with all the remarks that have been made about that, he also contributed immensely to the Indigenous land rights issues in this country, and that shouldn't be overlooked, because it did set a precedent and a pathway for Indigenous land ownership that we still have to this day.

When he left politics, I would occasionally catch up with Nick, and, again, his interest in politics never waned—not only his interest, but, quite frankly, he was someone who could read the political winds so well. He was someone that you would take advice from because you knew that he understood politics and he understood what the likely consequences of different decisions were. It was always a pleasure to catch up with him to hear his insights into what might lie ahead, and we would do that quite regularly.

In fact, when I had Lindsay Tanner, who was the finance minister after my election to this place in 2007, come out to my electorate to do a community forum, I had Nick as the emcee—again, because of his interest in politics, his ability to perhaps elicit the right questions that the public might want to hear and the people that were attending might want to hear and also his ability to be able to contribute to the forum responses that there might be. Lindsay was so well known and it was great to have the two of them there together, because they had both worked with each other and knew each other, and it was an asset for me to have both of them there.

Subsequent to that, as I said, I'd kept in touch with him, but, in later years, Nick's health started to decline. When he went into the nursing home in 2019, I would visit him. Regrettably, because of COVID, the visits had to be stopped for a while. But, once the restrictions were lifted, I'd still go back and visit him, and I watched him deteriorate physically over that time. I'd take him outside of the centre, and we'd go down to the local shopping centre nearby. I'd take him down there for a coffee, and we would again talk politics. And, even though he was physically almost unable to feed himself or drink his coffee, his mind was as sharp as it was the day I met him. Again, he was someone that you could ask for advice about what was likely to happen. He could read the political winds, as I said earlier, and that never left him.

In his time here, at this place, I know that he developed friendships with a lot of MPs—I'm talking about friendships that were life lasting—and it was so good to see people, at the memorial service, like Laurie Brereton, Warren Snowdon and Brendan O'Connor come along. Nick, when he was reminiscing about his time in this place with me, would often mention them as being partners in whatever else he was doing. The late Simon Crean was another person—and I know Simon would've been there had it not been for the fact that he couldn't be there, because he had passed away—that I know Nick would speak so highly of.

Everything's been said about his contribution to public life and the examples of the people that he has helped, and I'm not going to go over all of that. But I say this about him: he was a person who, like all of us, came into this place wanting to make a difference, and he did. He made a difference in this place. He made a difference back in South Australia in particular, where he was an influential leader within the Labor Party. He made a difference within his own Greek community; the member for Adelaide referred to his international contacts and so on. And he made a difference to people's lives, including people overseas—and again there were examples given of that. He did so always committed to, and always being a true believer and a faithful member of, the Labor Party. Even when he left this place—and he didn't leave under his own decision—he never turned his back on the Labor Party or the people that he had got to know over the years.

I'll finish with this observation about Nick: I knew him for most of my life, and in all that time I can never once recall him raising his voice—not once; not within the chamber and not outside of the chamber. He was always quietly spoken, very placid and very considered in everything he said. So to Nick I say: Nick, thank you for your leadership. Thank you for your friendship. Thank you for what you did for the people of Australia. May you rest in peace.

Debate adjourned.

It's with great sadness that I rise here today to pay my condolences to our Luch. No-one in this place does their job alone, especially in Parliament House. Some of us are lucky enough to spend enough time in this place to get to know a lot of people behind the scenes—and I say 'behind the scenes' but, for all of us, Luke stood out. He was someone who had the heart and soul of our parliament really close to his heart. He was ever the professional. He carried out his role with pride and with really good humour, and he was a big personality. He was a friendly face who cared deeply.

When I learned of his passing, it came as a shock, and I know it came as a shock to many people across this parliament—both elected officials and all of the people who work in this building. He was someone who was so full of life—Luch Jonceski from Jerrabomberra. He served parliament and its members for four decades, always with a smile on his face and always bringing a bit of fun and humour to a place that can be short on it a lot of the time. He'd offer you water and he'd say, 'It's on the House.' He'd greet me every single sitting day with, 'How's my local member today?' He'd sneak in a chocolate, and he'd do so from within the sleeve of his coat, and he'd always chat to me about his beloved Queanbeyan City Football Club. He'd ask for his birthday card and his Christmas cards to be delivered personally, and I always obliged.

It's been really interesting talking to so many other people across this building, because everyone has a personal story or a connection with Luch just like that. There was his daily quip to the Speaker of the House at the opening of parliament every day: 'Let's do this, Mr Speaker.' He was comfortable speaking with prime ministers, with opposition leaders and with members from all political persuasions, and he helped each and every person in this building. His work here was diligent. He was diligent in his job because he had a deep respect for the institution that he served and he had an existential belief in the proper running of our democracy.

Luch, it was a privilege to be your local member. It's something I'll always cherish. A couple of weeks ago, in that extraordinary sitting of parliament, I'm sure I wasn't alone when I came in and was looking around and found it quite weird that he wasn't actually in the chamber. And I'm sure it's going to be a habit that's hard to shake for many of us, because Luch was the very best of us. He was a friend to a lot of people. He was a genuinely good man. He cared for others, and he's going to be really missed in this place. My sincere condolences to his family and friends and to the many members of the Macedonian community, of which Luch was a really, really proud member. These halls will not be the same without you, but we are forever indebted to your memory. Vale, Luch.

A few days ago I actually got up to give my speech for our dear friend Luch in this place because I was fearful that, listening to the contributions of others, I would struggle to keep myself together. And, may I say, I delivered in spades. I was a burbling, sobbing mess. But today I hope to tell some of the fun stories of Luch. After all, I can't cry in front of the member for Canning! I would never live that down. But, as I went to give my speech a couple of days ago, I actually reached out to Luch's colleagues, and I said, 'If there's anything you'd like me to say on your behalf—to read into the record of Hansard forever—then I am very happy to do that. And so here are some of the reflections of his friends and colleagues in the messages to Luch. I'm mindful many of them are watching from your offices and that some of them are here with us today.

Here's the first one. This one's from Raff. Everybody knows Raff. Raff has been around forever, and I didn't know that Raff's official title is Messengerial Attendant. I assume that's what Luch was too. Raff said:

I first met Luch when I joined the Messengerial Services Team a number of years ago.

It was clear to me right from the start that he was well respected and much loved. It didn't take me long to realise that he was a bit of a legend throughout Parliament House. He was a trusted source of information and people would seek out his counsel—he was often a 'steady hand' that provided calm reassurance.

One of the things that I admired about him was that he didn't have tickets on himself. He was a 'down to earth' kind of guy who was pretty happy (and so grateful) for his lot in life.

He was the longest serving member in the Department of the House of Representatives and he had a vast amount of experience and knowledge in the functioning and operations of this place. All of which he was willing to share with you, and I've learned so much from him in my relatively short time here.

Raff, it feels like forever. He goes on:

Luch was a wonderful colleague who brought much joy and humour to this place. He took his role seriously but he also loved a chat and a joke behind the scenes, and occasionally from the Centre Stage of the Chamber.

I will always cherish the many laughs and good times we shared. He was a wonderful workmate and friend, and it was a privilege to have worked with him.

I will miss the larger-than-life character, along with his trademark smile and booming laugh.

Rest in peace my Friend!

And there's another one from Messengerial Phil—I love the way they sign them off:

Luch was a font of knowledge in the Reps chamber back office. Whenever he had answered a clarifying question from a colleague, he would then usually add, "What are you going to do when I'm gone?" or "What will you do without me?" Unfortunately Luch was taken from us too soon and we are left trying to work out what we are going to do without him.

We all miss you, Luch.

This is from one of my own staff members. We all love Luch in our office precisely because, as the member for Eden-Monaro would say, he'd always come around at Christmas time, my birthday, his birthday—any excuse for another photo and indeed another card. And so Unity Paterson in my team said:

He insisted on showing me the prorogue personally when parliament dissolved—something I'd never forget, because he reminded me how genuinely incredible a peaceful dissolution and election is. People just rush past this inconspicuous document on this inconspicuous stand, on their way to do this or that, but Luch was PROUD. I would have done the same if it wasn't for him, and it really reframed how I entered the election. How lucky we are to have democracy sausages as a hallmark of our election, not violence, and that Luch's pride is what sustains that—it's not really luck after all.

He was so proud of the functioning of this building, connecting the dots and people to get the best outcome, whether it be a piece of mail, a piece of advice, or just a feeling of inclusion.

He was always worried about people's wellbeing, and he was genuinely interested in the humans that made up this building. People like him are the reason that these institutions stay strong, as he reminds those who work in it, when the stakes are so high and the stress is so much, and it all starts to feel not real, of the human stories that make up our democracy and our country.

My friend Annabel Crabb, who had featured Luch in her series, The House, back in 2017, says:

Of all the Parliamentary denizens we interviewed for our documentary series 'The House', Luch captured better than any what the spirit of this place can be when it listens to its better angels. He was courteous, respectful, charming, industrious and observant to a fault. I will never forget the wonderful sight of Luch reporting to Mike Hughes' office at the beginning of a sitting week to have Mike do his tie. They would never let me film this little ritual, but it's always stuck in my mind. Towering Mike and modest Luch, preparing solemnly for another week in a place whose purpose and significance is far greater than that of any individual. It is a great honour for Australians that such a man both helped to assemble the bricks and mortar of this place, and then contributed an infallible humanity to its democratic function.

In my interactions with Luch over the years, every single one of these stories was brought to life. There was one day when we were threatened with a Saturday sitting, and I said, 'Luch, can you remember when it was that we sat on a Saturday?'

Here came the response: 'It was back when Kevin 07, Mr Rudd, was PM, and Mr Randall got a cardboard cut-out of Mr Rudd and brought it into the chamber that morning.'

I said, 'Oh, my goodness.'

He said, 'And before that, well, I think that was when we were doing Mabo, the stolen generations legislation. But I will confirm tomorrow.' He followed up with an Excel spreadsheet of exactly when we'd sat on a Saturday. I don't even know how he did it.

Luch, as we know, was famous for sneaking chocolates into the drawers of some of his favourites. It didn't always work well. I do remember once I was chomping down on a Flake. Why would he put Flakes in my drawer? Honestly, that is the least appropriate thing to put in the drawer when it's illegal to chew anything in the chamber. But he gave me a Flake once, and I was talking to the member from Macnamara, who'd come round for a chat. I looked down and I said, 'Oh, dear, Josh. There's a problem.'

He said, 'What?'

I said, 'I've had a chocolate explosion on my pants.'

He looked down, and he said, 'There's no recovering from that.'

I said, 'I know. I don't quite know what to do.'

Anyway, it turns out we have leather on the seats down there, where the chocolate went. Luch must have known, and that's why he gave me a Flake.

But there was another instance where I said, 'Luch, my goodness! I've had a mini-Crunchie choc explosion in my drawer. How do I deal with this disaster?'

'Leave it with me,' said Luch. The next day the Crunchie explosion was gone, and there were more to replace them.

Luch was an avid follower of politics. I think he knew more about politics than most of us. At the last election he would send text messages every few days, checking in on the count and making sure that I was going to be okay. And then came good wishes for Easter and then came good wishes for promotions. He signed off every text message 'Luch-elicious', which I called him one day. He seemed to like it, and so he stuck with it.

There was one day in the campaign when we'd run out of all the money that we had, and we had run out of stamps. But I knew there were about 40 stamps somewhere in the office here. Luch broke in, got the stamps, stuck them in a package, and sent them down to Melbourne. He went far and beyond for all of us to make democracy work, and he was so proud of his time here. He sent me a photo of the pollie class we all do when we first get elected. When I looked at it carefully the other day, I realised the reason he sent me that one was that it shows Luch in the attendance box, watching over us for the future. My great regret is that I missed my last Christmas photo with him. He'd said to me, 'Can we do the Christmas photo?' I said, 'Yes, yes.' But the end of the year was so crazy and so busy.

There's one person I want to thank, who is one of the silent angels in this building. On New Year's Day, I received a message from the member for Fadden. He said, 'I just need to tell you that we've lost Luch.'

I was shocked and I said, 'Are you sure?'

He said, 'Yes, absolutely. Leanne, the former attendant, wanted you to know specifically.' I don't know Leanne, but I know she's one of the angels of the architecture of this building. Wherever you are, Leanne, I say: thank you.

I sat with the news of Luch's loss for a day, and then I wrote an ode to him on Facebook. Then I observed Luch's last great gift to democracy: 300,000 people read that post. Thousands engaged with it, and hundreds of people commented. It was obvious that through the story of this wonderful, humble and humorous man, so dedicated to this place, that Luch had restored their faith and hope and belief in democracy itself.

I leave you with the final words of Luch's family—so raw and yet so formal, as was our man Luch:

The Jonceski family extends their sincere gratitude for the kind words shared and for recognising the positive impact his presence in Parliament had on many, all of whom he regarded as family.

I think the fact that so many of us in this place are actually speaking on a condolence motion for an attendant in this building says a lot about the person that Luch was and the esteem in which we held him. He had been a constant in my journey here in parliament. I've now been a member for over 18 years, and every day I turned up Luch was in the building. Every day, he anticipated my needs and the needs of the other many members of the federal parliament in the House of Representatives chamber.

Everybody here, when we talked about the sudden loss of Luch, was shocked. Everybody was saddened, but everybody had such wonderful anecdotes to share. Talking to my colleagues about those anecdotes, about those stories about what made Luch so special, a few themes came through. One, of course, was the great dedication to his job and the important role which it played in our democracy and how proud he was of it. One was his sense of humour and that great smile and the little smirk he would give as he made his jokes. The other, of course, was his industriousness. He understood how this building worked, and he made sure it worked as well as it possibly could. He was so proud of his role in it. As we heard from others, it didn't matter if he was talking to fellow attendants, clerks or people that work in this building or if he was talking to prime ministers, treasurers, leaders of the opposition; every single one of us Luch made feel important. He took time to engage with all of us equally. None of us was more important than anybody else, nor are we, but the fact that Luch saw that, understood it and treated us all equally, I think, says a lot about Luch as a human being.

To Luch's family and friends: I hope that our stories, our condolences, give you some comfort as you deal with the sudden loss of a loved one. Sudden loss can be incredibly difficult, but the stories and the esteem in which we held him in this place hopefully will help heal some of that pain.

I was talking to the Chief Government Whip today, and we remembered how hard the attendants and the people in this building worked through COVID to make sure that our parliament could continue to sit. Luch—we called him our official greeter. Every day he would tick us off and make sure that all of those that needed to be here, in terms of the reduced quorum in this place, were here to be able to make sure that federal parliament could continue to function, that the government could continue to function and that we would together work to make sure that Australians got the support they needed during what was an incredibly difficult time for our nation and indeed the globe. Luch had an important role in that, like everybody else did, as part of that democracy and the institution of democracy in which he took such great pride.

It was very lovely to meet his family yesterday and to pass on my condolences. Like many others, I'm sure, I was shocked that they knew my name. Engaging with them, I recalled very fondly that each year at the end of the year I would bring gifts up for the attendants, from my electorate, of Tasmanian fudge. I always brought them up and still do every Christmas. I would try and find Luch or some of the attendants, and Luch was always making sure that everybody got their share of the little token Christmas gift that I was bringing to say a big thank you for all of the work that the attendants and the people in this building do to make our job so much easier. He was always thinking about others. Clearly some of those made it home with my little 'Thanks from Julie Collins' on it, because the family knew who I was. I think that that says a lot about Luch too. He was also taking them home for his family and friends to enjoy—a little gift from Tassie that I made sure that I brought to this building to make sure that he and the other people that work in this building understood that we do value what they do in this place, that it's important and that it matters.

To all of those for whom Luch's life matters: there are many, many people in this building for whom Luch's life mattered. We share with you in your grief. We hope that our stories and anecdotes give you some comfort at a time of sudden loss, and we wish you and your family all the very best as you deal with this sudden loss. Vale.

It's not very often that you get to rise in this place and on the passing of someone who works in this place, bringing all of us together, and that's what Luch has done.

Ljupco Jonceski—I didn't know that was his full name. I used to call him 'Luciano', after Luciano Pavarotti, because I wanted to be different from everybody else who called him Luch. Luch was the kind of gentleman—and I use the term 'gentleman' in its truest sense—that had the ability to make everybody feel as though you were the only person in the room. When he was operating in a room as the attendant of 150 people, many of whom probably had pretty high opinions of themselves, Luch had the ability to make everybody feel special.

It's really quite remarkable to stand here and listen to the minister and the member for Flinders and many other speakers, whether they've been here for five minutes or 25 years, and listen to their stories, because I thought I was the only one who had a really good relationship with Luch. And that was the nature of the man—that he had that kind of relationship with so many other people.

I remember working very closely with Luch when I was the Speaker of the House. Listening to the current Speaker talking yesterday, he used the same jokes with me. But being the Speaker of the House of Reps is a very stressful job. Most people would have absolutely no concept of how stressful it was and is. But Luch, every single day, was a voice of reason, of calmness, of good humour and of good sense. It was his ability to be able to lighten the mood in what could sometimes be a very difficult working environment. I will always remember Luch for that.

I don't know how it came to be, because, of course, we can't take photos in the House of Representatives, but somehow a photo was taken of Luch and me. We were the only ones in the chamber. The House wasn't sitting at the time. I think it was in between sitting weeks. It was after the election that we'd lost, and I think it was probably the on last day, or on the last day before I handed the baton over to the current Speaker. There's this great photo of me on the floor of the House of Reps, and Luch is standing in the seats looking over me, looking like he's giving me a lecture, and, of course, nothing could be further from the truth. But I'll cherish that photo because Luch was a true gentleman and an inspiration to me and clearly to everybody else that he touched in this place.

It was really interesting to hear the Prime Minister talk about Luch yesterday. This was a gentleman who worked in the employ and service of our great democracy for more than 40 years. In fact, to be the longest serving employee in the Department of the House of Representatives is no small feat, but to have worked down the hill at Old Parliament House, then to have come up here to work as a labourer in the construction of this great, magnificent building and then, once again, to have worked in this building since 1988, serving democracy, serving us all—not just serving the people who have the privilege of being in here but serving the nation in the way that he did—as a former carpenter and joiner, really struck a note with me.

That is what's great about this country—that a man from a Macedonian background can come here, whether working as an attendant or a labourer on a building site, and 40 years later have so many members of the House of Representatives stand up and talk about how great this man was. It is a testament not just to Luch, not just to his family, but to our country. They don't make them like Luch anymore. That's really sad to say. But Luch was a man of what I would regard as great integrity and good humour. He treated everybody the same, whether it was the Prime Minister or the newest backbencher. What the Prime Minister said yesterday was very true. He would often just bring you a glass of water and say, 'That's on the House, sir!' He had a terrific sense of humour and was a good man. I had the privilege of working very closely with his daughter Jess, who worked in this building. Jess served on the secretariat of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, which I had the privilege of being the deputy chair of in the last parliament and for a bit in this one. I know that he was immensely proud of you, Jess. I told you that yesterday. I know you've gone on to perhaps bigger and better things now, but he was incredibly proud of you for the work that you were doing and have done for this country. I just wanted to put that on the record because he and I would often talk about the great work that you'd do, that you did, for the committee. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

So, to Luch's family, to Jess, of course, and to his wife and kids: thank you for sharing Luch with the Australian people for so many years, for more than four decades. We are richer for having worked with Luch. The country is richer for it. Our democracy is richer for it. I want to thank you all for sharing him with us. This place will never be the same. When I heard that he'd died, I couldn't believe it. 'Not Luch. Seriously? No, not Luch. He's still a young man.' I think I was a bit shell shocked then. But his legacy will live on. For the attendants that are here, I would encourage you to take a leaf out of his book and use his phrase, 'That one's on the House, Mr Hastie!' Try and emulate that success, that spirit of Luch. I don't know what we'd do for him as an institution, but we should not just remember him in this sense, which is very important, but, I think, do something a little bit more as well, because I think he's a terrific example of what our democracy is all about, of what our country is all about. We're a migrant country, and we should continue to celebrate that, for all the riches that people bring to this country from their different cultures and faiths. I'm probably rambling now. Vale, Luch. You were a good man. You were a great man. Thank you for your service.

I rise today to pay my respects to Ljupco Jonceski, known to all of us simply as Luch, and to extend my deepest condolences to his family. It is an honour to speak about a man who meant so much to this place and to the people within it. When we returned to this place at the start of the year, many of us felt Luch's absence immediately. In a place that is defined by change, by elections and by people coming and going, Luch was a constant. He was always here, always ready and always doing his job with care, dignity and good humour.

Luch served this parliament for over four decades, and he did so with an extraordinary sense of pride in the institution. As the Prime Minister noted, his story is deeply connected to this building itself. From working in Old Parliament House to labouring on the construction of this parliament to then serving here as a parliamentary attendant, Luch quite literally helped build and sustain the people's house, and that is a legacy that very few can claim. What set Luch apart, however, was not just his long service, but the way he treated people. He treated everyone equally, regardless of seniority, portfolio or party. He just had an instinctive understanding of procedure and ceremony, and he carried out his duties with efficiency, courtesy and warmth. He managed to be both highly professional and genuinely kind, and that combination earned him respect across the chamber. Many members will remember moments of nerves or pressure when Luch would quietly appear with a glass of water. You never had to ask; he had already noticed. It was a small gesture, but one that captured his thoughtfulness and his attention to others. He understood that this place can be demanding, and he took it upon himself to look after people in practical and very human ways.

For me, Luch was a familiar presence over a very long time. I had known Loochy for 35 years. During my time here as a staffer and as an MP, he would always ask me about my home in Wollongong. He loved the Gong, and he never missed an opportunity to ask how things were going there, what was happening in the community and how people were travelling back home. That genuine interest in people's lives beyond this building was part of what made him so very special. He often asked me about my predecessors Sharon Bird and Stephen Martin and spoke warmly about them. Sharon Bird shared this with me:

It was always such a pleasure to come back to Canberra and be greeted by his friendly smile, chat about the Gong and enjoy his little jokes.

Stephen Martin, a former Speaker of the House of Representatives described Luch as 'a champion person, a true gentlemen, friendly but efficient in all my close working relationships with during my parliamentary career and even on those occasions I returned to Canberra'. Those words reflect how deeply Luch was valued across generations of members in this place.

Like the Speaker, I shared familiar exchanges with Loochy in the attendants room near the chamber, where we bantered about who would get the lectern, who would get the water. He would insist on doing it. I would say, 'Loochy, I'm going to do it,' and that he could relax. He would say no, that he was going to do it, every time. It was said lightly, but it reflected his very deep sense of responsibility and his pride in his work. Luch loved this place and he loved the people who worked within it. He was a gentleman in the truest sense of the word, not because of formality but because he looked for ways to help others, to treat everyone with respect and to do his job well and without fuss.

His passing has left a real void in this parliament, and I really did not want to walk into the attendants room at the start of this year and not see him here and not get a chance to banter about who gets the lectern. His legacy lives on in the memories, the kindness and the care that he showed to generations of members of staff and of visitors. On behalf of all of us, I extend my heartfelt sympathy to Luch's family. May he rest in peace.

Just think about this: condolence motions are usually reserved for royalty, for world leaders, for ministers of the Crown and now Luch. Luch! What a national icon he is in life and in death. Ljupco 'Luch' Jonceski was 59 years young. Like the member for Fisher, I was shocked and saddened when I learnt of his death. I learnt it from Zoe McKenzie's Facebook page, actually. I was just stunned. I think we all were. He had such a wonderful life. He'd packed so much into those 59 years, and I'll say 'short years' because he left us all too soon, all too suddenly.

There are thousands upon thousands of people who come to Parliament House to work every day. It doesn't matter whether the place is sitting or whether it's in recess. I can think of four who are universally loved and, moreover, universally known by all of us, and they are, in no particular order, Brigette Bull, who is the barista at Aussie's Cafe, and then Maria Ljubic and her sister, Anna, the cleaners—those well-known cleaners who always have a cheery smile and sometimes a cuddle and a kiss for the MPs. Aren't they fantastic? What an amazing duo! Then there was Luch, universally loved and respected and known. Now the parliament stops to honour his memory, a right usually only reserved for somebody really important. But, you know, Luch was important, and he was important to each and every one of us because he made our jobs easier; he made our lives better. He was a builder, and we know that he helped build this place. Later on, when his labouring days were over and he became a greencoat, he built relationships. He built relationships across the aisle. We didn't even know that he was doing it, but he did.

The last time I saw Luch, I was dressed up as Elvis Presley. I was. We had our seventies and eighties dress-up theme night, as only the Nationals could do, and Luch spotted me in my powder-blue sequined suit, and he made a beeline for me because he wanted a picture with me. We did the old Elvis thing. I was a little bit tardy in sending him the picture—it took me about 10 minutes—and Luch was straight on the phone: 'I want that picture. I need that picture.'

He was somebody whose smile, no matter how bad a day you were having—on some of your worst days in politics, Luch was there and he was always smiling. He was always wanting to gee you up and make you feel good about yourself and make you feel good about the fact that you were here in the people's house and you were here representing the nation and representing your electorate.

Like the member for Cunningham, I too shared in Luch's want—his need—to know about your electorate and your people. I attended his Monday 12 January service, his funeral, at Queanbeyan's Macedonian Orthodox Church of the Prophet Ilija, and I got there early. I could not believe the throng of people. It's only a little church, but I was astounded by the number of people who turned up at that service. I was one of the lucky ones to be inside the church. I felt a bit guilty, but I was dragged in there by someone who felt that I should be in there. There were a few parliamentarians there, and I must admit I didn't understand the whole service; it was done in the native tongue. But the eulogies were very special. They were done in English as well, and they described a man who was a wonderful human being. We all saw him just as somebody who we thought we owned, but he was more than that. Out in his Macedonian community, he was a sports follower. He was somebody who, as here, had an infectious way about him. But he was a family man as well. He was a husband, he was a father and his family just adored him, as you can understand. But so did the entire community who turned up at that service—a bigger service than probably most of us will get, and deservedly so.

He ran the green-coated attendants with good humour, with professionalism and with aplomb. Nothing was ever too hard for him to do. Nothing was too menial. He would do anything for you. He treated everyone the same, from the prime minister of the day to the newly minted backbencher, and everybody loved him for his trademark smile, his happy disposition and his wisdom. He didn't clean your office like the two sisters, and he didn't make your coffee like Brigette, but what he brought to this place and to each and every member was his love, his care, his support and his friendship. He was a stalwart. Hundreds upon hundreds of MPs have benefited from his more than 40 years of experience, his wisdom and him just being Luch.

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, the member for Oxley, described Luch as his 'main man'. When Luch passed away, I contacted the Speaker. He said, 'Every time Luch saw me, each time we walked the mace or he opened the door, he always said, "Let's do this, Mr Speaker."' It was a little thing, but, as the Speaker said, it made him laugh. Milton Dick said, 'I saw how kind he was to every new member. What a hero.' Too true, Mr Speaker. He was such a generous soul. We mourn his loss.

The place, as the member for Fisher said, will not be the same without him. It would be nice to think that we could do something for him—maybe name the attendants room in his honour—that would honour his memory. I did go into the attendants room just before question time on the first day back here, on Tuesday, for the parliamentary year—apart from the extraordinary January sittings we had—and I offered my condolences to the attendants, and I do so again now, because I know how each and every one of you would be feeling because he was a special person. It's like losing the mentor who you've known, loved and respected.

I say, again, what an extraordinary human being—the fact that the Parliament of Australia can stop, can grind to a halt, and we can all as one rise in our places, offer him the respect he deserved and then give speeches for his passing. Who else would get that but Luch? He'd be looking down on us now and he'd be almost annoyed at the fuss. He'd be humbled by it, but, in his own special way, I think he'd quite enjoy the fact that he was being honoured in this way, because he was gregarious and he was a great people person. May he rest in peace. We love you, we honour you, and we miss you dearly. Vale, Luch.

I rise today with a very heavy heart to mark the passing of Ljupco Jonceski, who was known to many of us in this place as Luch. For more than four decades, Luch dedicated his working life to service in the Australian parliament. His contribution may not always have been visible to the public, but his presence and work strengthened the way this place functioned every single day.

I was fortunate to share a very special bond with Luch—one that was deepened by my role as chair of the parliamentary friendship group for the Republic of North Macedonia. Luch was incredibly proud of his Macedonian heritage and he shared that pride very generously with me. He loved teaching me Macedonian words. Every morning, he would say good morning to me and how are you, and would speak with such great affection about his culture, his religion, his community and also his family.

When I was first elected, everything felt new and everything was overwhelming. I felt nervous in the House sometimes, but somehow Luch always knew. He would quietly bring me a glass of water. He knew exactly how I liked my glass of water—with no ice—and he would say, 'Ms Fernando, pretend it's vodka,' just to make me laugh and settle my nerves. It was such a small gesture, but it meant so much to me. Those little moments of kindness are what I will always remember. Walking through these halls now, the House feels a little bit different without him. He was a devoted husband, colleague and friend.

Luch, when I do go back to your home country, I will always remember everything that you've said and everything that we have shared over the last few years. It will always be a part of me. Thank you for everything. You are deeply, deeply missed.

I also extend my heartfelt condolences to his wife, Mary, his kids, his family and his friends, and especially to the Macedonian community. His presence is deeply, deeply missed throughout Parliament House. We love you, Luch. I am missing you so much; every question time or 90-second debate, I miss you. Vale Luch.

Having listened to so many fine tributes to Ljupco Jonceski—or, as we all knew him, Luch—it's hard to add much more to what has already been said. I begin by making this observation: it was absolutely wonderful to see Luch's family on the floor of Parliament House yesterday when the Prime Minister moved the condolence motion. For someone who had been so much a part of this House, who had spent so much of his life in this building—and, in particular, on the floor of parliament where few people ever get to step—I think it was not only appropriate but so good to see his family share in the space that took up so much of Luch's life. To them I extend my sincere condolences. Luch died too young, and I'm sure that the heartache of knowing that he died too young is something that they will have to try to work through over the years ahead.

When I heard of Luch's passing, like so many others I couldn't believe it. I just thought, no, it can't be possible. Sometimes things seem to be what they are—I can recall on the very last day of last year when we were in this place, seeing Luch there and admiring him on that particular day for the way he conducted himself and for the way he worked within this building. When I reflected back on it later, I thought, 'I have been here for 18 years, but why did I think of him on that particular day in the way that I did?' Perhaps it was because, for some unknown reason, it was the last time I would see him. When I came back here after the break, and even now, I still don't find it real that he's not part of this building and that he's not one of the people that we see each and every day.

When I was first elected in 2007 and came here, Luch was the first attendant I got to know. He was the one that you might say I was introduced to as one of the attendants of this place. From that very first moment, he made me feel welcome and he made me feel supported. For a new member, it's pretty important to know that you feel that you've just made a friend that knows this place and is going to be there for you when you need that support. It's incredibly important. Over time, you build up relationships with so many other people, but he was the very first person I can actually recall. Others have spoken of the way he was able to support people in this room, regardless of which side of politics they came from, and to do so in such a professional way that everyone felt treated—as others have quite rightly said—equally. And they were treated equally; he didn't differentiate and he tried to support people in every way he could.

One of the things I did notice about Luch was that he got to know the procedures and processes of this place so well, and he was a stickler for procedure. I could see that in the way he would talk to his other attendants, making sure that things were done right according to the rules and conventions of this place. He did that and I admire him for it. The credibility of this place all comes down to the way we all conduct ourselves and the processes which we adhere to and which, in turn, give legal standing to everything we do. Luch wanted to make sure that was done properly, and he always did.

As we all know, the role of politicians is not always easy, and there are indeed stresses that we all face each and every day. As so many other members have pointed out, Luch could read people. He could read the floor of parliament and he could read when he perhaps needed to do that little bit extra that others might not have picked up on but Luch had. With respect to his work here, I have to say that it is something that has touched each and every one of us, because he touched each and every one of us in a very, very personal way.

He reflects and embodies what I believe is the spirit of all of the staff that work in this building—whether it's the attendants, whether it's all the other staff that we see in Parliament House—who, equally, are nonpartisan and don't treat anyone differently but collectively make our role work as well as it does and give us the support that they do. I suspect that Luch, even among the attendants and the other staff, set an example for others to follow, which is something that we should also appreciate.

I thank him for his personal support, but I also thank him for being the role model he became as an attendant in this place. As others have said, and as the last speaker—the member for Riverina—quite rightly pointed out, it's not usual that we honour someone that hasn't been a statesman of some sort, yet here we are, honouring and remembering Luch, because he did touch our lives. I say to Luch: thank you for your support during my time here. It's greatly appreciated, as I'm sure it is for all the others. May you rest in peace.

Just while I'm on my feet, I will also take the opportunity to recognise Malcolm Balcarek. Malcolm, who also passed away only recently, was one of the small team of Comcar drivers in Adelaide. Malcolm's funeral, I believe, is tomorrow. Like Luch, Malcolm was one of those people upon whom we rely each and every day who do such a wonderful service—unassuming and always there supporting. Again, I simply want to say thank you to Malcolm and offer my condolences to his family.

I'm rising to speak on today's condolence motion in relation to the passing of Luch Jonceski. Like many in this chamber, we've had the opportunity to know Luch through our work in this place, but I'm probably one of the only elected officials who can say that they shared the chamber with him as a fellow attendant.

I met Luch just over 12 years ago when I started in the building as an attendant. I was paired up with Luch in question time on the government side—Luch was always insistent on being on the government side, whoever was in government at the time—and it was a great opportunity for me not only to get to know the work and the parliament but to get to know Luch. When I was in the chamber yesterday and we had the opportunity to recognise Luch's contribution—and to do so in front of not only the public but, most importantly, his family—I was thinking about Luch and how he would have absolutely loved that, because he very much felt at home in the building, and I think all of us felt at home in the building because he was there.

For those who didn't have the opportunity to know him, Luch was the longest serving House of Representatives employee. His service went not only across the lifespan of this building but into the lifespan of Old Parliament House. In fact, I understand that he was involved in the construction of this place as well. Luch understood service. He understood the importance of this place as being significant, and he understood the value of it in our great democracy. For him to be acknowledged in this way following his passing is, I think, a testament not only to him but to our country, because our country is here and our parliament is here to serve those who go about their lives in the way people like Luch did. He had quite an incredible story.

When I joined as an attendant, I was in my first year of being an attendant while Luch's daughter Jess was in her second year, so I had the opportunity to spend a lot of time with Jess. I just say, my thoughts really go out to Jess, to Luch's other daughter, Rebecca, to his son, Joshua, and of course to his wife Mary and extended family as well. Luch will definitely be missed in this place. As someone who had the opportunity to sit next to him in countless question times, I'll always remember the inside jokes. He taught me a few words of Macedonian, and he knew every single room and every single story behind every single room in this place as well. Rest in peace, Luch. You will be missed by the parliament, and we had the absolute privilege of spending time with you.

It was really lovely to hear that story, and I've learned something new about the member today as well. I rise as well to join colleagues from across this chamber in offering my heartfelt condolences to the family of our very beloved Luch, a proud Macedonian. Like many others, I've had experiences of him sharing his culture and language through this place. My husband is Croatian. It's a similar sort of language and ideology, so on occasion he would attempt to compare and teach me words in Macedonian and vice versa.

I've known Luch for my entire political career, first as a staffer—a very, very long time ago now—and for the past 24 years that I've been a member of this place. He knew this building and Old Parliament House that came before it like the back of his hand. He spent more time here than he would have done at his family home. Always extremely professional, he was the person you could rely on for absolutely everything. I think many of us remember back in late 2014, when question time coincided with a really big thunderstorm, a leak was spotted in the ceiling above the chamber, and Speaker Bishop remarked, 'I realise that leaking is a familiar problem for political parties; however, I think we need a bucket!' Within minutes, Luch had sprung to his feet and gotten a bucket to the floor of the chamber, rightly to the applause of all members. There was an iconic photo in the Age newspaper with Luch and the bucket, rescuing us all from imminent threat of getting very wet.

Luch's unfailing good humour, kindness and absolute love of this parliament and the people who work here made him a joy for us all to be around. No matter how you were feeling or what was happening in the chamber, he could always put a smile on your face. I'm so sorry that he is gone. It is not how any of us ever expected to say goodbye to him. After a 40-year career, you would have expected that we would have had a retirement motion in the parliament. I know we were all just extraordinarily shocked over summer and just couldn't believe it. He's just been such a part of this place. We are so grateful to Luch for his long and dedicated service to this House and to the people of Australia, and I thank so much his beautiful family, including his daughter, who works in this building now as well, continuing in her dad's footsteps. We are so grateful that you allowed him all of the time that he spent with us. And I want to say thank you in Croatian, not too dissimilar to Macedonian: [Croation language not transcribed].

It's an honour to follow Minister King in her contribution and the member for McPherson, who not only worked with Luch as a parliamentarian but as an attendant as well. There have been so many beautiful speeches made in this debate, and I agree with the minister that Luch is the sort of person that we would have had a series of speeches for had he lived to retire; he'd have had a particular retirement farewell speech. Luch is one of those people that is so vital to the character of an institution like this.

One of the things that he didn't do towards the end, because I think the parliament had dispensed with it, was this. In the first two terms that I was here in my 10 years of service, Luch would greet you at the airport on a Sunday evening. Like a barista knowing your coffee order, he would remember what time your car was going to pick you up and where it was going to pick you up the next morning. He brought a great smile, and, after a flight that could sometimes be unpleasant, he was a wonderful person greeting you and bringing the good humour that he brought to all of the work that he did.

My office is opposite Zoe McKenzie's, the member for Flinders's, and in her office window she had a beautiful picture of her and Luch, when the parliament resumed in January for those important sittings to deal with the aftermath of Bondi, and I said, 'That's a beautiful picture of you and Luch in your office window.' And then she told me that Luch had passed, and, like so many, we just couldn't believe it—that somebody who's been so vital to this place, who's been so important for the good humour of this place, had. Some days in politics you have days where the highs are very high, and other days you have days where the lows are very low, and Luch was always there to inspire, to welcome, to greet—to just remind you, with his good humour and good nature, of the importance of the service role that you're giving here.

To those of us in partisan politics, it's often hard to imagine what it must take—an idea that the member for McPherson knows well—to be engaged in an impartial position in this House. So many of us join our political parties because we feel so passionately about our democracy and about issues to do with our democracy, or we stand for parliament—as you do, Deputy Speaker Sharkie—as a crossbencher, because you have a set of values that you want to impart onto the parliament. But our attendants don't do that, and the staff that work in the parliament don't do that; they are here as servants of our democracy, and they take a dispassionate view.

And Luch was such a great ambassador for the parliament. He was such a great ambassador for the idea of service. I will never forget, when I was on the back bench, sometimes you'd only just need to wave at Luch and he knew exactly what you wanted, whether it was a water or the big lectern or the small lectern, and there were other days where perhaps the only thing you did, in terms of walking into the House, was walk in just to get your name marked off and see him. But his service, his decency, his remarkable connection with people right across the parliament and right across the building is something that is very much worthy of celebration.

To his family, who will have been shocked at his untimely passing, as we all are: I hope they take comfort from the fact that so many people from across the parliament who've served here for many years are paying tribute to this wonderful man who really touched so many people's lives. I wish I'd had the opportunity to say to Luch how much he mattered to me, as he mattered to so many of the colleagues here. To his family and to all those who knew him: may his memory be a blessing.

Today I rise to also associate my comments with others' on the passing of a much loved and deeply respected figure in this place, Ljupco Jonceski, known affectionately as 'Luch', but, as an avid Collingwood supporter, to me, I think, the Parliament House's very own Macedonian marvel. He was not an elected member, he never stood to speak at the dispatch box and his name will not appear on the rolls of parliament, but make no mistake: he was part of the fabric of this place. Listening to other members' contributions today, and having had time to think about what Luch meant to me, and to other people in this place, since his passing, I keep coming back to one known fact, and that is that Luch spent his time helping to build this place, and I think it's part of the reason why his fabric is so interwoven into every little facet of this building—someone of the people who helped to build the people's house and then attend us in the House of Representatives for four decades. I think it's quite a fitting achievement for the man.

I often come here early in the morning and I leave late at night, and Luch was always someone who I would come across very early, on my path in, and probably the last person I'd see, apart from security, as I'd leave the building, and I was always met with, 'How're you going, boss?' and I'd reply with, 'Good thanks, chief.' The interactions that we had with him were so genuine, at just the purest, simplest level. There was no fuss about all the other noise going on in this place. It was his opportunity to make sure that you felt grounded in this place and that you weren't being lost in the hustle and bustle and noise.

I know there have been a lot of comments around how people have felt et cetera, but I do want to extend my condolences not only to his family but, importantly, to all of the chamber attendants. I know that it was extremely difficult when we came back for the couple of days' sitting in January. I had the good fortune to speak to a few of our wonderful staff that assist us every day and I know that it was extremely difficult. I think the member for Fisher spoke about legacy and the desire to have people cut from the same cloth as Luch. I think that Luch's presence in this building and his service to this place have left an imprint on each and every single attendant, so I think that there is, without doubt, no risk to the fact of his legacy living on, because I am very certain that every attendant will do everything they can to uphold the values for which Luch stood.

We often speak in this chamber about service to the nation. Luch was a great servant of Australian democracy, not through speeches or legislation but through constancy, professionalism and decency, and through decades of showing up early, staying late and making sure this place functioned with care and respect. His contribution reminds us that democracy depends not only on those who debate and decide but on those who support, sustain and uphold the institution itself. Luch did that for longer than anyone, and since his passing, Parliament House has been a quieter place, but his legacy remains in the memories of colleagues, in the stories shared in these corridors and chambers and in the culture of respect he embodied.

On behalf of the parliament he served and the nation that parliament represents, I extend my deepest love and sympathy to Luch's family, friends and all who had the privilege of knowing him. May you take comfort in knowing that he was admired, respected and genuinely loved. Vale Luch.

The words fall like stones in a silent room, heavy, cold and irreversible. A diagnosis doesn't arrive gently; it crashes in, shattering the quiet of an ordinary day and turning life as you know it upside down. In that moment, the world you knew just seconds ago vanishes, replaced by an unsettling shadow. Fear begins to coil around you—fear of the unknown, fear of the fight and the terrifying question of what this means to you and the people you love. This is the reality for thousands of Australian women, and this is why I rise today to give a voice to those fighting in the shadows and to advocate for the life-changing work of the Trudy Crowley Foundation.

Yesterday was World Cancer Day, a global day of unity in the fight against this disease. But for those living with cancer, the fight is not a single day on the calendar. It is the lived reality that requires a community led response. February is also Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month, a time when we don the teal ribbon to shine a light on what is devastatingly referred to as the silent killer. It is a call to action to remember those whom we have lost and to bolster the courage of those currently in the fight.

Ovarian cancer is a particularly brutal disease. Symptoms like bloating, abdominal pain and fatigue are vague and easily dismissed as something else until it's too late. This is why the message of 'know your body, know your normal' is so vital. These were the words of the foundation's former ambassador, Bridgeen, and they are the words that now define the foundation's mission. Bridgeen battled ovarian cancer for many years with spirit—the foundation of the foundation. Despite her stage 4 diagnosis, she remained a fierce advocate for ovarian cancer awareness. As we mark the first anniversary of her passing this month, her legacy lives on through every woman who hears her words, 'Know your body, know your normal'. It's a plea to get women to trust their intuition, and it is a demand for our medical system to listen.

In my electorate, the Trudy Crowley Foundation was formed from a legacy of courage. Trudy Crowley was a woman of extraordinary grace and grit. When she was diagnosed with terminal ovarian cancer, she chose not to retreat. Instead, she proved that personal can be powerful. She turned her own private battle into a public mission, ensuring that no-one in the greater Mackay region would have to walk the cancer path alone.

This mission is powered by a board of locals and family members who lead with their hearts. I wish to formally acknowledge founding director Jacquie Camilleri; along with Trudy's husband, Damian Crowley; Trudy's sons, Levi and Jacob; Luke Phillip; Lassara Camphuis; Aggie Murphy; Sonia Crowley; and Pauline Townsend. Founding director Jacqui Camilleri is the driving force behind this organisation. Her journey began as a volunteer tea lady at the Mater Hospital, where she first met Trudy. In the quiet of a hospital ward, Jacqui saw a spark in Trudy and knew that this could not be extinguished.

What began as a chance encounter has blossomed into a beacon of hope that now lights the way for people with cancer. My own connection to this mission is personal. Board member Pauline Townsend is a valued member of my Mackay electorate office, and I see her work tirelessly for the foundation. The foundation is also championed by two patrons: the Queensland state member for Whitsunday, Amanda Camm, and my own media adviser, Amanda Wright. Ms Wright faced her own stage 3 cancer battle less than two years ago. Her presence here in Parliament House today is a sobering reminder that this disease does not discriminate. It doesn't care about your age or your plans for the future. The scourge of this disease touches us all.

While the foundation's roots are firmly planted in the soil of ovarian cancer awareness, its branches have grown to support families facing all forms of cancer across the greater Mackay region. By offering this simple human comfort and support network, they are easing the journey for locals living with cancer. They remind us: while these diseases may be silent, our response must be loud! This February, I urge everybody to learn the symptoms of ovarian cancer. Be a shining light for this disease. We are raising awareness. We are saving lives.

I rise today to recognise the extraordinary contribution made by Jenny Kena to the community of Robertson, a beautiful village in the Southern Highlands region within my electorate.

In 2025, Jenny was named the Wingecarribee Citizen of the Year, and she has performed her role admirably over the past 12 months. Jenny is widely admired and respected for her integrity and character, as well as her hard work in the local community. For over 20 years, Jenny has been a very active member of her community in Robertson. She played a key role in founding CTC Robertson in 2004.

CTC Robertson is a not-for-profit organisation that enriches the local community through arts, education and social programs. The initials 'CTC' represent the organisation's three core areas of focus: community, technology and creativity. Jenny has not only been CTC's president for the past 14 years, but her enthusiasm and drive have been critical to the organisation establishing itself as a thriving community hub. Her dedication has been essential to CTC becoming a vital space for education and connection and is an extremely valuable community asset. Jenny also writes for the Robertson News and Robertson E-News, manages the village website and represents CTC on the Robertson Community Association. I thank Jenny Kena today in the Australian parliament for making such a longstanding and valuable contribution to her community.

I rise today to recognise an incredible woman from my electorate of Whitlam, Aunty Lindy Lawler, an Aboriginal elder, Yuin woman, community leader and survivor of the stolen generations. Aunty Lindy is highly respected across the Illawarra for her inspiring qualities of strength and resilience and her generous work in the community supporting organisations such as the Illawarra Women's Health Centre, Illawarra Aboriginal Medical Service, Shellharbour Council, the United Koori Social Club and the Wollongong Cultural Centre. This important work covers so many areas, including mental health, cultural education and mentorship.

I was honoured to be at the Shellharbour Civic Centre when Aunty Lindy received an Outstanding Contribution to Reconciliation award, at the 2025 regional NAIDOC awards, for her tireless advocacy, creating spaces for young Aboriginal people and promoting education and healing within the Illawarra community. Aunty Lindy was also recognised and awarded the Outstanding Contribution to Educational Achievement by an Aboriginal Community Member at the 19th annual Nanga Mai Awards, in 2024.

Aunty Lindy has endured great hardship in her life, enduring emotional turmoil and abuse after she and her twin sister were stolen from their parents when they were only five months old. Aunty Lindy and her identical twin sister were born in David Berry Memorial Hospital, at Berry, on the New South Wales South Coast, in December 1958. In May 1959, their parents were told to take the twins back to the hospital for a check-up, and, when they returned, the girls were gone. When they were 18, the sisters were able to meet their mother for the first time. Aunty Lindy never got to meet her father. Aunty Lindy has demonstrated extraordinary resilience and dedication to community healing. Aunty Lindy is widely loved and admired, and, on behalf of the Whitlam electorate, I thank her for her leadership and her service to our community.

I also rise today to recognise Barbara Gibb, a highly valued member of the Warilla and Shellharbour communities. For the past 25 years, Barb, as she's known, has worked as a volunteer with Assist Shellharbour, managing the Born Again Boutique and op shop in Warilla. Born Again Boutique opened in 1998, providing a place where people in the community can have access to clean, preloved and affordable clothing and goods. Many items can be purchased for just a few dollars, and Born Again Boutique is popular and has a great reputation.

Barb looks after every aspect of the boutique's day-to-day functioning, including sorting donations, organising tip runs, maintaining cleanliness, supervising volunteers and liaising with partnering organisations, and she volunteers 40 hours a week. Importantly, Barb doesn't just manage the store; she's cultivated a space of connection, care and community, and she's achieved this through her integrity and compassion. She remembers people's names, their stories and what they're going through in life. She takes time to check in on customers and community members, offering a kind word, a cup of tea, a message of support or a reminder that they're not alone.

I had the great pleasure of visiting Born Again Boutique a few weeks ago and meeting Barb and her wonderful team of volunteers. I thank Barb for her 25 years of service to her community and for doing this with such warmth, compassion and generosity of spirit.

I always love going back to my electorate after coming to Canberra, although I do really appreciate and relish the opportunity that I've been given to represent, in this place, the people of McPherson. But this time I'll be going back to McPherson with some bad news, and it's bad news in relation to the state of our economy. As we're all aware, we've seen a yet another—the 13th—interest rate rise in Australia.

It's well known and well documented that we're going through a housing crisis, and I have the opportunity every now and then to speak to many people, especially young people, across my electorate who are struggling to get into their first home. But I also have the ability at times to speak to people who have managed to get into their first home, and now they're presented with an increase to their repayments and with yet another barrier to real wage growth as well. What we're seeing by this Labor government is no real growth strategy. Consistent with Labor ideology, we're seeing the constant redistribution of what we already have. As somebody who represents the next generation, I think we need to set our sights higher. Not only that, we need to make sure that this government takes responsibility for where it hasn't been able to achieve what is required by the Australian people.

Let's look at the state of this economy. We're looking at inflation rates at the moment, and inflation in this country sits at 3.8 per cent, which is significantly above the target range of two to three per cent. We've seen the Assistant Treasurer, Daniel Mulino, recently say that it's actually a global phenomenon at the moment. Well, if you actually look at where Australia sits, Australia and the UK are now the only two countries in the developed world where inflation sits above three per cent. So it is 0.8 percentage points above the upper range of where it should be in Australia. And not only that, but we all saw the commentary by economists in the lead-up to the rate rise on Tuesday. It was predicted, and it was predicted because of what we've seen in this country from this government. It's the reckless spending that has continued under Labor. We've seen the budget continue to blow out. Before this Labor government, the previous biggest budget blowout in spending was $10 billion, but now we're seeing a budget blowout that is more than five times that.

I've sat in question time time and time again, and I've seen the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Chris Bowen, talking about how he's using your money, which you provide as taxpayers, to subsidise the installation of home batteries. The program was originally costed at $2.3 billion, but it's now blown out to $12.3 billion in just six months. That's a blow-out of over $10 billion. You cannot trust this Labor government to spend your money wisely. They're also using your money to subsidise the electric vehicle preferences of some. Originally, that was estimated to cost $90 million this financial year, but it's now coming in at a cost of around $1.35 billion, yet another example of how you can't trust this Labor government to spend your money wisely.

The bottom line is that all of this government spending is keeping our interest rates and our inflation at the highest levels in the developed world, and that has real, tangible consequences. I see those, and I'm sure my colleagues across the board here see those when they go back to their electorates and they're presented with the problems that our constituents face on a daily basis. We must hold this Labor government to account, because the reason that we are in the situation that we are in and that this economy is in the situation it's in is that we've got a government that is not prepared to act within the necessary fiscal guardrails that are required to manage inflation and manage reckless spending. I say this: as a country, we need to think seriously, and I urge this government to think seriously about the legacy that it is leaving and the debt burden that it is leaving for the next generation, because, if we're not putting that front and centre of our considerations in this place, something is clearly wrong.

Before entering this place as an MP, I spent three decades working in the community sector learning how real and lasting change is created when people come together with shared purpose. That experience shapes everything I do as the member for Dunkley. I know that the strongest solutions are built from the ground up through listening, partnership and genuine collective impact. Social challenges are never simple. They are interconnected, embedded locally and felt every day by families, workers, young people and older residents alike. Meaningful change starts by engaging the people who live these realities: residents, organisations, community leaders, local businesses and those whose lived experience guides us toward the truth of what is needed.

Two of the most pressing issues facing the Dunkley community are men's health and wellbeing, and housing. These matters are not abstract policy debates. They shape daily life, dignity and opportunity. As the member for Dunkley, I feel a deep responsibility to create the spaces where our community can come together, share openly and design real, practical solutions.

That's why I convened the Dunkley Men's Health and Wellbeing Forum, a place based response grounded in genuine community need. The forum brought together men and boys aged 16 and over from across Dunkley for an open, honest conversation about men's health and wellbeing issues. This workshop was facilitated by the Man Cave, supported by Movember, and the Frankston Dolphins football club. Around 70 men and boys and community organisations attended. What emerged was extraordinary honesty, hope, vulnerability and a willingness to share.

My son, Flynn, spoke courageously about growing up as a young man today, the pressure to be perfect, the constant comparison and the weight of social media. His words reminded us that young men want to talk—often, they just need a safe space to begin. We also heard from the Special Envoy for Men's Health, the member for Hunter, who spoke powerfully about mental health, body image, prostate cancer and the courage it takes to ask for help in a society that still tells men to tough it out. What struck me most was the connection in the room; teenagers sitting beside retirees, everyone speaking without judgement or bravado. From this forum grew a tangible outcome: a commitment to establish the Dunkley Men's Health Network, focused on connection, prevention and strengthening the support systems that help men in Dunkley thrive.

Housing remains one of the most complex challenges of our time, but any lasting solution must be informed by local reality. That is why I brought together representatives from all levels of government: community housing providers, developers, universities, landlords, service providers and investors—people with the insight and influence to help drive meaningful change. What emerged was rare—genuine alignment across sectors. Participants recognise the scale of the housing crisis and share a determination to collaborate on diverse, place based solutions. We identified that Dunkley already has many preconditions for success, from redevelopment opportunities and strategic planning frameworks to strong local demand, driven by education, health and workforce growth. Federal initiatives such as the National Housing Infrastructure Fund were acknowledged as critical tools to unlock progress.

When I was first elected, I wasn't entirely sure how best to translate my community experience in this role. I am now absolutely clear: my responsibility as the member for Dunkley is to listen deeply, understand needs and opportunities, and bring people together to create solutions to the complex challenges we face locally and nationally. As our challenges grow more complex, so must our collaboration. The future we want depends on relationships, shared purpose and the courage to work together, even across the aisle. In Dunkley we have that courage. We have that determination. We have capacity to come together and lead. The strength of a community is not measured by the challenges it faces, but by the way in which it comes together to overcome them.

I rise today with a heavy heart to honour the life and legacy of an extraordinary woman, Carol Porter OAM, a longtime resident of Latrobe, a pillar of our community and a very close and dear friend to myself and so many. Just two weeks ago we lost Carol. With her passing our community has lost one of the greatest champions. Carol Porter was a local legend who impacted many lives with her selfless service. A lifelong resident of Officer district, Carol poured her heart, energy and her remarkable generosity of spirit into helping others, particularly in the community.

Carol was involved in an incredible 15 organisations. She served with the Officer Hall Committee, the Officer Football Club, the Officer Union Church committee, the St John of God hospital and the Make-A-Wish Foundation. She also served her community through her work with the Officer community association, the Probus club, the Red Cross and the Officer Memorial Gates. Those gates were moved when the oval had to be realigned, and Carol was the one who did all the hard work putting the application in. Carol also played a significant leadership role as a director of the Board of Directors for Beaconsfield District Community Financial Services, serving since it was established nearly seven years ago and helping ensure local banking profits were reinvested back into our local community.

Carol's advocacy helped shape the Officer community we know today. She was instrumental in so many local achievements. She fought to return the post office box to Officer, and that was a very interesting one. One day Australia Post decided to move the Officer post office box, and Carol got me down there and said we want it back. I said, 'Carol, you can't go up against Australia Post.' She said, 'Well, you'd better start making speeches and petitions.' We did all that. Eventually we had the Australia Post regional manager in the office, and, after the meeting, the regional manager said to me, 'Is this Carol Porter going to give up?' I said, 'Make our lives easier and bring the thing back.' I may have used a few other words. Lo and behold, Officer now has its post office box back—all due to Carol. It's the same with the traffic lights at the intersection of Tivendale Road. There's also the big one, Beaconsfield interchange. Carol was on the Officer township committee and worked with the Beaconsfield Progress Association. That's a major project she fought to get. She also fought and stopped the poker machines coming into Officer. I think it's one of the first times a case has gone to VCAT and VCAT decided in favour of the local community, to keep pokies out because of the damage pokies do to families.

She's always been an amazing contributor to our local community. She received—as you would expect based on what I've said so far—the Medal of the Order of Australia to recognise her for amazing community service. Madam Deputy Speaker Sharkie, you'll love this. She was a staunch Liberal. She was very Liberal. She was the person who, right from the start, got behind me. If it weren't for Carol, I wouldn't be a member of parliament. She's been a great mentor. I also want to say she's a very fair person. She worked with everyone in the community to make sure that, whatever the project was, it would be delivered to our community. Many conversations I had with Carol over the years started with Carol saying, 'Jason, somebody needs to tell you,' to which I would reply, 'Carol, why is it always you?' She's one of those constituents who would never give up.

Her husband, Rob Porter, is sadly not with us any longer. He was also awarded an Order of Australia. They championed the Officer recreation reserve, and it's got new basketball courts in it. Carol was the one who led the charge there. The next mission was the sports club, which was upgraded. And, finally, there were the social rooms. I say to the Porter clan: thank you very much for allowing Rob and Carol to do so much for our community. To Geoff and his wife, Jayne; Gavin and his wife, Toni; the six grandchildren; and the four great grandchildren, we feel your immense loss, and we also feel your immense pride knowing what Carol and Rob have done for the electorate of La Trobe and especially for the people of Officer. May they both rest in peace.

This year we've already had a number of very painful reminders of why, as a nation, we have to be relentless in our commitment to end domestic, family and sexual violence. We have to make sure that every child has the opportunity to grow up safe, loved and hopeful for their future. Like so many Australians, I was shocked and heartbroken when I heard that Sophie Quinn, her unborn baby, her aunt Nerida Quinn and her friend John Harris had been killed.

I'm just as devastated that Sophie and Nerida were two of at least six women who have been killed in the last two months alone. Every single death reminds us of what is at stake. That's why we will continue, as a government, to address the gaps that remain in our national effort to reinforce what works and to make sure that we adapt to the pervasiveness of family, domestic and sexual violence. We understand that the character of this violence changes over time, including as technology changes. We've made the leaving violence payment permanent so that women have the financial support they need to leave. We've invested in responses to perpetrators of violence that break that cycle of violence. We're investing more than any government before, with over $4 billion since 2022, and, of course, an additional $3.9 billion into legal services as well.

But it's not just about dollars spent; we have to drive a seismic shift in our community. The Commonwealth government has a real, large and serious degree of responsibility here, and so do the states and territories, but so do all of us in our individual lives have a responsibility to shift the culture that turns a blind eye to violence—or worse, tacitly permits it.

We need to take account of changes in technology, and that's why we've taken world-leading action to address the impact of harmful technology like nudify apps and undetectable stalking tools. It's why we're investing in educating young men and boys, in particular, about consent and healthy relationships. We know that there are a lot of amazing role models out there doing fantastic work. We need to make sure that more young men and boys have that influence in their lives.

It's why we're investing in essential frontline services, it's why we're making sure that universities respond appropriately to the unacceptable rates of sexual assault on campus, and it's why we're making changes to the family law system, as well, to make sure that the presumption of shared responsibility is properly understood so that we continue to put the best interests of children at the very heart of any decisions in family law. This is about making sure that all of our systems work for victims of family, domestic and sexual violence.

Today I was very proud to introduce a bill establishing an independent National Commission for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People. We know that there are still too many gaps for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people when it comes to starting school with developmental delays and when it comes to the way that mainstream services, like our big health and education systems, serve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. It's why we need to address the unacceptable number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children entering our out-of-home care systems and juvenile justice systems.

We need to make sure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander kids can expect all of the same good things as any child in this country: great education systems, starting school school-ready, thriving through their schooling years with a great job at the end of it, and specialist systems that work for them, too. At the moment, we know that we're letting too many children down. We have the opportunity to change that and, as a government, we are absolutely committed to doing that.

Question agreed to.

F ederation Chamber adjourned at 13:32