Mr HILL (Bruce) (13:20): I was hoping for a division to end that debate, because I thought the government might turn up, but there you go.

I come to this place from the south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne where I was born and bred. It is a region which I am proud to call home and proud to represent as the member for Bruce. Like most of us who hail from big cities, electorate boundaries are somewhat ephemeral. Bruce today is bordered by Highbury Road and Glen Waverley in the north; Blackburn Road, as it runs past Monash University and the Australian Synchrotron; the Pakenham railway line in the south, as it runs through Springvale, Noble Park and Dandenong; and back up the Dandenong Valley creek.

For thousands of years these have been the traditional lands of the people of the Kulin nation—the Bunurong and the Wurundjeri people. With that in mind, I pay my respects to their elders, past and present, as well as to the traditional owners of the land of this place, the Ngunnawal people, and to the elders of other communities who may be here today.

I also want to thank my community for the trust they have shown in me and the Labor Party by electing me to represent them. I ran a grassroots campaign knocking on 14,000 doors over 13 months. Fronting up on people's doorsteps for a chat—or the occasional bollocking, and you get a bit of that—to listen to people one-by-one, family-by-family, is a humbling and intimate process. I will do my very best every day that I hold this office to honour their trust. Every encounter has value, and I hope some of the wisdom of the crowd, if you like, stays with me.

My favourite question to ask people was: what is most important to you? I thank everyone who took the time to answer that question and to share their views, and I would like to reflect today on what I heard and what I learnt. The distinguishing characteristic of Bruce is its human diversity. It is one of only two federal electorates where a majority of people—53 per cent—were born overseas. Over decades, people from every part of the world and from every cultural, religious and language group have settled to live and work in the suburbs of Bruce. It is truly a microcosm of humanity. I had that line before Peter Khalil used it yesterday, I will note.

I am one who cherishes—relishes—this diversity of the multi-ethnic fabric that makes up Australia's multicultural communities. Unfortunately, there are too many people in this 45th Parliament who tap into and take advantage of the fear of diversity. The politics they play is both devious and dangerous. It is devious because it taps into genuine community concerns, such as economic exclusion and uncertainty, and it is dangerous because it trades on the basest of human instincts, to fear the other and scapegoat people not like me. This is surely the lowest form of politics and the antithesis of good leadership, and it is a path that I know all of my Labor colleagues reject.

I must say that the aftermath of the federal election reminds me of the time that I spent as Mayor of the City of Port Phillip, a large and diverse inner city municipality, from 2000 to 2002. This was at the tail end of the first phase of One Nation. Back then, community leaders spoke up against bigotry. Right now, we need to continue to call out this behaviour because it is morally wrong and because demonising marginalising people sells out and damages Australia's security and prosperity. To paraphrase my friend Councillor Meng-Heang Tak, who is the Mayor of the City of Greater Dandenong, Bruce today is Australia tomorrow. Think about those words. Australia is a diverse nation, and the reality is that even greater diversity will be there in the years to come. We can get a sense now of what this could mean from communities like Bruce.

We all want to believe that Australia's best years are in front of us. I wish I could say that I am certain that they are. They can be if we make the right choices, but if we do not, if we fail, then we will be the first generation to bequeath a lower standard of living to our children as well as a less equal society, and that would be a disgrace. Current indicators are worrying. Despite 25 years of continuous economic growth, inequality in Australia is at a 75-year high, and the transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle classes to the rich continues. More than 2.5 million of our fellow Australians live below the poverty line, unable to fulfil their human potential or contribute meaningfully and fully to our economy, our society and our community.

I have listened to a few first speeches and I have heard other people say those things. These facts are known, but they must not be accepted as our new reality. I worry that the language of social justice has become too soft, that we must speak more clearly about poverty and stark, indefensible and growing inequality. In my electorate of Bruce I see pockets of growing affluence right alongside entrenched unemployment. Young people, migrants and older workers are especially at risk. Thousands more job losses in the auto supply chain loom across south-east Melbourne, which are a direct result of the laissez-faire extremism of this government. In some areas we are at crisis levels already. For example, the unemployment rate in Dandenong is consistently more than twice the metropolitan average, the youth unemployment rate in south-east Melbourne is pushing 20 per cent and there are anecdotal reports of unemployment amongst African youths far higher than that. The social and economic costs are immense, not just from direct expenses but lost productivity, forgone growth and genuine community safety concerns when alienation turns to anger.

I am proud to be a member of a Labor Party that fights policies that fuel inequality, such as the largesse of massive company tax cuts and personal tax cuts skewed to the top end; the current negative gearing and capital gains tax arrangements; a tax on penalty rates for low income workers; cutting pensions and family payments or attacking public education and Medicare. I could go on. I am conscious, though, of the community's frustration with negativity and the lack of cooperation between parties. You certainly pick that up when you are doorknocking. Too often this century, parliaments and parties have failed to reach enduring agreement in important areas of policy where stability is most needed—for example, climate change and carbon pricing, retirement incomes and the taxing of resources. I am up for doing my bit to listen, learn and find common ground with other views in this place. As long as we stay true to our core values there is no shame in difficult compromise if it solves our shared problems. Finding common ground to solve problems is what the people we represent expect of us, and we sell them out when we avoid it.

I have listened to a few of the first speeches of new members opposite, and I have noticed a theme about Australia's now-precarious fiscal outlook. If anyone opposite is listening—they are probably on the television—I will say this in response: I agree that sustainable budget reform is a pressing challenge for this parliament and that Australia needs to act. Imagine then how great it would be if this government could cut a deal that included serious structural reform where the top 10 per cent contribute rather than consistently asking and picking on and taking from those who have the least, because there can be no grand bargain with us to protect the wealthy and vested interests from the burden of budget repair.

Let me take members back to the streets of Bruce. I mentioned that when doorknocking my favourite question to ask people was: what is most important to you? Given the exceptional diversity in Bruce, you might think that there was no one issue that stood out, but you would be wrong. Overwhelmingly, the answer was education, from parents worried about the government cutting the Gonski needs based school funding or baby boomers who benefited from free education and are worried about their grandkids paying $100,000 for a degree or working-class families who are so proud that their kids are not just finishing high school but attending TAFE or university or students angry at the prospect of a lifetime of debt. Education was especially important to migrants who, like my mum, have a laser-like focus on education as the key to a better life for their children.

I share that belief in the importance of education because I have lived it. My mum raised my brother and I alone after my dad died when I was four. Although money was tight, Mum used the money available when my grandma died to ensure we got the best education possible. We were the kids who rocked up in the old Torana to the rich school, Wesley College Glen Waverley in Bruce. I then went on to study science and law degrees at Monash University. Mum was the political black sheep of her family for being a Liberal voter—although John Howard lost her in the end! We can talk about that another day. But I need to be careful because Mum died about six or seven years ago, so she cannot answer back and she may haunt me from the grave! She always did think voting was private—but we knew what went on! It was when I was at Monash that she finally accepted I was like the rest of the family—a Labor person. She saw me on TV on the nightly news with a megaphone, leading a student protest against Jeff Kennett. We are forever grateful that she did not see us chucking the oranges!

Without a great education my life could have been very different. Like so many parents, Mum made sure we had what she never had. Mum was a working-class girl from Footscray in Melbourne's west.

Mr Watts: Hear, hear!

Mr HILL: Hear, hear! It explains my footy team—go Doggies!

Mr Watts: She was a Liberal voter?

Mr HILL: I know, we never really got that. Anyway, she was an independent woman. Despite her intelligence she could not finish high school as her family could not afford the uniforms for her to change to a matriculation school. This contrasts with my father's story. His family had access to funds which allowed him to pay his way through medicine at university and reach his potential. I tell this story to explain my deep personal commitment to ensuring that education is available in Australia according to merit, not money.

Education is the most important protection we have for equality of opportunity, and it is also a critical enabler of our future economic prosperity. I learnt this in my professional career as a senior public servant in the Victorian government, most recently in economic development including international education, investment and trade. Over 14 years I also worked in regional development, business engagement, Aboriginal affairs, metropolitan planning and infrastructure. I am proud to have worked as a public servant and was honoured in 2012 to have been inducted as a fellow of the Institute of Public Administration Australia, Victorian Division. I intensely dislike the way the term 'public servant' is often deployed in political discourse as a pejorative. People in Bruce have told me how important it is to them that government does its job well. That is because there is a direct correlation between the quality of services and the quality of life enjoyed by citizens. In other words, great societies have great public services, which require excellent public servants who deserve our respect.

Australia has been well served, but the impact of ongoing budget efficiency dividends on the public service is now a grave concern. I believe both sides of politics—and I have served governments of both sides—are guilty of overusing this budgetary technique. It is a question of not just hiding cuts, which may be perfectly justifiable, but also accountability. Through efficiency dividends, cabinets outsource decisions about cuts to the public service—not always with ministerial input, as I know, and usually hidden from public scrutiny. Australians feel the impact of diminished service quality, and I pay tribute to the great work of my union, the Community and Public Sector Union, for their fight to protect services. Of equal concern is the insidious damage this assault does to the ability of our public services to provide long-term, strategic policy advice to governments of the day and to remember the lessons of decades past. Consulting houses have arisen to fill some gaps, but we cannot contract out society's memory, and I believe over-reliance is putting at risk our tradition of great and innovative public services for the next generation.

I think a great deal about the increasingly complex world that my daughter, who is now 20 years old, will have to live and compete in. This much is clear: as Australia's neighbours grow stronger and more confident, it is apparent that the world does not owe this lucky country a living, and we would be foolish to try and build our 21st century economy on the happenstances of good fortune. You do not have to spend long in Bruce to understand how truly connected to the world my community is. People sense we are entering a paradoxical period of strategic uncertainty but incredible economic opportunity. Power is increasingly divided amongst major nations. The so-called rise of China, India and Asia is historically unexceptional—the world returning to normal, as some say—and welcome. But it is less predictable than the security of empire, or the bipolar or US-dominated world we have been used to in my lifetime.

My point is that we will be forced to adapt. I firmly believe that Australia's best future lies in rebalancing our ties and deepening our connections across the Indo-Pacific region—to, as Paul Keating continues to remind us, seek security in Asia, not from Asia. This serves ournational interest, and also that of our dearest, abiding friends. China is critical, though Asia is greater and more diverse than any one country. Despite this strategic uncertainty, we are geographically blessed. We sit at the bottom of a fast-growing region of 4.5 billion people. The centre of the world's economy is returning to Asia, faster than at any time in human history. Australia's opportunities to support Asia's growth are immense, whether through goods exports, manufacturing or services. Growing our national wealth is, and must remain, core business for Labor.

Manufacturing is important. Despite the headlines, it remains the largest single employment sector in Bruce. Local businesses are transforming into high-tech advanced manufacturers and cracking new export markets. Yet if we are successful in moving up the global value chain, manufacturing will be a bit like the story of agriculture in recent decades: greater productivity, higher export output, more highly skilled jobs, but declining job numbers overall. So, we must capitalise on the long boom in services that will come as the middle classes of Asia grow to number more than three billion. We have expertise to export in education, financial services, transport, infrastructure, urban management, health, business services and so on. Government has a role to play in helping business to trade and grow.

Closer economic ties with Asia can also help ensure regional peace and security. I am a person who does believe that the potential for violent conflict is, sadly, a persistent part of our human condition and a risk we need to realistically always be prepared for and guard against. If politics is our alternative to violence then war or state-sponsored violence surely represents the greatest failure of politics. A prosperous interconnected region, while never a guarantee of peace, can be a strong preventative measure.

Deeper regional cooperation is also critical to addressing shared problems, such as climate change or forced migration and this is important, but not easy, work. We share a common humanity, but people in other societies have their own thoughts, values, histories, traditions and norms, and those differences must be respected and understood.

To do so, business people, public servants, diplomats and academics all tell us that we need to develop better language skills and more cultural understanding, and deeper international networks and relationships. As I move around Bruce I see all of this capability in the multicultural suburbs, yet I cannot help feeling that we are not fully leveraging our human diversity and that we need to do more to make sure that the promise of Australian multiculturalism lives up to the reality. Spend time with highly-skilled migrants and you will hear stories of frustration and bewilderment at being denied employment due to that deathly phrase, 'a lack of local experience', or darker tales of people still anglicising their names just to get an interview.

Our society's institutions of power—our parliaments, judiciary, public services and military—still have a way to go to fully reflect the communities we serve. This includes gender, especially for those opposite, as well as class, ethnicity, disability and sexuality. We make the best decisions when all perspectives are considered—when all voices are heard and at the table. I am conscious that as a Rainbow Labor member my election is a very small step to adding to the diversity of this parliament, and I am proud to see more LGBTI Australians in this parliament than the last.

There are other things—important things—that I will talk about another day, given the time. Issues such as the lack of real action on climate change, or environmental degradation, or cuts to science and research, or the arts or care for our veterans. Or housing affordability, or the growth and productivity of our cities, in one of the most urbanised nations—or how our region addresses migration and the global refugee crisis.

Or the republic—yes, the 'R' word! I am a proud and passionate republican. Monarchies are by definition undemocratic, illiberal and nonegalitarian systems of government, and these are not Australian values. And I see my daughter up there at the moment going, 'Oh, no, Dad—not one of your antimonarchist pro-republican raves!' So I will stop now—but it is a hot button! I think there is a standing order also that I need to be mindful of.

For now, though, it is important that I say some thank yous, as getting here was only possible with immense support. Thanks to my family, whose love and forbearance I treasure. My daughter Elanor: we are very close, and I have lived at times as a single parent, experiencing that unique joy and loneliness. She is here today, so I will put it on the record: yes, you are the perfect daughter! I am not the only one who thinks this. For years she kept asking why people kept calling her Saffy. I have always had to explain to her it is because of her innate, wonderful qualities and not because her parents are anything like Patsy or Edina!

I have also known the love of two long-term partners, her other parents: her mother, Lorien, and David. Thanks to my brother Damian, and to Flap, Eva, Cynthia, Janina, Oz, Winston, Posy Regina and Paisley Regina.

Thanks to the previous member for Bruce, Alan Griffin, who served in this place for 23 years—a mentor to many, and occasional dementor. That is a Harry Potter reference! That is the sum total of my literary references so far, and I thought that was appropriate.

Thanks to the campaign team and supporters, including Callum Drake, Sarah Spivak, Paul Haseloff, Lee Tarlamis, Matt Broderick, Mathew Hilakari, Ray de Witt, David Hodge, Peter Jabbour OAM and Angie Venuto-Cole; and to our state members of parliament, Daniel Andrews, Gabrielle Williams, Steve Dimopoulos and Hong Lim. Senator Louise Pratt—she was going to be here. Louise is a very dear old friend of mine, but it looks like we found the Senate something to do! So there you go. It is great to be back here with her.

Thanks to Helen Tierney, Kate and Feyi, Dalan and Bawa—actually, Dalan is in the gallery here today. I will stop now! To Penny Sharpe and JoB, Cam Green and Flora Yeh; the CPSU, the ASU and other unions; Ben Knight, Corey Rosevear and the Monash University crew. Thanks to the ALP branch members who time and time again perform impossible feats, as well as hundreds of community members from across Bruce who campaigned tirelessly for over 12 months, giving voice to their values.

Thank you also to my colleagues here, especially Bill Shorten for such strong, effective leadership through the last term, seeing off one PM, and through the campaign, and to my old friend, Tanya Plibersek. We were staffers together last century, when we were young—actually I think that is AA Milne, isn't it? When we were young we used to leave on Wednesdays and sip chamomile tea together. Thanks also to Albo. I remember 1996 when you arrived and the fun faction began—and I am back.

And to the class of 2016 and all the rest, who I am getting to know. I said to Tanya yesterday, actually, as we were walking out of the chamber and we were both feeling quite emotional after some incredible first speeches that my overriding reflection was that if diversity counts for anything, if values count for anything and if knowing who we are here to represent counts for anything then we have the makings of a truly great Labor government, should we be successful and given that honour by the Australian people at the next election.

I will close by saying that if I am fortunate enough to follow previous members for Bruce with a reasonable stint in this place—however I choose to undertake my responsibilities—I would hope for two things when I look back. Firstly, that my time here would rank well against the two types of people that Alan Griffin observed are called to serve in this place: 'politicians', who work with their party to seek power to effect change, see justice done and progress made and also 'parliamentarians', here for service, to take responsibility and to represent others—most especially giving voice to those without any.

And, finally, that I could be proud of my contribution: that I had the courage to change my view in light of new evidence or circumstances, that I was not still or silent when it mattered and that I could not have worked harder. Thank you.

Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler) (13:44): I rise to raise my concerns about the latest stage in the WestConnex project, which has been characterised by poor and ill-conceived planning. The latest suburb potentially to suffer is Leichhardt. Local residents are concerned that a site on Darley Road in Leichhardt will be the midpoint for tunnelling for the extension of the WestConnex project. Darley Road is already a very busy road. There must be proper consultation with local residents and proper planning, including a local traffic plan, to satisfy residents that there will be no adverse impacts on them.

Of even greater concern is that the nearby Blackmore Oval and/or other public space in the area will be used during construction. Active and passive open space is at a premium in my electorate. Blackmore Oval is used by a variety of sporting codes for local sport. In addition, the Canal Road Film Centre is situated behind Blackmore Oval. This centre houses 75 or more specialist businesses that comprise a big part of the Australian film industry infrastructure, which is important for our national economy. I have spoken to the federal minister responsible for urban infrastructure about these issues and have had two direct discussions with the appropriate state minister, Duncan Gay, and called on him to ensure that these issues are resolved and that Blackmore Oval is protected. (Time expired)

Mr VAN MANEN (Forde) (13:45): My electorate has some tremendous leaders in the field of education, and I would like to acknowledge one of those today, Mrs Donna Anderson, who is Head of College at Canterbury College. Mrs Anderson is an excellent example of how our schools need to think outside the basic curriculum to develop pathways where Australia's students can engage and achieve. Through the success of the college's strategic partnerships programs, Mrs Anderson has been chosen to speak at an educator research symposium at the University of Oxford in the UK. The strategic partnerships programs connect students with the real world and also develop personal relationships where staff network and collaborate with universities and businesses. Through this program, Canterbury College has been able to provide more subjects for its students, including robotics in kindergarten, as well as better facilities, including world-class science laboratories, and access to higher education programs though first-year university subjects and on-site training.

Mrs Anderson has gone above and beyond to drive cultural change at Canterbury and offer real-world, out-of-the-box experiences for students to truly discover their talents and passions. She is a true leader in the electorate of Forde, and I commend her hard work and commitment to the students of Canterbury College.

Mr WATTS (Gellibrand) (13:47): The Saturday night before last a very excited crowd filled VU Whitten Oval in Footscray to watch the AFL Women's All-Stars game between the Western Bulldogs and the Melbourne Demons. My daughter estimated that the crowd at the ground was 'about a million', but official counts suggest that about 6½ thousand people came out. The television audience for the game did top one million viewers, and they saw the Dogs beat the Demons 14.6 (90) to 6.9 (45)—finally. Even more impressively, in Melbourne the game averaged 387,000 viewers, 40,000 more than the best men's regular season fixture. The game's success highlights the tremendous potential the new eight-team women's league has when it kicks off in February 2017.

It was a thrill for me to be able to go through the footy record with my daughter before the game, knowing that this would be the last women's exhibition game and that we would be able to watch Steph Chiocci, Ellie Blackburn and Katie Brennan in Dogs colours week after week next season.

The establishment of this league is a testament to the hard work of many women, but Whitten Oval paid special thanks on the night to the Western Bulldogs' Vice-President, Dr Susan Alberti AC, a true champion of the Western Bulldogs' new club new slogan: 'Three teams; one club. Be more Bulldog'.

Extraordinary strides have been taken in recent years to advance the women's game in Australia but there is still a distance to travel. We need to see an enduring, fair and equitable pay agreement for the players if we want the game to thrive in the long term. The Women's All-Stars game showed that the demand is there from the fans, and if the AFL invests in the players and invests in our women then the community will support it.

Mr VASTA (Bonner) (13:48): Today I would like to speak about Joshua and Benjamin Wood, two remarkable brothers from Carindale. These young men are an inspiration and an example of what hard work can achieve. Josh is nine years old and profoundly vision impaired. I first got to know Josh two years ago, when he came second for reading in the Queensland Braille Writing Association's Braille Literacy Challenge. Josh worked extremely hard for this result. I am pleased to inform the House that last week, at this year's challenge, he came first in the state in his section for reading and second in his section for writing. This is another great result he should be proud of.

Josh's older brother Ben has also achieved remarkable things. Ben has learnt Braille to help Joshua and attends Braille camps with him every year in Sydney. He has also received the highest mark in the state twice for his AMEB speech and drama exams. Ben is a fantastic speaker with a big interest in politics, and I look forward to seeing him in this chamber one day!

Josh recently wrote to me about his and Ben's wish to meet the Prime Minister. Tomorrow I will have the pleasure of hosting both Josh and Ben at Parliament House. I am excited to introduce these young men to the Prime Minister in person. Thank you, Joshua and Ben, for the fine example you have set for the community.

Ms RYAN (Lalor—Opposition Whip) (13:50): I rise to speak about Morgan Mitchell, an incredibly talented young woman who, I am proud to say, hails from the electorate of Lalor. With Cathy Freeman as a mentor, a thousand-megawatt smile and tonnes of talent, a less grounded athlete might get a big head. However, Morgan's beautiful family has kept her grounded. In news reports it has been said that Morgan's mum begged her to 'please just come home the same person' from Rio.

Alongside Jess Thornton, Anneliese Rubie and Caitlin Sargent-Jones, Morgan did her country proud in the 4 x 400 relay. All of them were first-timers at an Olympic Games and they made the final. The Australian athletics team has not done that since 2000. The last time, our friend Nova Peris ran in the 4 x 400. I was proud to see Morgan Mitchell have the same honour.

Like many other kids, Morgan started her career in Little Athletics, and she has always been an incredibly talented sportswoman. At 17 she played in the under-19s Australian netball team and represented Australia in the IAAF World Junior Championships. Her humility and hard work are an inspiration to everyone in the electorate. We are proud of our national champion and we are proud of her efforts as an individual and as part of the team in the 4 x 400 relay team.

Mr WALLACE (Fisher) (13:51): With a population nearing 300,000, the Sunshine Coast is punching well above its weight, with no fewer than 12 of the Olympians representing Australia in Rio last month having lived or trained on the coast. Of those 12, eight hailed from my electorate of Fisher. It is with great pride that I inform the House that the Fisher Olympians returned from Rio with two silver and three bronze medals.

Shining under the tutelage of swim coach Chris Mooney from the University of the Sunshine Coast, Leah Neale and Taylor McKeown both won silver: Leah in the women's 4 x 200 freestyle relay and Taylor in the women's 4 x 100 medley relay. Jake Packard, also coached by Mooney, took away a well-deserved bronze medal in the men's 4 x 100 medley relay. Also in the water, 18-year-old Chelsea Gubecka, from the Kawana Waters Swimming Club, came 15th in the women's 10-kilometre open water swim.

In archery, Ryan Tyack, from the Sunshine Coast Archery Club, put in a great performance to help clinch bronze in the men's team bronze medal match. Also hailing from the coast, Buderim born Alyce Burnett and Alyssa Bull, from my home town of Alexandra Headland, fought valiantly to place eighth in the K2 500-metre kayaking final. Also, Alana Boyd placed fourth in the pole vault final.

Ms RISHWORTH (Kingston) (13:53): If we look around the chamber, many of us have started to wear yellow ribbons. These are very important symbols of recognising that September is Childhood Cancer Awareness Month. This month was first proclaimed in 2010 by US President Obama, and it has since become a global initiative.

We wear gold ribbons to raise awareness about this incredibly important month, where we recognise those young people in our community who are suffering from childhood cancer or have passed away from childhood cancer. It is pleasing to see so many members and senators starting to wear them. For those who have not got a gold ribbon, look into getting one because it is an important month.

The Kids Cancer Project here in Australia works hard to help fight the scourge of cancer. It funds research to help end childhood cancer and has been doing so since 1993. According to the Kids Cancer Project, three families will hear the words 'your child has cancer' every day. There are 950 children diagnosed with cancer in Australia every year.

I would like to recognise Erin, who has unfortunately passed away at the age of 14. But before her death, she advocated on behalf of other children around the world; she really shone a light on this terrible scourge. She urged us to continue to address this issue in this parliament. (Time expired)

Mrs WICKS (Robertson) (13:54): It is a fact that the Central Coast needs a major injection of local jobs to become the thriving centre of opportunity that it deserves to be. That is why our community supported our plan to deliver 600 new federal jobs, mainly from the ATO, into Gosford during two federal elections. Over the last few years I have held hundreds of listening posts, community meetings and round tables regarding this desperate need for local jobs. but let us contrast this with Labor. Just last week, Senator O'Neill sent an error ridden open letter through the media that was misleading and bizarre, and it only highlights Labor's opposition to local jobs and growth.

My commitment has always been to jobs, not to a building. In deciding the location for 600 new jobs in Gosford, the ATO chose a site that is a two-minute walk to the centre of Gosford. It was selected independently by the ATO through an open, thorough tender process—and that is as it should be. Senator O'Neill actually confirmed this in a series of stunts in the Senate. Labor now wants to build a performing arts centre on that very land. So why did Senator O'Neill spend three years as the local member publicly campaigning for it to be elsewhere? And why doesn't the senator admit another simple fact: that the location of the performing arts centre is actually up to the council to decide?

Businesses describe our 600 new jobs as a catalyst project our region needs. It is a catalyst that I will fight to see delivered, with 600 new jobs into Gosford by the end of next year. The future of our region depends on it.

Mr FEENEY (Batman) (13:56): I am always inspired by stories from within my electorate of individuals and communities coming together and making real change. Today I would like to make special mention of one particular success story—Preston South Primary School.

Sitting in the heart of my electorate, Preston South primary has students from a diverse range of social and cultural backgrounds. Not long ago, Preston South primary was facing some immense challenges, including declining enrolments and the challenge of a serious fire in 2009. Today the school is transformed, a model of quality education and inclusion with a vibrant curriculum and dedicated staff. This transformation has been led by Principal Leon Leonidas.

Last month I had the pleasure of celebrating National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children's Day with the school. This event was an excellent example of the outstanding initiatives championed by the school. The day began with a moving welcome to country by Aunty Di Kerr and offered students the opportunity to explore Aboriginal culture and history.

It is with immense pleasure that I congratulate the Preston South Primary School and Principal Leon Leonidas on their success. Universal access to quality education is critical to giving our children their best start in life, and I extend my thanks to all the educators in my electorate who dedicate themselves to achieving that goal.

Mr RICK WILSON (O'Connor) (13:57): It is with great pleasure that I report to the House a fantastic night of fun and frivolity last Wednesday at the Albany Entertainment Centre. This year's Albany District Primary Music Teachers' Network's music festival was hosted by Flinders Park Primary School and included outstanding performances by Spencer Park primary, Mount Barker Community College, Mount Lockyer primary, Parklands primary, Flinders Park primary, Australian Christian College, Little Grove primary, St Joseph's College and, last but by no means least, the school that my youngest kids attend, Albany Primary School.

My favourite individual school act for the evening was Flinders Park Primary School's performance of the old Beatles classic Octopus's Garden, where music teacher Mike Staude had every single student in the ensemble playing an instrument. However, the highlight was undoubtedly the combined school choir's resounding rendition of All Over the World, where every child who had performed on the evening came together in an ensemble of more than 400 voices in perfect harmony.

My hearty thanks to Flinders Park Primary School principal, Richard Bushell, and his team for hosting a wonderful concert. Congratulations to each of the students who performed with pride and confidence in front of a full house. As a parent of one of the performers, I can honestly say how proud I was of not only my daughter but of every single student as they sang their little hearts out for their teachers, families and friends.

Finally, a big shout out to the Albany music teachers' network for their hard work and professionalism in preparing their students for this wonderful evening. I would like to single out Robyn Wilson, of Spencer Park Primary School, who is retiring after 19 years, and acknowledge her years of commitment to cultivating the musical talents of so many young students. I am sure— (Time expired)

Ms BRODTMANN (Canberra) (13:59): I was one of the many Canberrans who woke with a shock one Saturday a few weeks ago to front-page images in The Canberra Times of topless women in G-strings serving drinks at a Geocon worksite. The idea that in 2016, a company would think it appropriate to celebrate with strippers on a worksite raises questions about how committed that company really is to promoting gender diversity in the workforce. I encouraged Canberrans to write to Geocon to make their views heard, and I am pleased that many did just that. I have since met with the managing director of Geocon to hear what is being done to ensure this never happens again. Geocon has enlisted David Morrison to serve as a 'high-level mentor' to the company's managing director and it has developed a cultural change strategy. As far as these moves are evidence of a proactive response this clear failure of judgement needs to be recognised and we need to ensure this is just a first step in a very long process towards banishing these attitudes for good. It will take more than a mentor. It will require a sustained and tangible determination to improve. I will keep pushing for progress because these attitudes, cultures and behaviours do not belong on building sites in 2016, they belong in the history books.

The SPEAKER: In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.

Mr LLEW O'BRIEN (Wide Bay) (15:00): My question is to the Minister for Small Business. Will the minister outline to the House how the government has supported small business over the last year?

The SPEAKER (15:13): I present the Auditor-General's Audit report number 16, 2016-17 entitled Performance audit: offshore processing centres in Nauru and Papua New Guinea: procurement of garrison support and welfare services. Department of Immigration and Border Protection.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

The SPEAKER (15:17): I have received a letter from the honourable the Leader of the Opposition proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Prime Minister’s failure to deliver in his first year of office.

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—

Mr SHORTEN (Maribyrnong—Leader of the Opposition) (15:17): What a busy week it has been, and it is only Tuesday: cabinet leaks directly defying the Prime Minister's orders; a public split in the Liberal party room; the Liberal party room now a live blog site for different factions of the Liberal Party; the extreme right wing calling the shots; the member for Warringah airing his views to all and sundry about all and sundry; and a parliament in chaos—a government Senate with no business to do. The last time we met, those opposite could not wait to go home, and now they are here they have got nothing to do. This is a government in chaos. Let me correct myself: this is business as usual, another week in the busy life of the Turnbull government.

Let's cast our minds back to a year ago, the fateful 14 September. It was the beginning of new politics, and our friend the Prime Minister said it would be the end of slogans. The future was here. It was the second coming of the Sun King. We were going to see the heroic mould of individual leadership shining brightly like a lone star over this benighted Liberal government and we were going to be rescued by none other than Malcolm Turnbull, Prime Minister. Of course, we were told by some of his boosters—indeed, some in the media—that this was a marvellous development for democracy. No longer would we need the outmoded two-party system; we had the Turnbull-party system. And what a year it has been since then! I concede there has never been a more exciting time to be Malcolm Turnbull, but unfortunately for—

The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition will refer to members by their correct titles.

Mr SHORTEN: the member for Wentworth, the Prime Minister, the Sun King, the man who invented the internet. Anyway, a year later—

The SPEAKER: I want the Leader of the Opposition to be able to use his entire 10 minutes without me pulling him up.

Mr SHORTEN: Thank you. Me too.

The SPEAKER: Well, you know the answer.

Mr SHORTEN: A year later, this Prime Minister is the great national disappointment: from Messiah to mediocrity; from agile to fragile. Never before has a Prime Minister promised so much and delivered so little. He claims, in a remarkable statement, that this has been a substantial year of achievement, but in fact it has been marked by dithering, delay, dysfunction and disunity. It has been a year marked by cowardly retreats and by the betrayal of everything the old member for Wentworth pretended to care about. It has been a year of weakness, not strength. It has been a year of moral cowardice, not leadership; a year when at every turn, on every issue, the Prime Minister has allowed himself to be bullied by the right-wingers in his backbench.

The promise the Prime Minister made, to be able to say that he could lead and unite his party, was that he would deliver a massive electoral mandate to the government. In the first 10 months of his government that was the promise which even the most optimistic Turnbull boosters hung on to—that he would deliver the electoral dividend that would mean he would at last be able to stamp his authority on the party. But that did not happen. There are 17 fewer coalition members sitting on that side of the parliament because of this Prime Minister, a Prime Minister to whom no-one in the government owes anything. Authority is not granted by title; authority is granted by the ability to deliver. We on this side understand very bitterly that the government won the election, but we also recognise a wounded, weak leader, with no agenda or authority, just waiting for the next mistake.

Every time his backbench have demanded more and more of him he has caved in. He surrenders on every issue that he has ever said he believes in. On climate change, the once heroic figure who would cross the floor is now letting the climate sceptics write his climate change policy. But at least he is in charge, he says. On marriage equality, in the month before he rolled Tony Abbott, the member for Warringah, the Prime Minister said that he believed a free vote in parliament was the best way to go. He knows it is the best way to go. Why are we led by a man who will, when knowing the best option, recommend to Australians a second best option? That is moral cowardice. He can claim his mandate for a plebiscite, but we understand that he knows that if he was actually in charge of his party he would not be having this plebiscite. So Australians are presented with a leader claiming to lead the country when he cannot lead his own party in the way which his own conscience demands he should.

But we have also seen him on superannuation, a matter very important to millions and millions of Australians. The changes that these vandals opposite, the Treasurer and the Prime Minister, made with their agendaless government in the last budget have critically undermined the confidence of every Australian in superannuation investments. I acknowledge we have to rein in the excessive concessions at the top, but the way this ham-fisted government went about their business means they have created a question mark in the minds of millions of superannuants: why do we even bother doing this? It takes some going to trash the superannuation system. He says he has got an absolutely ironclad policy, and then he uses his weasel words and his weak retreat. He is already explaining to people: 'Well, I might've said that then, but I certainly can't say it now. And I'd better check with some of my backbench in case I can say what I said today tomorrow.'

And what does he always say when we have these problems? I am sure what he says to his few remaining desperate backers—he shrugs his shoulders and he says: 'What do you expect me to do? I'm only the Prime Minister. You must be realistic. You have unrealistic expectations of me. All I wanted was the job. Why do you ask me to do anything with the job?' But you do not have to take my word for it; the reviews are in a year in. Michelle Grattan:

… since the coup that installed Malcolm Turnbull, many Liberals are disappointed and surprised he has turned out, so far—

love your optimism, Michelle—

a mediocre Prime Minister.

      …      …      …

He struggles in adversity, anger on display, firing bullets of blame. His graceless election night address was appalling. Andrew Bolt, not exactly a true believer:

HOW bad is Malcolm Turnbull? Even he struggles to name one thing he’s achieved since becoming Prime Minister.

      …      …      …

[The] official list of achievements is so embarrassingly tiny that his staff have padded it with things … stolen from Abbott’s.

Or what about that memorable exchange between Jeff Kennett and Andrew Bolt, which I concede I failed to watch. But I repeat:

Bolt: Can you name the achievements of the Turnbull government one year in office?

Kennett: Not easily.

Bolt: Can you name one? I am not asking this as a trick question …

Kennett: I want him desperately to succeed.

Bolt: That's right, but can you name one?

Kennett: No, not at the moment.

But I think Michael Gordon summarised this government best by quoting Neil Young:

It sorta starts off real slow and then fizzles out altogether.

A year ago when he launched his coup, the current Prime Minister said about his predecessor, 'Ultimately the Prime Minister has not been capable of providing the economic leadership our nation needs.' Let us look at his economic leadership in those fun 12 months. Plan A: a 15 per cent GST on everything. He sends out poor soldier Morrison, and then abandons him and runs away—and do not ask poor old Premier Baird what he thinks about Malcolm Turnbull's spine! Plan B—which the Prime Minister called, with his characteristic trademark humility 'a once in a generation reform'—double taxation. Why didn't we all think of that? Because you need to be as clever as Mr Turnbull to come up with an idea as absolutely dumb as that idea. Plan C: a $50 billion giveaway for multinational companies. I must record that when we went into the lock-up on budget night I saw my shadow minister for finance and my shadow treasurer and they were surprised. They were stunned. They said, 'You'll never believe it'—and I couldn't. A $50 billion tax giveaway. Even Goldman Sachs says $30 billion of that will go overseas; the big banks will pay $7½ billion less tax profit to the bottom line.

They want to look after multinationals to send more profits overseas. We want stronger Medicare. They want to give the banks a tax cut. We are determined to seek justice and give Australians a banking royal commission. Indeed, when we talk about the lack of conviction of this Prime Minister, what we have to look at is marriage equality. The idea that he will provide $7½ million to the no case and $7½ million to the yes case, to be supervised by five MPs and five citizens, is an atrocious idea. It shows the retrofitting of a bad idea being reinforced by even less sound planning. This nation does not need to spend nearly $200 million of taxpayer money on a government opinion poll when we have a budget repair situation requiring hard choices. That is all this plebiscite is; it is a government opinion poll. But even worse, this government and this nation need leadership from the Prime Minister. We know the Prime Minister's heart is not in this plebiscite. He desperately wants the issue to go away. Our problem is that the consequences of Mr Turnbull's pursuit of power will be to damage— (Time expired)

Mr FLETCHER (Bradfield—Minister for Urban Infrastructure) (15:27): Is there a more ludicrous spectacle than a leader of a Labor opposition having the temerity to criticise this side of the House when it comes to delivery? How short their memories are, when you look at that side's utterly inept record of delivery. There is the member for Lilley, creeping out of the chamber. He was the man who stood here and said 'the four years of surplus I announce tonight'. How many years of surplus did he deliver? Not four, not three, not two, not one—he delivered none of them. Who can forget Labor's disastrous incompetence on border protection? I had a look recently at a press release issued by the then minister for immigration, Senator Chris Evans, on 13 May 2008, speaking about the scrapping of temporary protection visas. He said this:

… would not compromise the Government’s commitment to protecting Australia’s borders.

'Would not compromise'? What a disastrous record of delivery the Labor Party has when it comes to protecting Australia's borders—1,200 deaths at sea, 50,000 unauthorised arrivals, 8,000 children put into detention, 17 onshore detention centres—and the Leader of the Opposition has the temerity to talk about delivering.

What about their hopeless record of incompetence on delivery when it comes to the National Broadband Network? During the 2007 election they promised they would spend $4.7 billion to connect 98 per cent of Australians to a fibre-to-the-node network—complete failure to deliver. They just could not do it. So in 2009 they had a new plan. Now it was going to be $43 billion, and they were going to connect 90 per cent of Australians via fibre to the premises.

What had they achieved when they left government? They had spent money. They are very good at spending money, this lot. They had spent over $6 billion. But what had they delivered? Barely 50,000 Australians connected to the network. We are connecting more Australians to the network every month than Labor's chaotic, incompetent record of delivery when it comes to the National Broadband Network.

What about the pink batts disaster Tragically, four young men died and there were some 200 house fires, thanks to this lot's incompetent record of delivery. What about my personal favourite. There were going to be 260 new childcare centres built on the premises of schools all around the country. The member for Adelaide was going to end the double drop-off. Do you know how many they managed to build by the time they pulled the plug in April 2010? They managed 38 out of the promised 260—and this hopeless ravel has the temerity to come in here and talk about delivery!

Let me tell the House about delivery. Let me tell you what the Turnbull government is delivering. Economic growth has strengthened to 3.3 per cent. We now have faster economic growth than any of the G7 economies. In the last year we have created almost 220,000 jobs, and over 60 per cent of those have gone to women. I will tell you one very important thing that we have done to create jobs—we ended Labor's disastrous Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal, which was an arrow in the heart of small businesses in the trucking sector delivering jobs. That meant 35,000 owner-drivers could get back on the road. Our PaTH program, announced in the budget, will provide up to 120,000 internships for young people to get a foothold into jobs.

I talked about the National Broadband Network before. I talked about Labor's incompetent, unbelievably hopeless record of delivery. Compare that to the systematic and steady progress we are making on this side of the House with a competent chief executive, a competent board, a competent management team and a credible business plan. That is why over three million premises around Australia can now connect to the National Broadband Network—and the chief executive of the National Broadband Network, as recently as last week, made it clear that we are on target to get the National Broadband Network completed by 2020. That is delivery. That is what is happening under Prime Minister Turnbull, that is what was happening under Communications Minister Turnbull and that is something that this lot on the other side have simply never managed to achieve because they are completely incompetent when it comes to delivery.

Let's talk about the export agreements through which Australia is engaging with the growing economies in Asia and the terrific opportunities for our exporters. Under the China free trade agreement the tariff on fresh and frozen beef cuts has already been cut from 12 per cent to 9.6 per cent. By 2024, it will be zero. Under our Korea free trade agreement the tariff on fresh beef has already been cut from 40 per cent to 32 per cent. That is delivery.

We are delivering on health care. Despite the extraordinarily misleading claims made by the Labor Party in this last election, bulk-billing is at record levels under a Turnbull government. We are investing more in localised mental health care and support. Our ambitious $1.1 million National Innovation and Science Agenda is being implemented. Innovation and science is being supported by responsible guaranteed funding of schools, which will increase by 26 per cent over the next four years.

Let's talk about border protection, where the Turnbull government is delivering. It has been almost 800 days since a boat arrival. We have been able to close 17 detention centres. When it comes to border protection, you do not hear Labor having anything credible to say. We have a proud record of delivery—and that is before I even get to talking about the $50 billion infrastructure program which we are delivering and continue to deliver.

This motion asks: 'What has been achieved in the last 12 months?' I will tell you what has been achieved in the last 12 months. Flinders Link, an extension of the Adelaide rail network to Flinders University—$43 million committed in June of this year. Forrestfield Airport Link, an 8.5-kilometre extension of the Perth rail network to connect to Forrestfield near the Perth Airport—$490 million committed in May this year. Gold Coast Light Rail Stage 2, construction of a 7.3-kilometre light rail system—$95 million committed by the Turnbull government. Sods were turned in August 2016 for stage 2, and I was very pleased to be at that sod-turning. WestConnex, an extraordinarily important project that will link Sydney's west and south-west with the CBD—a 33-kilometre continuous free-flowing motorway. M4 East tunnelling began in July 2016. That is delivery. We are getting on with the Turnbull government delivering. The Gateway Upgrade North project in Brisbane, an 11.3-kilometre widening from four lanes to six lanes between Nudgee and Bracken Ridge. Major works commenced in February 2016. The Tullamarine Freeway upgrade to widen and upgrade the freeway between the Melbourne Airport and Melrose Drive. Work commenced in May 2016. In Adelaide—the north-south corridor, the Darlington Upgrade, a reconfiguration of a section of South Road into an expressway standard road. Work commenced in April 2016.

Across every aspect of this government's activities, we are delivering. What has been delivered by the Leader of the Opposition? We have seen a complete failure to act on Senator Dastyari taking payments from Chinese owned companies. We have seen $40,000 pay cut to the member for Fenner to accommodate that old-style socialist hack 'Senator Kim Il-Carr'. That is what we are seeing in terms of comparative wage justice from the Leader of the Opposition! And we have seen the Leader of the Opposition imposing silence on the member for Grayndler. The member for Grayndler has been barely heard of in some four question times. I wonder why the member for Grayndler is never allowed to get a question under this Leader of the Opposition?

By contrast, what you are seeing from this side of the House, from the Turnbull government, is a consistent pattern of delivery. Just today we have announced a way forward in relation to the plebiscite on same-sex marriage. We have announced the date when that will be held. We are carrying out the action we committed to carrying out during the 2016 election. We are delivering. Just today you have seen us announce agreement with the opposition in relation to $6 billion of budget savings. We are doing what the people expect the Turnbull government to do, which is to get on and get the budget under control.

This is a government which is delivering. We have had a year of delivery. Of course there is much more to do, but we are determined to create in this country the growth, the jobs, the prosperity and the opportunity to back Australians to achieve everything they want to achieve. That is what we are focused on. We are not focused on inside-the-Beltway political games. We have had 12 months of delivery, and there is much more to come.

Mr HAMMOND (Perth) (15:37): I must say I am very pleased that the Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for Maribyrnong, has phrased the matter of public importance in the manner in which he has. If we had been asked to debate the topic of what it is the Prime Minister has actually done, I would have sat down by now.

Whenever I am asked to reflect upon what it is that the Prime Minister has actually done in the last 12 months, I cannot help but keep coming back to Monty Python's Life of Brian, in that famous scene in which the People's Front of Judea asked, 'What have the Romans ever done for us?' But the problem is that, like most sequels, it is horribly disappointing, because unlike in Life of Brian, in which the People's Front of Judea are able to reel off quite a lot of things that the Romans had actually done for them, in this sequel what we have seen is a Prime Minister who has failed to deliver any single thing of substance in the course of the last 12 months.

Let's just dig down a little deeper in relation to what it is the Prime Minister has failed to deliver. You heard it in question time. In the course of the issue of marriage equality, he inherited a flawed plebiscite concept from the honourable member for Warringah. The Prime Minister could have done something. He could have led from the front, and he could have made marriage equality a reality with the stroke of a pen, but he has failed to deliver on marriage equality.

You might ask yourself: what is it that the Prime Minister has done in relation to the issue of health? Well, he has failed to deliver in the last 12 months in relation to the issue of health care. Perhaps we should reflect on that further. Perhaps we can concede there are a couple of things he has done.

Mr Pasin: We're here. Talk to us.

Mr HAMMOND: Well, I am happy to talk about the fact that he created a Medicare privatisation task force, and I am very happy to talk about the fact that the Prime Minister has proposed and backed in $650 million of cuts to Medicare, which affects mums and dads and the community who desperately need pathology services the most.

You might ask yourself what it is that the Prime Minister has actually done in his first year of office on education. Let's look back at what the Prime Minister has done in relation to education in the last 12 months. He said this to Fran Kelly: 'you could make a very powerful case' to stop funding at a federal government level to government schools. But then he also said this:

No Coalition Federal Government, I suspect no Federal Government, would retreat from funding and continuing to support the non-government school sector …

What we can take away from all of that is that the Prime Minister has failed to deliver any single thing in relation to education in the last 12 months.

What about mums and dads? What has the Prime Minister delivered for mums and dads in the last 12 months? Well, he has not really concentrated on mums and dads. What he has done is deliver a $50 billion tax cut in relation to big business.

Mr Pasin interjecting—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Coulton ): The member for Barker will be quiet.

Mr HAMMOND: A $50 billion tax cut—that is what he has promised.

Ms Ryan interjecting—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Lalor is not in her place and will be quiet.

Mr HAMMOND: And, of that $50 billion, what has he done? He has promised—he has not even delivered, but he has promised—$7.4 billion of that to the big four banks. What are we doing in relation to the big four banks? We want to hold them to account by calling them in to a royal commission. That is what we are doing, and this Prime Minister has done nothing.

The Prime Minister has failed to deliver, in the last 12 months, anything meaningful at all as far as the National Broadband Network goes. In my home town, in the federal electorate of Perth, not one single home has got or will get the National Broadband Network in the next term of government. Mums and dads in the federal electorate of Perth do not think 'NBN' stands for 'National Broadband Network'; they think it stands for 'not before never', because we are never going to see it. We are never going to see it under this Prime Minister if his last 12 months is anything to go by.

In relation to infrastructure, the member for Bradfield boasted about infrastructure projects that he says he has delivered. In my home town of Perth, there are only three infrastructure projects of the 76 promised. Seventy-six of those projects are being delivered into Liberal and coalition electorates. That is an abject failure of infrastructure in this term of government. We are not left with a single thing in the last 12 months. Not so far, not so good. (Time expired)

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The free-ranging conversation is getting too loud. I suspect the divisions that will follow this MPI might be important to members in this House, and I suggest that they tone it down.

Mrs SUDMALIS (Gilmore) (15:43): Matters of public importance are supposed to be just that: matters of importance, not a cowardly attack on achievements or a person individually. But I have learned over the past couple of years that Labor only cares about the negative, not the positive. Labor determines success by acts of bullying rather than the skills of negotiation and conciliation. So let's do what I love best, and that is talking about the positive. It actually goes on very well with the theme set by the last speaker. Monty Python said, 'Always look on the bright side of life.' So let's do all those things and look there. We need to look at the activities, outcomes and achievements of the Turnbull government, because, in reality, to look at the positive is easier, it is better for our nation and it is better for our people.

From spring last year to spring now, we know that we are an economic aspiration for other developed nations, with our strong economy and strengthening budget measures. Our economic growth has gotten to 3.3 per cent, meaning that we now have faster growth than any of the G7 economies.

We have legislated some of the world's toughest measures relating to multinational tax avoidance, which has been a hot issue locally, that my local people requested to make some of the huge profit making international businesses pay the correct amount of tax. We have put legislation in place so that the small businesses, like my local IGAs, will be able to have a fair go at competing against big businesses, which helps them to keep their market share.

On the national front, almost 220,000 jobs have been created over the past year, with more than 60 per cent of these jobs going to women. Let me tell those who sit opposite: getting women into work is a catalyst of social change, particularly in rural and regional areas. Those sitting opposite will whinge and complain that a large proportion of the jobs gained are only part time. Many of the unemployed people in Gilmore would love to get part-time work, as it gives them a balance to their other favourite activities.

Getting rid of Labor's so-called Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal has meant my local owner drivers can get back on the road. Mark and Allen, my dairy farmers, and the drivers for the meat processing works are unbelievably pleased about saving both their rigs and their mortgages.

I cannot wait for the PaTH program to start, and neither can a number of businesses and job seekers living in my electorate. Preparing, trialling and then perhaps getting hired for a job is a great strategy for young people living in families where there is no role model of a working adult.

Yesterday at HMAS Albatross, the Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Tim Barrett, along with hundreds of Navy personnel under the command of Captain Simon Bateman and our newly appointed Commodore Chris Smallhorn of the Fleet Air Arm, took delivery of our last MH-60R Seahawk 'Romeo' helicopter. That brings 24 to our local base. Their trained crews and families number in the hundreds. This completes the first half a billion dollars of investment into my local Navy base. There is another half a billion dollars to come, included in the already begun program of unmanned defence technology piloted by our local, very-skilled Defence workforce. We have put legislation through to crack down on terrorists and keep our people safe.

We have made strong progress on the NBN, with over three million Australian premises now being able to connect to the NBN, which is over 1.2 million Australian homes and businesses as active customers. The new NBN Sky Muster satellite service is delivering high-speed broadband. Let me tell you: I have all three types of NBN in my area, and that is including 31,855 ready-for-service homes and businesses in Gilmore.

As for our trade agreements with China, Japan and South Korea—well, what can I say? I have wine growers, shellfish farmers, dairy farmers and even mushroom growers, skin-care manufacturers like Nowchem, and alpaca meat processors all champing at the bit to get into the game of making money from exports.

We have made many medicines cheaper and added life-saving drugs, including those for breast cancer and melanoma, to the PBS. In November this year, one of my favourites will be added—the vaccination against shingles for people aged between 70 and 79. In Gilmore, we have Waminda, an Indigenous women's health network getting great outcomes. They got $764,000 over three years. I worked hard for the $2 million for Triple Care Farm for their youth detox centre.

We are investing more in localised mental health care and support. In particular, we have the $2 million development at the UOW Shoalhaven campus to help with mental health care. It is now going to be the call centre for Lifeline. In addition, we are implementing our National Ice Action Strategy, including almost $300 million over four years to improve treatment.

I think we have done a lot in just a year, and it is all for the people of Australia and our national feeling of success. We are absolutely going to look on the bright side of life.

Mr GEORGANAS (Hindmarsh) (15:48): Last year, on 15 September 2015, the member for Wentworth was sworn in as the 29th Prime Minister of Australia. I have to say that even I, as a member of the Australian Labor Party for over 30 years and entrenched in Labor politics, felt a glimmer of hope. I thought that the attitude of this place was going to change, the three-word slogans were going to be out the window—that there was going to be a clear plan for Australia and perhaps a Prime Minister that may leave a legacy behind that this place is better after he left than when he came. But how disappointed was I, and how disappointed were the thousands and millions of Australians around this nation?

To mark the one-year anniversary, we are witnessing one headline after another—and what are those headlines? Every major paper across this country is asking the same question: what has the Prime Minister achieved? The answer, quite unanimously, appears to be: not much. Whether you are listening to reporters on the TV, in newspaper articles or on the radio, the answer is unanimous—and it appears to be: not too much.

It must be a real concern for the government when their very own former Victorian Liberal Premier Jeff Kennett, who has held executive positions on their national body and on their state body in Victoria, when asked in a television interview, was not able to name one achievement—not one.

What does it say about the coalition government's confidence in its leader when not even the Deputy Prime Minister can come up with an answer? When he was asked by Barrie Cassidy on ABC's Insiders what their best achievements were, the only answer he could come up with was that they had won the last election. This must be really concerning for the Liberal Party, the coalition and the government.

It is also concerning that the Senate today ran out of work to do, and the senators were reduced to talking about all sorts of absolutely unrelated things just to fill in time. Not only that, last week they all decided to go home early. Australians see this. It is reflected in the polls that coincide with the one-year anniversary, which show that the Prime Minister's approval ratings were lower than the Labor leader's.

So what, exactly, has the Prime Minister achieved in 12 months? Well, for one, he has sorely disappointed his supporters by not being able to take a stance on many important policies. On so many issues such as climate change, health care and education, the PM is following the right-wing fringe of his party instead of leading the country. It is like they are riding a horse and they have the reins in their hands and they turn his head and direct him in any which way they wish. He has threatened our education system by saying you could make a very powerful case for the federal government to stop funding public schools. We know that he still plans to cut Medicare. He still plans to give a $50 billion tax cut to big business and the banks. These are his achievements. He refuses to stand up and protect penalty rates and he has also learned nothing from the brutal election results, where he lost a number of seats.

The Prime Minister must understand that these policies hurt real people. They hurt people in our electorates; they hurt the Australian public. They have an impact on local jobs and local schools, and the ability of people to access basic services. The overwhelming feeling in the community is one of great disappointment and, as I said, I share that feeling. Motherhood statements are not actions. Getting up and performing opera in this place for your fans on the other side is not governing. Unless those statements are followed up with policy, action, conviction and leadership, they are just empty words.

I am worried about the future. The Prime Minister made promises to the good constituents in my electorate and Australia. We have seen many things in his first year: setting up the Medicare privatisation task force and cutting $650 million from bulk-billing incentives for pathology services. As I said, he wants to give big business a $50 billion tax cut while at the same time cutting from those lower— (Time expired)

Ms PRICE (Durack) (15:53): It really is a joke—and we have heard a bit of comedy here today—the Labor Party's MPI on failure, particularly a failure to deliver, considering their woeful record on delivering in the bush during their six years in office. It is also unfathomable that they have the audacity to discuss failures, given that they were widely known as a deeply chaotic government that rarely had Australia's interests at the forefront whilst they were in office and raking up debt that left our country with a whopping interest payment of $1 billion a month. The Labor leader failed yet again another test as opposition leader. Illustrating his complete failure to lead, he sat idly by and did not have the political fortitude to sack one of his factional lieutenants—well-known Senator 'Shanghai' Sam. There are many other colourful names, but that is my preference.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has delivered right across Australia. A number of projects and initiatives in Durack got off the ground on the Prime Minister's watch. I would like now to educate those opposite. In January I announced a women's resource centre in Fitzroy would be receiving $150,000 from the Turnbull government to address domestic and family violence in the community. This is part of the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children announced by the government last November. It is a very important initiative. The funding was for the women's resource centre to offer workshops promoting and enhancing safety and wellbeing of women and children in the community—tackling one of our national shames.

In May two Durack organisations were awarded Australian Small Business Advisory Services grants. The Karratha Business Enterprise Centre and the Small Business Centre East Kimberley will receive $600,000 over the next three years to provide low-cost advice to tourism small businesses and start-ups, which will be of great assistance to them. Tourism small business is a vital economic driver of local economies throughout not just the Pilbara but Australia more broadly.

What about the Defence white paper that was released in February, again under Prime Minister Turnbull's watch? This white paper was not just about submarines and frigates; this paper included increasing Defence spending by two per cent and a number of upgrades to incredibly important Defence facilities in my electorate of Durack. RAAF bases Curtin and Learmonth will be upgraded to support the RAAF's new strike and air combat capabilities. The Harold E Holt communications facility in Exmouth, which the Minister for Defence, Marise Payne, and I visited in April, will be upgraded to support communications capabilities and enhanced space situational awareness.

The investments in my electorate of Durack and across Australia will boost the economy in Durack and further add to this country's recent excellent economic growth of 3.3 per cent, which we heard previously from the minister is better than any of the G7 members' economies. That does not sound like a failure to me. The boost in the economy will also lead to further job creation, which is a hallmark of this government, with almost 220,000 jobs created in the last year. I am very proud to say that 60 per cent of those jobs are being filled by women and many of those are in my electorate.

The Dob in a Dealer campaign was launched in two places in my electorate: in Broome and in Geraldton. This campaign, which is part of the Turnbull government's National Ice Action Strategy, will get real results in this government's efforts to tackle the ice scourge in Australia. The campaign raises awareness of methamphetamine use and encourages people to contact Crime Stoppers to help tackle the manufacturing and distribution of the drug in their area. As I have said numerous times in this chamber, ice is a massive problem throughout regional, rural and remote Australia, and every single measure like this strategy will play a role in decreasing ice use across the country and start to mend communities.

This is just the flavour of our commitments and what we have achieved in the last 12 months. The time allotted here today does not allow me to mention all of them. On closing I would like to say that, thankfully, we on this side are in control. We are the adults. We have achieved a lot. Thankfully it is us who are in control, not the rabble on the opposite side.

Dr ALY (Cowan) (15:58): I have been sitting here for about the last half an hour really keen and eager to hear about the achievements of this government in the last year. When given an opportunity to speak for 10 minutes on their achievements the member for Bradfield spent 6½ minutes talking about the Labor Party. I find it quite astounding that when he was given an opportunity to speak for 10 minutes about their own achievements all he could muster up was 3½ minutes to talk about them. I find that really quite astounding.

I have to agree with my colleagues here. The year that has passed, which started for some of us—some people in Australia and certainly some people in my electorate—with so much promise, with so many promises of a different kind of government, has delivered nothing—nothing but disappointment. So many have asked: where is the Prime Minister? Where is the Prime Minister they hoped for? Where is the strong moral leadership that many Australians so eagerly crave? On issue after issue, this Prime Minister has dithered and danced to the beat of his extreme right-wing friends. It reminds me of a saying that we have in Arabic that the man might be the head of the house but the woman is the neck that moves the head. It certainly is the case here, where the Prime Minister might be the head of his party but the neck that moves that head is certainly within the right-wing of that party.

An opposition member: It's certainly not a woman either.

Dr ALY: And it is not a woman! Nowhere is this more evident than in the less than impressive report card given to the Prime Minister by those within his own ranks, who one would expect would be spruiking the achievements of this government—indeed, if there were any. So let us just do a little bit of a stocktake here. Let us see: in this first year, as the 29th Prime Minister of Australia, Malcolm Turnbull has got a rather unenviable list of achievements, the first, of course, being the setting up of a Medicare privatisation task force. What about cutting $650 million from bulk-billing incentives for pathology services? There is an achievement you all can be proud of. What about giving big business a $50 billion tax cut, of which $7.4 billion will go to the big four banks? There is a big achievement. But, wait a minute, if you go into Cowan and talk to the people that I represent, what about the NBN? Now, there is an achievement you all can be proud of.

The Prime Minister calls himself a feminist but he has five fewer female members in the House than his predecessor. Now, there is an achievement. He has crowed on about how he has a very solid working majority. What happened last week? What did we see last week? It was such an achievement. A majority government lost a House of Representatives vote for the first time since 1962. What an achievement. And his much-touted 25 pieces of 'new legislation' were not actually new at all—one had been on the Notice Paper for over 1,000 days. Let me make mention as well of the issue of border security. One of the previous speakers talked about the last 800 days. Last I counted, a year has only 365 days. Am I right?

Opposition members: Yes.

Dr ALY: Let us not forget that Mr Turnbull has suggested that the solution to the housing affordability crisis is that wealthy parents should shell out for their kids to help them buy a house. Now, there is an achievement. I guess it is all part of the PM's latest slogan—so far, so good. And is it any wonder that everyone agrees with the member for Warringah, Mr Tony Abbott, when he says the reality is that this government has been in office but not in power? So far, so good.

Mr PASIN (Barker) (16:03): I have been sitting here thinking about how I could perhaps deliver a message to those opposite, so I thought what I would do was put it in a language they could understand. I am channelling Clinton-Gore 1992: 'It's the economy, stupid.' Let us look at our economic achievements over the last 12 months. Of course, our economy and our budget are strengthening. Those opposite might not realise it, but we have an economy that is growing at 3.3 per cent. This means that the Australian economy is growing faster than any other economy in the G7. In my language, that is an achievement.

The member for Lilley—who is gracing us with his presence this afternoon, and I appreciate that—even understands that that is an achievement. What does it mean for jobs?

Mr Perrett interjecting—

Mr PASIN: Sadly, some opposite are still in their jobs. What it means for Australians outside of this place is that 220,000 new jobs have been created in the last 12 months. For those opposite who want to talk about gender inequality, 60 per cent of those jobs were created for Australian women. That is an economic achievement. I appreciate that some of the new members of this place would not know this, but in the last government they were pretty cool and pretty keen to kill off 30,000 small business operators who drove in the transport industry. The Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal—remember that? Member for Lilley, you were here in the last parliament. Do you remember that? That is 30,000 jobs—small businesses.

Opposition members interjecting—

Mr PASIN: All right. So let us not just talk about truckies. I am from the proud state of South Australia. Let's talk about naval shipbuilding. In the six years that those opposite were in government there was not one order, not one ship. They did not even order a dinghy—not one. I will tell you what we have done. We have invested $195 billion in defence capability. We are going to acquire 54 new builds. Some opposite want to talk about the NBN.

Dr Aly interjecting—

Mr PASIN: The member for Cowan, I never thought I would say this, but I wish we had the former member for Cowan in this place. Let me tell you something about the NBN. In my electorate, when I came to government in September 2013—statistics here—zero connections to the NBN. Not one. In the three years of our government, including the last 12 months, we managed to connect 28,423 people to the NBN. That is an achievement. What we have is fibre to the node and what you had was fibre to the press release—and the Australian people know it. If we are talking about telecommunications, let us talk about the mobile phone black spot program. In six years in government, what did you deliver for the bush? A big fat zero. The member for Solomon over there should know something about regional communications—a big fat zero. What are we delivering? $228 million for mobile phones in the bush.

Those opposite want to talk about leadership. They want to talk—

Mr Dreyfus interjecting—

Mr PASIN: Mr Deputy Speaker Coulton, 'Doofus' is speaking again. You should stop him. I withdraw, Mr Deputy Speaker. I really should not call him by that term, but he kind of earns it. Those opposite want to talk about leadership. You know what I have observed over the last two weeks, not 12 months? I have seen an absolute lack of leadership from 'Brown Paper Bill'. Sam Dastyari—'Senator Dim Sum', or 'Shanghai Sam' as he is known by some—brown paper bags et al—

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Coulton ): Order, member for Barker! I call the member for Isaacs.

Mr Dreyfus: Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Barker should know better. He has been here for more than a term. He should use parliamentary language. He should use the titles by which members of this place are entitled to be addressed. And he owes an apology to the House and a withdrawal.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a free-ranging debate, but I will remind the member for Barker to tone his language down.

Mr PASIN: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I should refer to him as the junior senator, Sam Dastyari. I thank you for your indulgence.

Ms HUSAR (Lindsay) (16:08): Today I am rising to speak about the government's achievements over the last 12 months, since—what is his name again; Malcolm Turnbull; that's right—Mr Turnbull, 'the member for net worth', took office.

The SPEAKER: I will remind the member to refer to members by their title.

Ms HUSAR: Absolutely. You would think a government attuned to the feeling of the nation right now would use this opportunity to fess up and admit they have an awful lot of making up to do for the abject failure and disappointment of the last year. You would think the recent election would at least provide some point of reflection for members opposite—oh, he has left—because the Australian people were pretty clear in the brutalising result for Malcolm Turnbull's Liberal government. The Prime Minister's lack of vision led to the loss of 14 seats across Australia. Smile all you like. The government's so-called win literally could not have been narrower.

Communities right across Australia sent a clear message to those opposite, but it seems the message was lost on the Prime Minister and each of the coalition members we have heard from this afternoon. For their benefit in particular, the message was simple: start paying attention to the real issues that people care about in their day-to-day lives. Stop meddling with Medicare and quit this obsessive preoccupation with ripping money out of health and hospitals and handing big tax breaks to hugely already profitable companies. Start delivering on your education promises and reverse the government's abandonment of the Gonski model that you promised to match. Stop trying to distract from the real issues affecting working people and stop giving a green light to the right-wing of your party to go on ideological crusades that are divisive, expensive and downright indulgent.

This government lurches from disappointment to disappointment, humiliation to humiliation. They cannot seem to go a fortnight without another stuff-up. When will it stop? When will this government start talking about the real issues facing the people in this country? It is a pretty clear indictment on the Prime Minister's failed year of leadership when his own people cannot name a single achievement. The Prime Minister's own colleagues decided to desert him and headed home early in the very first week of parliament—day 2—as if they had been elected to lounge around in their own self-importance and skip out on discussing the things that matter. The Prime Minister's personal failure with regard to the NBN will surely be viewed in years to come as the largest and most harmful infrastructure failure of our time. He calls himself a feminist, but has five fewer female members in the House than Tony Abbott did. He is out of touch. He failed to appoint a minister for small business until the community reacted with outrage. There was the $50 billion corporate tax cut to the big end of town, while his Treasurer flies around the country lecturing working men and women about living within their means. And the suggestion that the serious issue of housing unaffordability could be solved by getting wealthy parents to shell out for you is an outrage. His own MPs describe his performance as wishy-washy and his senators are told to review their favourite TV shows in the chamber instead of discussing anything real or meaningful.

When I was looking for his list of achievements, I dug deep. I even consulted Google and this is what it returned—that is all we could get: blank white paper. It is simply not good enough, and I hear time after time that people expect more. This is not some frivolous issue to be dismissed as opportunism from our side. It speaks to the serious lack of delivery from this government and the impact it is having on local communities.

My electorate of Lindsay has the most under-pressure hospital in our state, Nepean Hospital, which looks after 350,000 people in Western Sydney. More than half of the emergency patients are forced to wait longer than the national benchmark of four hours to be admitted. I hear, time after time, stories of patients having to wait 15 hours or more to be admitted into the emergency department. I hear constantly from our nurses and our doctors, who provide exceptional care but are frustrated year after year by Liberal government budget cuts and policy indifference. I expect that, if you stopped anyone on the streets in my electorate in Penrith, St Marys, Emu Plains, Jordon Springs or Kingswood, they would beg this Prime Minister to stop throwing away $170 million on a wasteful and unnecessary opinion poll and direct the money to the local hospital instead. That is on top of the $50 billion handout to big business that will gift more than $7 billion directly to Australia's big four banks, the most profitable banking industry in the world—I should get a job there—and one which is ridden by systemic failures that cripple hardworking customers and small businesses for nothing more than profiteering. The people on the streets of Lindsay would tell this Prime Minister to use this money to reverse the cuts to bulk-billing and pathology services, reinstate a proper school funding model and build a proper NBN in the suburbs of Lindsay where they cannot even access ADSL at the moment. The people of Lindsay and Australia deserve more.

Mr SUKKAR (Deakin) (16:13): I suppose we got what we deserved with such a tawdry, hopeless MPI today. This has been one of the less inspiring debates, I must say, particularly from those opposite. Let's just try and look at some facts. When we look at the success or otherwise of a government, we by definition on this side of the House have a different set of criteria. I remember very vividly during the Gillard years that their measure of success was how many pieces of legislation they rammed through this parliament. I quite often remember Gillard or Rudd or a minister at the time talking about X hundred pieces of legislation or regulation that they had passed through here. That is not our definition of success on this side of the House.

When I look at the success of a government, I look at the scoreboard. A number of members on this side of the House have spoken about the scoreboard, and one of the most important scores is our GDP figures. We are growing at 3.3 per cent per annum. I know members opposite take that for granted, but we are the fastest growing economy in the G7 and that is what is going to underpin our prosperity into the future. It will assist in addressing the most significant issue of our time, which unfortunately does not appear to be in the speaking notes of those opposite, and that is repairing the budget. All we hear from those opposite and from the Leader of the Opposition and his shadow frontbench is talk about a constituency or a group that they want to spend more money on. The reality is that this government is focused on ensuring that we get our fiscal house in order. Until the Labor Party accept that that is one of the existential challenges not only for this side of parliament but also for our entire parliament, they will be languishing in opposition, because the Australian people instinctively understand that a government is no different to their families and no different to a small business.

We must start living within our means. When all I hear from those opposite is 'Liberal cuts' and 'Liberals reducing spending', it is a mark of success, because until government starts living within its own means all we are doing is burdening the next generation with higher taxes. Every dollar we borrow now is a tax that our children and our grandchildren will have to pay into the future. When we are looking at the markers of success, that figure alone indicates that this government is showing leadership and stewardship of the economy. But we do not take credit for it. The Labour Party take credit for successes in the economy. We take some credit, but we ultimately accept that it is hardworking private individuals who must take credit for those things. That is why we want to empower them. We want to ensure that they can harness their creative talents to improve the economy.

The second marker of success that those opposite do not talk about, and that we seldom get questions about in question time, is national security. The fact that we are very blessed in this country to have a security environment that, in my view, many jurisdictions around the world would wish for is a credit to the government, but I will also say that it is a credit to this entire parliament. I give credit particularly to the Leader of the Opposition for ensuring that our agenda to strengthen our national security has not been scuppered by the hard left of the Labor Party, whose views on national security we know about instinctively. That is— (Time expired)

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Coulton ): The time for the discussion has concluded.

Mr PYNE (Sturt—Leader of the House and Minister for Defence Industry) (16:48): I move:

That standing orders 2, 131, 132, 198, 204, 205, 206, 215, 217, 220 and 222 be amended, and new standing order 205a be inserted, as follows:

2    Definitions

The following meanings apply throughout these standing orders.

…

petition is a formal request (in paper or electronic form) to the House to take action that is within its power to take. A petition for presentation to the House must comply with the standing orders. An electronic petition (e-petition) is a petition that persons may sign through the House of Representatives e-petition website (House website). A paper petition includes any petition that is not an electronic petition.

…

present a document means table a document. A document presented to the Federation Chamber is taken to have been presented to the House.

…

visitor means a person other than a Member or parliamentary official or an infant being cared for by a Member (standing order 257(d)).

131        Successive divisions

(a) If a division is called following a division and there is no intervening debate, the Speaker shall appoint tellers immediately and the bells shall be rung for one minute.

(b) If there is a successive division, Members who wish to vote in the same way as in the previous division must remain seated until the result of the division is announced. The tellers may record each Member’s vote as being the same as it was in the previous division unless a Member reports to them. A Member must report to the tellers if he or she:

   (i) wishes to vote differently to his or her vote in the previous division; or

   (ii) voted in the previous division and does not wish to vote in the current division; or

   (iii) did not vote in the previous division and wishes to vote in the current division.

(c) The vote shall be counted as in standing order 130 if:

   (i) in the Speaker’s opinion most Members wish to vote differently to their votes in the previous division; or

   (ii) any confusion or error occurs in the count by the tellers.

132        New division in case of confusion, error or misadventure

(a) If confusion, or error concerning the numbers reported by the tellers, occurs and cannot be corrected, the House shall divide again.

(b) If a division has miscarried through misadventure caused by a Member being accidentally absent or some similar incident, any Member may move on the same sitting day, without notice and without the need for a seconder—

That the House divide again.

If this motion is agreed to the question shall be put again and the result of the subsequent division shall be the decision of the House.

198        Report to the House

(a) When the Federation Chamber has fully considered a bill referred to it, a final question shall be put immediately and resolved without amendment or debate—

That this bill be reported to the House, with[out] [an] amendment[s] [and with (an) unresolved question(s)].

(b) The Clerk of the Federation Chamber shall certify a copy of the bill or other item of business to be reported to the House, together with any schedules of amendments and unresolved questions. Unless otherwise provided, the Speaker shall report the matter at a later hour that day when other business is not before the House.

204        Rules for the form and content of petitions

(a) A petition must:

   (i) be addressed to the House of Representatives;

   (ii) refer to a matter on which the House has the power to act;

   (iii) state the reasons for petitioning the House; and

   (iv) contain a request for action by the House.

(b) The terms of the petition must not contain any alterations and must not exceed 250 words. The terms must be placed at the top of the first page of the petition and the request of the petition must be at the top of every other page. The terms of an e-petition must be available through the House website.

(c) The terms of the petition must not be illegal or promote illegal acts. The language used must be moderate.

(d) An e-petition must be in English. A paper petition must be in English or be accompanied by a translation certified to be correct. The person certifying the translation must place his or her name and address on the translation.

(e) No letters, affidavits or other documents should be attached to the petition. Any such attachments will be removed before presentation to the House.

(f) A petition from a corporation must be made under its common seal. Otherwise it will be received as the petition of the individuals who signed it.

205        Rules for signatures—paper petitions

(a) Every petition must contain the signature and full name and address of a principal petitioner on the first page of the petition.

(b) All the signatures on a paper petition must meet the following requirements:

   (i) Each signature must be made by the person signing in his or her own handwriting. Only a petitioner incapable of signing may ask another person to sign on his or her behalf.

   (ii) Signatures must not be copied, pasted or transferred on to the petition or placed on a blank page on the reverse of a sheet containing the terms of the petition.

(c) A Member must not be a principal petitioner or signatory to a paper petition.

205a        Rules for e-petitions

(a) A principal petitioner for an e-petition must provide the petitioner’s full name and address.

(b) The posted period for an e-petition is to be four weeks from the date of publication on the House website.

(c) Once published on the House website the terms of an e-petition cannot be altered.

(d) Once the posted period for an e-petition has elapsed, the petition shall be presented to the House in accordance with standing order 207.

(e) Names must not be copied, pasted or transferred on to an e-petition.

(f) A Member must not be a principal petitioner or signatory to an e-petition.

206        Submitting a petition for presentation

(a) Petitions may be submitted:

   (i) on paper, directly to the Standing Committee on Petitions or via a Member; or

   (ii) electronically, through the House website.

(b) The Standing Committee on Petitions must check that each petition submitted for presentation complies with the standing orders, and if the petition complies it shall be approved for presentation to the House.

215        General purpose standing committees

(a) The following general purpose standing committees shall be appointed:

   (i) Standing Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources;

   (ii) Standing Committee on Communications and the Arts;

   (iii) Standing Committee on Economics;

   (iv) Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training;

   (v) Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy;

   (vi) Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport;

   (vii) Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs;

   (viii) Standing Committee on Industry, Innovation, Science and Resources;

   (ix) Standing Committee on Infrastructure, Transport and Cities;

   (x) Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs; and

   (xi) Standing Committee on Tax and Revenue.

(b) A committee appointed under paragraph (a) may inquire into and report on any matter referred to it by either the House or a Minister, including any pre-legislation proposal, bill, motion, petition, vote or expenditure, other financial matter, report or document.

(c) A committee may make any inquiry it wishes to make into annual reports of government departments and authorities and reports of the Auditor-General presented to the House. The following qualifications shall apply to these inquiries:

   (i) Reports shall stand referred to committees under a schedule presented by the Speaker to record the areas of responsibility of each committee.

   (ii) The Speaker shall determine any question about responsibility for a report or part of a report.

   (iii) The period during which an inquiry into an annual report may be started by a committee shall end on the day the next annual report of the department or authority is presented to the House.

   (iv) If a committee intends to inquire into all or part of a report of the Auditor-General, the committee must notify the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit of its intention, in writing.

(d) Each committee appointed under paragraph (a) shall consist of eight members: five government Members and three non-government Members, except for the Standing Committee on Economics, the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training and the Standing Committee on Infrastructure, Transport and Cities, which shall consist of ten members: six government Members, three opposition Members and one non-aligned Member. Each committee may have its membership supplemented by up to four members for a particular inquiry, with a maximum of two extra government and two extra opposition or non-aligned Members. Supplementary members shall have the same participatory rights as other members, but may not vote.

217        Library Committee (To be omitted)

220        Standing Committee on Petitions

(a) A Standing Committee on Petitions shall be appointed to receive and process petitions, and to inquire into and report to the House on any matter relating to petitions and the petitions system.

(b) The committee shall consist of eight members: five government and three non-government members.

222        Selection Committee

(a) A Selection Committee shall be appointed to:

   (i) arrange the timetable and order of committee and delegation business and private Members’ business for each sitting Monday in accordance with standing orders 39 to 41;

   (ii) select private Members’ notices and other items of private Members’ and committee and delegation business for referral to the Federation Chamber, or for return to the House; and

   (iii) select bills that the committee regards as controversial or as requiring further consultation or debate for referral to the relevant standing or joint committee in accordance with standing order 143.

(b) The committee shall consist of eleven members: the Speaker, or in the absence of the Speaker the Deputy Speaker, the Chief Government Whip or his or her nominee, the Chief Opposition Whip or his or her nominee, the Third Party Whip or his or her nominee, four government Members, and three non-government Members. The Speaker shall be the Chair of the committee. A quorum shall be three members of the committee.

(c) For committee and delegation business and private Members’ business, the committee may determine the order of consideration of the matters, and the times allotted for debate on each item and for each Member speaking.

(d) In relation to committee and delegation business and private Members’ business the committee must report its determinations to the House in time for its decisions to be published on the Notice Paper of the sitting Thursday before the Monday being considered. In relation to bills the committee must report its determinations as soon as practical in respect of each bill or each group of bills.

(e) Reports of the committee under paragraph (d) shall be treated as having been adopted when they are presented. Reports shall be published in Hansard.

(f) A referral by determination of the Selection Committee pursuant to paragraph (a)(ii) or (a)(iii), once the determination has been reported to the House, is deemed to be a referral by the House.

It is not my intention to delay the House unnecessarily by debating this first tranche of standing order changes. I have, for the benefit of the House, put two notices of motion to change the standing orders. The first, which we are dealing with now, is the standing order reforms suggested by the procedure committee and the petitions committee from the 44th Parliament. The second group is the suggestions to change the way we schedule the parliament, and we will deal with those separately. It is my understanding that the opposition is opposed to some of these changes in both of these different notices of motion, and it is not my intention to truncate constructive debate. However, if the debate becomes not constructive, then I reserve the right to do so.

The first tranche of reforms to the standing orders has been proposed by the Clerk and, in some instances, by the petitions committee or by the procedure committee, to make clear certain practices that the House has adopted over recent years, particularly because of technological changes—for example, in the way that we operate in our daily working lives—which have not been reflected in the standing orders. These are particularly around things like e-petitions, to make it easier for committees and for the parliament to operate and to put some of those conventions, if you like, in the standing orders. This makes it easier for the person occupying the chair to be able to interpret what the House wants and how we want our arrangements to be managed by the chair, and it makes changes to the standing orders that allow the Federation Chamber and this chamber itself to operate more effectively and efficiently. The changes will establish the general purpose standing committees in the way that we have outlined previously and, as the member for Grayndler has correctly pointed out, will not continue with the Library Committee, which has been omitted from this 45th Parliament. The changes will also continue the arrangements around the Selection Committee that were in place in the 44th Parliament.

I would have thought most of these matters were entirely non-controversial, and I would be very surprised if they were opposed by the opposition or, for that matter, the crossbenchers. We have, as they say these days, socialised these changes with the crossbenchers, and I am hoping that we will garner support for the changes that are proposed by the Clerk, the petitions committee and the procedure committee. That is the first motion.

I should point out to the crossbenchers that I have been studying their letter to me about other changes to the standing orders. That remains a live prospect for us in the future, but we want to get these machinery changes to the standing orders done first. We then of course want to change the sitting pattern of the House. I understand the Manager of Opposition Business does not want to finish at 8 pm as a hard finish, which I think will come as a surprise to many people on both sides of the House, particularly those with young families. But, nevertheless, we will deal with that matter next.

I hope that we will garner the support of the crossbenchers for these machinery changes. With regard to the further changes that they propose, I am happy to keep talking about those within the government and to the crossbenchers, because I think there is merit in some of them. There are some where I do not believe there is merit to them, but I do believe there is merit in others, and I will continue to talk to the crossbenchers about those matters.

Mr BURKE (Watson—Manager of Opposition Business) (16:52): The Leader of the House is nearly accurate. When he says that there are some aspects of his amendment to standing orders that are not controversial, that is true—for example, changes to petitions. Allowing e-petitions is something that has been sought in the House for a long time, and it is good to see a first step happening with that in standing orders. But it is quite disingenuous to claim that what was put in a joint letter from the crossbenchers and I to the government some time ago now is something that they still need to spend time reflecting on and considering, when they have been able to rush through changes that deal with what happens when you want to conduct a vote for a second time. I move opposition amendment No. 1:

(1)    Omit proposed standing order 132.

(2)    Omit proposed standing order 215(d), substitute:

      (d) Each committee appointed under paragraph (a) shall consist of seven members: four government Members and three non-government Members, provided that if a non-aligned Member is appointed to a committee, such committee shall consist of eight members: four government Members, three non-government Members, and one non-aligned Member. Each committee may have its membership supplemented by up to four members for a particular inquiry, with a maximum of two extra government and two extra opposition or non-aligned Members. Supplementary members shall have the same participatory rights as other members, but may not vote.

(3)    Omit proposed standing order 222, substitute:

222 Selection Committee

(a)   A Selection Committee shall be appointed to:

      (i) arrange the timetable and order of committee and delegation business and private Members’ business for each sitting Monday in accordance with standing orders 39 to 41;

      (ii) select private Members’ notices and other items of private Members’ and committee and delegation business for referral to the Federation Chamber, or for return to the House;

      (iii) recommend items of private Members’ business to be voted on. Three members of the committee are sufficient to recommend an item to be voted on;

      (iv) select bills that the committee regards as controversial or as requiring further consultation or debate for referral to the relevant standing or joint committee in accordance with standing order 143. One member of the committee is sufficient to select a bill for referral; and

      (v) subject to standing order 1, set speaking times for second reading debates.

(b)   The committee shall consist of eleven members: the Speaker, or in the absence of the Speaker the Deputy Speaker, the Chief Government Whip or his or her nominee, the Chief Opposition Whip or his or her nominee, the Third Party Whip or his or her nominee, three government Members, two opposition Members and two non-aligned Members. The Speaker shall be the Chair of the committee. A quorum shall be three members of the committee.

(c)   For committee and delegation business and private Members’ business, the committee may determine the order of consideration of the matters, and the times allotted for debate on each item and for each Member speaking.

(d)   Any non-aligned Member who has a notice of motion or order of the day on the Notice Paper may attend a meeting of the committee to advocate for its selection.

(e)   In relation to committee and delegation business and private Members’ business the committee must report its determinations to the House in time for its decisions to be published on the Notice Paper of the sitting Thursday before the Monday being considered. In relation to bills the committee must report its determinations as soon as practical in respect of each bill or each group of bills.

(f)   Reports of the committee under paragraph (d) shall be treated as having been adopted when they are presented. Reports shall be published in Hansard.

(g)   A referral by determination of the Selection Committee pursuant to paragraph (a) (ii) or (a) (iii), once the determination has been reported to the House, is deemed to be a referral by the House.

This amendment omits the change which is proposed by the Leader of the House to standing order 132. He says, 'You only told me 10 days ago.' How long do we think they have been considering a need to change this standing order? The proposed change to 132 deals with this: