Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (12:45): This is the time at which Mr Taylor's representatives were ordered by the Senate to table a copy of the City of Sydney annual report and any documents supporting the claim that he made in his false documents that were doctored. I was advised that the government would be tabling something. It's 12.45, and there's nothing yet. On that basis I will proceed. If the minister here is able to tell us that they're going to table something that actually supports Mr Taylor's claim, I will seek leave at that point to make further remarks.

I would make this point: this motion was a test for the government, and it has failed that test. It was a motion that required the government to table any evidence it had to support Mr Taylor's repeated claims that he didn't doctor a document to attack his political opponent. This is a scandal that started with a dodgy trick by a mediocre minister, and it's ended with the integrity of the entire government in tatters.

Today Mr Taylor had a chance to come clean. He had a chance to clear his name. He had a chance to put this to bed and get on with governing, but guess what he's done? He's refused. Mr Taylor has labelled this fiasco 'a grubby smear'. If that were true he'd be able to prove it, but he refuses to put forward any evidence to clear his name. The only reason you would choose not to clear your name is that you can't, because you have done exactly what you have been accused of, because you have been caught red-handed.

On 23 October this year Angus Taylor used a forged document in a botched political hit job. He took a swing at a local mayor and instead gave himself an uppercut. Mr Taylor used false travel figures in official ministerial correspondence to the Lord Mayor of Sydney, which was provided to The Daily Telegraph, and he claimed—and still inexplicably claims—that the document containing the doctored figures came from the City of Sydney's website. He has claimed this over and over again in the parliament—six times, to be precise—but he has got no proof to back it up, not a skerrick of evidence, and today he has refused to provide any.

In fact, all the evidence to date is that the document with the fake travel figures was never on the City of Sydney website. Metadata from the City of Sydney proves that the annual report hasn't been changed since it was published in November last year, and the public internet archives of the website clearly show that the annual reports published on the website on 27 March, 20 April, 19 June and 24 October this year contained the correct travel figures. But, somehow, Mr Taylor still expects the Australian public to believe that the website said something different when his office looked at it. His version of events is not believable—and Senator McGrath knows it.

Those opposite could have provided any evidence to support Mr Taylor's claims, but they refuse to do so. Do you know why they refuse? Because his deception has been like a web into which more and more ministers are drawn. The Prime Minister, by interfering in the New South Wales police strike force investigation, is now complicit in Minister Taylor's dishonesty and deception. The entire government is so deep in this fiasco that everyone on that side of the chamber is now complicit in the dishonesty and deception. This lack of integrity is not only an attribute of Mr Taylor's; it is becoming the defining trait of this entire government.

The minister refuses to explain exactly what occurred here, refuses to outline his personal involvement in a botched political hit, refuses to name the staff who are complicit and refuses to tell the truth to the parliament. His behaviour has, frankly, been appalling. By his behaviour, Mr Taylor demonstrates he is unfit for the office he holds. He isn't fit to be a minister of the Crown. Deliberately misleading the parliament is a contempt of the parliament and a breach of ministerial standards. But, most importantly, his behaviour is below that which the public expect from cabinet ministers. It is the worst of politics: petty, dishonest and incompetent. Any serious government—any credible government—would be worried that this scandal would be distracting from their policies and their agenda. But this government has no integrity, and Mr Taylor is the poster boy for a government that has no integrity.

What Australians have is a discredited government protecting a disgraced minister. He failed a test today. He was given the opportunity by this Senate—in fact, he was required by this Senate—to provide any shred of evidence to back up his version of events, and he provided none. His version is not believable. He has no credibility. He has no integrity. He should no longer be a minister.

Senator McGRATH (Queensland—Deputy Government Whip in the Senate) (12:50): It is time that we had a serious conversation about nuclear power in Australia. In July this year I joined my colleague Keith Pitt, the member for Hinkler, in calling for an inquiry into the nuclear economy in Australia and exploring the opportunities associated with capitalising on our uranium-rich nation. I commend the Liberal-National government for establishing a parliamentary inquiry, which is currently being chaired by my fellow Sunshine Coast colleague the member for Fairfax, Ted O'Brien.

As a resource-rich nation it is reasonable that we take the necessary steps to understand the state of the nuclear industry in Australia. Specifically, it is vital that we understand the research and development from around the globe. Most of all, it is crucial that we consider the benefits of a domestic nuclear industry to the national economy—in particular, the capacity for Australia to benefit domestically through the uptake of existing nuclear technologies or from new and emerging nuclear reactor technologies, such as the small modular reactor that is currently being developed in North America.

Additionally, with our significant endowment of uranium, it makes sense that we explore all the steps of the nuclear fuel cycle, such as fabrication, fuel enrichment, reprocessing, mining and the exporting of uranium and other fuels. It is well documented that Australia is uranium rich. Indeed, we hold 30 per cent of the world's uranium. However, we are only the third-largest producer, currently behind Kazakhstan and Canada, of uranium. With no doubt, Australia's uranium can only be used for peaceful purposes, such as civil nuclear power and nuclear medicine, which we can ensure through stringent trade agreements in addition to the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. If anything, we are best positioned to exploit uranium and use our foreign relationships to ensure that it's only being used for energy generation, not for other purposes. On the environmental front, the inquiry has explored the extent to which nuclear and existing electricity generation sources contribute to greenhouse gas emissions through their life cycles.

I propose that our approach should align with the other 31 countries, including France and the United States: that we seek to implement nuclear energy to support our energy grid and ensure baseload power. As it is fully feasible, the domestic nuclear industry presents an opportunity not only to generate affordable and emission-free energy but also to foster our untapped potential in science and research that includes nuclear medicine, material and agricultural research, and world-class training and employment opportunities. The Minerals Council of Australia reports that as Australia begins to realise its uranium potential it would equate to an approximate $9 billion industry by 2040 and deliver more construction and higher-skilled jobs. This data is reinforced by the success of the nuclear industry in other countries around the world. This is also supported by countless examples and evidence from around the globe which demonstrate new technologies, like small modular reactors, which are both effective and safe for constructing and developing nuclear energy.

Additionally, these technologies have come a long way in managing the by-product through enhanced safety methods and configurability that is designed to produce less waste. This enhanced safety conforms well to Australia's stringent workplace and health regulations that will ensure that we can manage any environmental and storage hurdles. This aligns with improving technology to see countries like France and the United States, along with 29 other countries, operate nuclear power reactors and save 2.2 billion tonnes in global CO2 emissions.

As it stands, Australia is the only G20 country that prohibits nuclear power. Nuclear may in fact be our long-term, environmentally friendly solution to generating energy and, most importantly, bringing down energy prices. Take France, which not only produces three-quarters of its electricity with nuclear but also pays 15 per cent less for its electricity than fellow EU counterparts. It's time we had a serious adult conversation about nuclear. As well documented, the threats and dangers of nuclear are spawned out of either regulatory mismanagement or corruption. However, what we can't allow are the nay-sayers and the conspiracy theorists, who mostly come from the left side of politics, who are stopping the country from having this grown-up conversation.

Senator VAN (Victoria) (12:55): I rise to make a statement on the parlous state of energy supply in Victoria. My once great state is now facing a high probability of electricity blackouts this summer due to the failures of the Andrews government. Let there be no doubt, the blame for these blackouts will be the energy policies of cynical and ideologically driven settings, produced to scrape a few votes from Labor's hard-Left green mates. As we've seen recently, Victorian power prices are now some of the highest in the country. This is a direct product of the Andrews government's politically driven but economically naive policies. Victoria used to have the lowest power prices in the country. And I can hear those opposite asking: 'Wow, why was that? And I'm happy to tell them.

Senator Chisholm: We hadn't said anything.

Senator VAN: Can I call the senator to order, please?

Senator Chisholm: What about Hazelwood, though?

Senator VAN: That was a product of your government's policy settings. I will get onto that, Senator Chisholm.

Senator Chisholm: If you're going to encourage it, deal with it.

Senator VAN: Mr Acting Deputy President, if I could call to order Senator Chisholm, please.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Gallacher ): Senator Van, resume your seat. Interjections are disorderly. I call both sides to order and allow Senator Van to make his contribution with silence in the chamber.

Senator VAN: Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy President. Don't worry, you will get your turn. I was explaining to those opposite why we used to have the lowest power prices. This was not because of generation technologies; it was because of an abundant supply of fuel. I know those on my side understand supply-demand economics, but a quick lesson for those opposite. If you have more fuel than you can use, it drives down prices—simple. Labor and the Greens will chip in with, 'Well, we have all this sunshine; we have all this wind, more than we can use.' Of course they are right, to a point. When the sun sets and the wind stops, how does your supply look then? Pretty low, right? So what happens to prices, Senator Rice? They go up.

Senator Rice interjecting—

Senator VAN: Have you heard of night-time?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Van, please resume your seat. Contributions should be addressed to the chair. Interjections are disorderly and are not usually from people making a contribution. Please continue and address the chair.

Senator VAN: Thank you, Mr Acting Deputy President. So this is worse at night-time. The price signals caused by the oversupply in daylight hours sends a signal to dispatchable generators that their supply is unviable. You can see a direct link between the policy settings arranged by 'Blackout Dan' and the closure of Hazelwood. So while Victoria had an oversupply of cheap generation that drove economic development and jobs based on low power prices, we now have to import higher priced energy, which means we will export jobs. So these price signals are leading to a lack of investment in coal generation which means less or no firm dispatchable power in the future. The product of this always will be blackouts in the once great state of Victoria.

The solution to this should be very simple. Let's use another abundant cheap power source that is dispatchable when the intermittent power supplies are not available. That solution is gas-fired electricity generation, or should be. Victoria has a long history of cheap, abundant, natural gas. This historically has come from our Bass Strait gas fields. However, they're getting to the end of their lives. Commonsense would dictate we use our other gas reserves to back fill. But no. 'Blackout Dan' has put a moratorium on all gas exploration and production in Victoria. So now we're importing gas from Queensland down a very long expensive pipe. Anna Palaszczuk must be loving her mate Dan because he's sending royalties and jobs to her state, not keeping them in his. The most galling part of this is that, in an attempt to stop blackouts from happening due to his stupid renewable energy target, Dan is rumoured—and I believe in these rumours—to be buying backup diesel generation for when the sun goes down and the wind stops. In case those opposite aren't aware, diesel is the most polluting and the most expensive form of energy generation. The people of Victoria are not stupid. They can see that the renewable target, while a noble aim, is a completely irresponsible energy policy. You can't claim to be looking out for Victorians and for the environment while pushing up the cost of living and polluting our cities and towns with diesel generation. Dan Andrews and his energy minister need to stand up and do the right thing by the people of Victoria. Lift the moratorium on gas exploration and production— (Time expired)

Senator CHISHOLM ( Queensland ) ( 13:00 ): Earlier this month BMA—BHP Mitsubishi Alliance—announced that they would be automating 300 jobs at the Goonyella mine in Central Queensland by rolling out 86 driverless trucks over the next two years. BMA have confirmed that the shift would affect production and maintenance employees, and BMA have said there would be no redundancies—either forced or voluntary. They can say this because the impacted workers are all labour hire employees.

The Liberal and National parties' attacks on job security over the last little while have allowed mine owners to casualise their workforce, and this is having a devastating impact on regional communities throughout Queensland. Over the past two decades mine owners have casualised a lot of their workforce. I'm reliably informed that the Goonyella mine had more than 2,100 permanent employees around the turn of the century, yet today has less than 1,000. Even though the workforce has grown, many of these casuals have been given the same job for five years, but they can be let go at a moment's notice.

The miners union have called on BMA to not make any employees redundant. They called for additional jobs and apprenticeships to be created in other parts of their business to offset any changes in job numbers and for the remote operations to be based on or near the mine, rather than in a capital city like Brisbane. Isaac regional mayor, Anne Baker, also met with BMA to understand the impacts of the proposal and to know how they intend to manage them. She said, 'Our community will see through any propaganda and will demand to know how the planned residual impacts on our community will be mitigated.'

We understand that these decisions are not taken lightly, but the company has a social responsibility obligation to engage the community and its workers on the proposals, the impacts and the way it intends to manage the impacts. So while technology does change and these changes can bring about benefits, it is important that those people are looked after, reskilled, and given good, secure, local work. According to research by consultancy firm McKinsey earlier this year, the automation of the nation's workforce will be most pronounced in mining regions, where it found that more than 30 per cent of jobs could be affected. A town like Mackay could see 27 per cent of jobs affected. They also said that, left to its own devices, automation would have significant distribution impacts. During the peak of transition, increased job churn could see Australia's unemployment rate temporarily spike by 2.5 per cent. So in the Mackay, Isaac and Whitsunday Region, which has an unemployment rate of 5.7, it could jump to 8.2. Without retraining for vulnerable workers, especially administrative and manual workers, for those in vulnerable regions income inequality could widen by up to 30 per cent.

Workers in Central Queensland are rightly sceptical of the impacts that automation will bring to their communities. You only need to look at what is happening with automation across the Pilbara, where roles are shifted to Perth out of communities. BHP need to commit to keeping jobs in regional areas and should rule out setting up automation hubs in Brisbane or interstate capitals. These jobs belong in regional Queensland, not Brisbane. Any automation hubs should be set up in mining towns like Moranbah or Dysart, or in regional cities like Rockhampton, Mackay or Townsville.

We want a mining industry that provides secure local jobs. For the companies that don't do that, there should be a price to pay. The LNP, at the last election, campaigned hard that it was the party for the coal workers, and the LNP guaranteed that the jobs of those who worked in coal would be secure. We need to see action from the LNP to ensure that all workers are looked after in the mining industry. The LNP needs to do more to ensure that people are not being forced onto labour hire, especially when they're just doing the same job for less pay and in worse conditions. The LNP have sided with mining companies over mine workers when it comes to casualisation and labour hire, and now they're doing it again when it comes to automation. This is just another example of the LNP failing regional Queenslanders.

Sadly, we are seeing a similar story in Bundaberg. The region has been drought declared by the Queensland state government. However, when they asked the local member, the member for Hinkler, Keith Pitt, and the federal government for a similar declaration, they were snubbed for not meeting the requirements due to, as the Bundaberg NewsMail put it, 'a bureaucratic flaw'. This is just another example of the member for Hinkler and the Nationals letting down drought affected communities. This is because Bundaberg has a high proportion of people in food manufacturing, rather than in primary agriculture—

Senator McGrath: Do you want to talk about Paradise Dam?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Polley ): Order! I'll just remind senators that interjections are disorderly. Senator Chisholm has the call and he should be heard in silence.

Senator CHISHOLM: This is because Bundaberg has a higher proportion of people in food manufacturing, rather than in primary agriculture. It's crazy to think that these industries are not impacted by the flow-on effects of the drought. And there is evidence that those primary industries are. A press release from Australian macadamia growers says that, despite planting more trees, production is down 5½ thousand tonnes over the last 12 months. So, despite there being more trees, production is down. And if we look at the Isis Central Sugar Mill, this year it's down 200,000 tonnes on where it was last year. So we can see the impact of the drought on those producers.

Bundaberg has experienced some of the driest conditions on record, with annual recorded rainfall being half a metre behind on average. The rejections mean that Bundaberg is not eligible for the federal government's Drought Communities Program, which gives each council $1 million for infrastructure and $3,000 to eligible farming households. This is money that would flow to help businesses deal with the immense challenges that drought has brought them. The minister has used this discretion previously in Bega in New South Wales and in Peterborough in South Australia, which has been reported in the media recently. Does this mean that he has refused to use his discretion to add Bundaberg to this important program?

The council first wrote to Minister Littleproud in July and got a response in September, saying that it would be looked into as part of the quarterly review. It's now December, and the council hasn't seen any action from Minister Littleproud. He has previously used his discretionary power to allow councils to be eligible for funding, but why not his home state town of Bundaberg? The member for Hinkler, Keith Pitt, and Minister Littleproud need to step up and allow the declaration of the state government to declare Bundaberg drought affected so that it can receive the funding support now rather than next year.

I would say to the member for Hinkler and to Senator McGrath that perhaps there should be a bit less time focused on nuclear power and more time on providing practical help to those communities in Bundaberg that have been impacted by the drought and that deserve support from this federal government, that has once again neglected Bundaberg and those drought affected communities. They deserve so much better. I am prepared to stand up for them, and the Labor opposition is prepared to stand up for them.

Senator RICE (Victoria) (13:08): Today is a dark day for the Senate, with the repeal of the medevac bill. On the basis of a secret deal between the government and Senator Lambie, the government has dismantled the only shred of humanity that our offshore detention system had. It was the only objective, independent insight into the system. Be in no doubt: it was a system and it is a system that is designed for secrecy. It is designed to keep people out of sight. It is designed to keep people's suffering out of sight and out of mind—out of the spotlight of scrutiny.

The medevac legislation meant that decisions on people's health and, potentially, their lives, were being made by doctors. We know that there are sick people on Manus Island and Nauru—people who have been kept in indefinite detention for over seven years. Anybody who has read Behrouz Boochani's award-winning book, No Friend But the Mountains, understands the desperation felt by people locked up indefinitely—locked up without hope.

We have all heard the stories of people paralysed by lack of hope, lack of meaning, lack of anything to look forward to, continuing nothingness—people who withdraw, people who stop eating and drinking, people who lie paralysed on their beds day after day after day. I feel so much for those people today, people who have not committed a crime, people who have been tortured by our government—yes, tortured. The United Nations tells us that indefinite detention is torture. Medevac gave these people hope that, as sick people, they would get the medical care they needed, the medical care they deserved, the medical care that we as Australians have an obligation to give them. I'm thinking of the hundreds of refugees on Manus and Nauru who this morning have had that hope ripped away from them. I know they will be feeling desperate. I want them to know that we will be there for them. The community is there for them. Certainly the Australian Greens are there for them. The majority of the Australian community is there for them. We will keep fighting for their safety. We will keep fighting to close the camps and to bring them here to rebuild their lives.

I haven't had the privilege of meeting those people who our government have locked up on Manus and Nauru, but I have had the privilege of getting to know many people who have arrived in Australia as refugees or as people seeking asylum. I've got a motion in the Senate this afternoon about two of them who are currently languishing jailed, denied their freedom, in the Villawood detention centre. Let's call it what it is—the Villawood jail. They are jailed purely for doing what is their right—to seek asylum if their lives are in danger. My motion this afternoon is about two journalists from Saudi Arabia who are being held there. They are two journalists who have made significant contributions, working with international publications, and their work has been praised by colleagues and international journalists. To say it's not easy being a journalist in Saudi Arabia is an understatement. The case of Jamal Khashoggi is sobering. A UN investigation concluded that his death constituted an extrajudicial killing for which the state of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is responsible. That's what can happen to journalists in Saudi Arabia.

The two men I've been in contact with are not only journalists; they're also gay. They were living in their home country, where homosexuality is punishable by death. It has been reported that they were outed by their own government in retaliation for liaising with the international media. They feared persecution, torture and death. So they did what was their right under international law—they fled Saudi Arabia and came to Australia to find safety. But instead of being welcomed with open arms and shown what a welcoming, caring country we could be, they were immediately detained. They told The Guardian Australia: 'We ran away from being detained arbitrarily in jail for no reason, only to arrive in Australia and find ourselves here in jail. We've been threatened with it in Saudi, but it never actually happened until we came here.' That's the Australia we're living in today. Through communicating with these men, I've seen photos of the results of the violent attacks LGBTIQ+ people face in detention centres in Australia. It's an incredibly dangerous place for LGBTIQ people seeking asylum. I understand these two journalists have been threatened with violence in detention and they live in fear for their safety.

I am here today for them and for all people seeking asylum in Australia. Australia can and must do better. We cannot continue along a path that involves locking up people unjustly. I urge my fellow senators in this place, and all Australians, to look at these issues for what they are—matters of life and death. Twelve people have died in detention on Nauru and Manus so far, and today's repeal of medevac makes it more likely that more will die. People's fates are now once again in the hands of an uncaring, untrustworthy government, in the hands of Minister Dutton—people who justify their cruel regime on the flawed and useless theory of deterrence and use that to mercilessly shred people's human rights, their right to safety, their right to asylum.

Those of us who have lost a loved one suddenly or randomly in circumstances that are random and seemingly unfair know how gut-wrenching this is, know the grief that those who are left behind are left with, know how their lives feel being ripped apart. And this is what our government and Senator Lambie are heartlessly imposing on innocent people who have already suffered so much. The Greens believe that our society can be so much better. We believe that seeking asylum is a human right and that people who enter Australian territory to seek asylum do so lawfully. We believe that Australia must uphold its humanitarian and legal obligations to people seeking asylum and refugee, to grant refugees protection and to reunite families as is required by international human rights law and the 1951 Refugee Convention and its protocol. We believe that people should be treated with dignity—surely that is not too much to ask?—and that we, as Australians, should be proud of the contribution we make to our community and the world. We should not hide behind our borders attacking those who come to us seeking asylum. We are here today for a fair Australia, one that supports our neighbours and the world, an Australia that we can be proud of.

Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (13:16): I rise this afternoon to recognise the Western Australian finalists in the WA Australian of the Year Awards of 2020. This remarkable array of Western Australians serves our nation with distinction in sections as diverse as education, medicine and science.

Western Australian of the Year finalist Annie Fogarty OAM is an education and social entrepreneur. In 2000, Annie developed the Fogarty Foundation with her husband, Brett, to deliver educational opportunities, to empower young Australians to maximise their potential and to develop stronger communities. The Fogarty EDvance program is perhaps Annie's most notable venture, which improves educational outcomes of students enrolled in schools in lower socioeconomic communities.

The Senior Australian of the Year finalist Professor John Newman is a pioneer in modern obstetrics. John is considered to be one of the world's leading voices in premature birth prevention. In 2018, John delivered a successful national rollout of the Australian Preterm Birth Pretension Alliance, a groundbreaking program which resulted in an eight per cent decrease in the incidences of premature births in Western Australia.

And, of course, Young Australian of the Year finalist Yarlalu Thomas is a medical student and public health fellow, specialising in genetic and rare diseases. Yarlalu works with the WA Register of Developmental Anomalies, Genetic Services WA and Cliniface to revolutionise genetic healthcare services for Indigenous people. Yarlalu, who synthesises modern scientific and medical knowledge with ancient Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander practices, created the UNESCO endorsed Life Languages project to translate medical terminology into Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and indigenous languages more globally.

WA Local Hero finalist Suzy Urbaniak is a decorated science educator and mentor, having received a number of eminent honours, including the Prime Minister's prize for excellence in science teaching and induction into the WA Women's Hall of Fame. Susie, who's motivated by seeing young people understand the applications of science to the real world, developed the Centre of Resources Excellence, a trailblazing science, technology, engineering and maths, or STEM, program which promotes meaningful careers in the resource sector.

It's my distinct pleasure to congratulate Annie Fogarty OAM, Professor John Newman, Yarlalu Thomas and Suzy Urbaniak for their merited recognition as WA finalists in the WA Australian of the Year Awards of 2020.

Secondly, I would like to acknowledge Julie Hughes of Ashdale Secondary College for finalising in the WA Education Awards of 2019. Julie was named as a Western Australian Beginning Teacher of the Year finalist for her innovative methods pertaining to science education. Ashdale Secondary College and its students are enriched by the presence of passionate educators like Julie. Indeed, my niece and nephew both attended and were educated at Ashdale Secondary College in Darch, so I know personally of the quality education provided by educators like Julie. This afternoon it's my hope that the Senate will agree to a notice of motion that I have, supported by other West Australian senators, to recognise the wonderful work of Julie and other notable West Australians.

In November, I had the privilege of supporting a number of occasions scheduled by Perth's Indian communities, namely the Indian Society of Western Australia, known in WA as ISWA, and Sikh Gurdwara Perth Inc. Diwali Mela, or the Hindu Festival of Lights, symbolises the spiritual victory of light over darkness, good over evil and knowledge over ignorance. Diwali Mela saw 30,000 people pour into the Claremont Showground in Perth on 1, 2 and 3 November. I'd like to extend my congratulations—and, I'm sure, the congratulations of all those 30,000 people—to the Indian Society of WA and to its president, Surya Ambati, and the ISWA management committee for providing every West Australian the chance to embrace this distinctly beautiful Hindu custom. I wish Perth's Indian community a very happy Diwali.

Perth's Sikh communities venerated the 550th birth anniversary of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, the founder of Sikhism, at Nagar Kirtan on 9 November. Nagar Kirtan is the processional singing of divine hymns in a neighbourhood or town. The processional singing, which started at Stirling Gardens and concluded at Forrest Chase in Perth, saw more than 3,000 Western Australians enjoy and participate in this important occasion. I compliment the Sikh Gurdwara Perth Inc. president, Mrs Kaur Uppal, and her management committee on sharing Guru Nanak Dev's lessons of honesty, equality and goodwill with the people of Western Australia. Thank you to the Prime Minister also for sending his best wishes to Perth's Sikh communities to mark this special and, indeed, historic occasion.

Gurpurab, on 12 November, saw Sikh Gurdwara Perth in Bennett Springs celebrate the 550th anniversary of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Guru Nanak Gurpurab saw more than 5,000 people celebrate what is one of the most sacred festivals in Sikhism. To the Perth Sikh community, I wish you all a very happy Gurpurab.

The celebrations of the 550th anniversary of the birth of Guru Nanak Dev Ji culminated in a sport and youth day on 16 November. Sikh Gurdwara Perth in Bennett Springs played stadium as youth from the Sikh community participated in a suite of different sports, including netball and soccer. I am looking forward to seeing, as we all saw on that day, the star-studded Perth Sikh Swans showcase their exceptional netball skills. I'm pleased to report the sports youth day was well attended on what turned out to be a very, very warm Perth summer's day.

Finally, the Westnam United Soccer Club celebrated its night of nights at the 2019 Westnam United Soccer Club awards night on 8 November at the Macedonian hall in Perth. Westnam United Soccer Club is symbolic of the benefits of grassroots sport, so I was delighted to provide a congratulatory message to the Westnam United Soccer Club awards night. The Westnam United Soccer Club awards night recognised the coaches, the managers and the players who represent the beating heart of Westnam United Soccer Club, a grassroots sport. I praise the Westnam United Soccer Club for celebrating the particular importance of the role played by its coaches, its officials and its volunteers, who brought this important event together. Of course, I congratulate the winners of the golden boots award, the juniors award, the managers award and the volunteers award. I would like to highlight the winners of the Westnam United Soccer Club MVP awards: Andre Giles from the metro team, Hao Nguyen from the masters team, Kenny Young from the reserves team and Kevin Nguyen from the firsts team. Thank you to Westnam United Soccer Club president Ted Nguyen and his management committee for their dedication to soccer promotion in diverse communities, a mission which I'm committed to supporting as its major sponsor again in the Asian Communities Cup finals next year.

The 2019 Asian Communities Cup sees seniors and masters teams from Perth's Chinese, Korean, Singaporean and Vietnamese communities compete in an exciting knockout competition. I'm privileged to be presenting the 2019 Asian Communities Cup, and I wish all the participants the very, very best of good sportsmanship. To reiterate, I'm dedicated to continuing my support of the Asian Communities Cup in 2020 and beyond and to partnering with the Westnam United Soccer Club to expand the Asian Communities Cup to include junior and women's teams into the future.

Senator McCARTHY (Northern Territory—Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate) (13:24): I wish to put on the parliamentary record that in this week in particular, where all Australians are saying no to violence—no to family and domestic violence; no to emotional and physical violence; no to verbal and written abuse that leads to violence—we must also say a definite no to workplace violence. We have heard many speeches in this Senate on deeply important issues, such as the high rates of murdered women in our country from either violent family relationships or simply while walking home from a night out. Violence against anyone—male, female, children—should never be accepted in our country, should never be accepted anywhere. But it does happen, every day, and we need to remain vigilant to that reality.

Today I share with the Senate my experience of what threats of violence in the workplace can feel like, and how it has been a long and oftentimes paralysing shadow over all that I do. I take this opportunity to express heartfelt gratitude to my team, in particular Johanna, Mandy, Charlie and Kirsty, who have walked with me through all these things. Next month it will be two years since the first abusive phone calls began—calls that my staff have had to endure, trying professionally to deal with constituent issues. But then the tone of the constituent calls took a turn for the worse. Call after call, message after message on my answering machine. Both my Canberra office and my Darwin office became an obsessive focus for the caller, so fixated on wanting to inflict pain, until finally I said, 'Enough!'

In my nearly 15 years of being a Labor member for both Northern Territory and now federal parliaments, I have never had to be concerned daily for my personal safety—until now. Arriving in Canberra is often fraught with anxious thoughts, and not just about politics, which has enough anxieties of its own. It was anxiety about safety. Am I safe? Are my staff safe? They are constant questions built into my daily work routine. Attending public events, especially speaking events at rallies, requires the presence of the Australian Federal Police, such is the nature of the threats against me.

Speaking to hundreds of people gathered at Reclaim the Night rallies, I realised that whilst I was advocating for the rights of the safety of others, I needed to also come to terms with my own need for safety in the workplace. The rough and tumble of political debate and political life is often seen as an expected part of our job description, but threats of violence, graphic threats of being gang raped and beaten, and threats of being killed for doing our job, for being a public figure, is reprehensible. Such threats are designed to maximise so much fear to render the person to whom the threats are levelled at incapable of doing their job, and instead ensure they live their life in a prison of impending danger.

Threats of executing me in the federal parliament have been taken seriously by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, which led to the AFP in Canberra eventually serving the personal protection order I sought for the protection of my staff and I. Mr President, I thank you for not even hesitating over this matter.

I am now aware that other Senate colleagues, including one former senator and also my colleague Senator Dodson, are also now a focus for similar threats. I thank the Northern Territory police and the Northern Territory branch of the Australian Federal Police for your immediate support and advice to my staff and me, and for taking the threats of violence very seriously. I thank also my legal teams in the Northern Territory, in the ACT and in Sydney, in particular solicitor Tim Lynch.

If the AFP is unable to easily locate the defendant or has other priorities, as was the case for my matter, it may be that the application or the orders, or both, are not served on the defendant in a timely manner or at all, rendering the personal protection order scheme ineffective. Such an experience can be debilitating for victims of violence—all victims of violence. Examination of the processes by which such orders are sought and obtained is desperately needed if my experience, as a person of some means, is any guide.

The impact on families is unimaginable, and the conflict it causes simply because they care so much and feel helpless in watching a loved one go through this experience, is completely disempowering for them too. It is one thing to be a political representative and expect a certain level of public criticism, and families do feel the frustration of watching that play out. But, when it comes to rape threats and death threats, my family has been struggling to cope, out of deep concern for me. So today I speak for them also.

My sons, CJ, Gray and Adam, are a tremendous source of loving strength. I stand here as a senator for the Northern Territory because of your belief in me, to keep going, to keep fighting for others, irrespective of the violent threats against me. I thank my dad, nearly 80 years of age. Thank you for your enduring love and wisdom in all these matters. It has been deeply disturbing and hurtful for you, I know. It has been perhaps two of the most difficult years for you and me in particular, and I am deeply thankful we have persevered and got through okay.

I thank my sister Selina, my Yanyuwa and Garrawa families and also my Wiradjuri sister Yvonne for her love and support. But, even deeper than that, I thank you for your fierce determination to spark the fighter in my spirit, to use my fear, to channel it with love, to rise above the hatred and to fight for all people.

My families, you remind me constantly of the higher purpose and focus required in serving the people of the Northern Territory and indeed Australia and that serving with a heart of love is the only way to overcome such hate. For that, I thank you. Bauji barra.

Senator HANSON (Queensland) (13:31): Australians are very concerned about key assets being sold to Chinese companies. I want to remind the government about the reasons for these concerns before the Treasurer rubber stamps any more sales to China. Chinese companies' relationships with the Chinese government are not like private sector companies' relationships with governments in the West. We know this because the owners of these Chinese companies tell us this is the case. In 2016, the government approved the sale of Darwin Port to Landbridge. Mr Ye, representing the company, said the Darwin Port investment was good for the company and served China's foreign policy goal, known as One Belt, One Road. We asked a firm representation Landbridge for evidence of the economic basis for that investment but nothing was forthcoming. The purchase of Darwin Port adds to the number of ports acquired by the Chinese government under its 'string of pearls' strategy.

I now want to move onto food security and the dairy industry. In 2016, the government agreed to the sale of the milk processer and dairy conglomerate Van Diemen's Land Company to the Chinese owned Moon Lake. Conditions were placed on that sale but to date those conditions have not been met, and the government is doing nothing to enforce them. The lack of action by the government casts doubt on whether any conditions placed on the sale of critical Australian assets are worth the paper they're written on.

This year, Mengniu, the company part-owned by the Chinese communist government has offered to buy Bellamy's and Lion drinks and dairy with brands including Dairy Farmers, Pura, Farmers Union and Big M. These sales will make a Hong Kong based company with deep ties to the Chinese government one of four largest milk processors in Australia. And it is not only dairy farmers who will be affected but also the Australian distribution companies, which could be replaced by Chinese ones. As it stands, the government does not require companies to meet domestic demand before exporting. This means there is nothing to stop Mengniu leaving Australia short of milk. Given Australian fresh milk sells for 10 to 15 times more in China than the price here, it's quite possible that we will see that happen.

The Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 provides the legislative framework for foreign investment in Australia. Private foreign investors are required to seek prior government approval before acquiring up to 15 per cent in a corporation or control of a business valued above $248 million at 2013 prices and indexed annually. Foreign governments have a zero asset base price threshold, but in practice it makes no difference to the outcome because all but a handful of applications to buy Australian assets have been denied. Free trade agreements lift the thresholds, with the result that an increasing number of sales happen without the need for government approval. Our government, the Liberals and the Nationals, have no problem with China purchasing our assets, property and essential services. Labor will be less restrictive because they want to raise the threshold by millions. The truth is that in the past decade the Foreign Investment Review Board has approved all but a handful of applications. It makes little difference whether foreign government owned entities apply to purchase critical Australian assets or whether foreign companies apply, because the result is the same: approved. Years ago, people talked about Australia as the 51st state of the United States, but today talk is about Australia as the 24th province of China.

I now want to talk about the potential sale of another critical asset to China. Not all of the story is known yet, but it looks to be like a sequel to 'Timorgate'. In the original story, Australia put listening devices in the rooms of Timorese negotiators, and, once that conduct became public, a dispute arose between our two countries. That dispute was settled with a treaty between Australia and the Democratic Republic of Timor which came into force on 19 August 2019. The sequel to 'Timorgate' began in July 2019 when an Australian ship anchored in the Timor Sea was served with a prohibition notice by NOPSEMA, the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority. The prohibition notice required the Northern Endeavour to cease oil production within 24 hours. Based on the facts available, an improvement notice should have been issued by NOPSEMA to the operator of the Northern Endeavour, rather than a shutdown order. There ought to be a Senate inquiry into the actions of NOPSEMA, because they have overreached their authority. The question arises as to why the government would now resist replacing the prohibition order with an improvement notice and get this Australian oil producer back in production and paying taxes.

Here are a few facts. In 2019, the ship was given a class certificate by Lloyd's verifying the soundness of the hull. A proposal to verify the soundness of the production facility had been rejected, but no alternative was suggested. A four-kilogram object found on the deck in June triggered the prohibition notice. No-one knows where this four-kilogram object came from and no-one saw the object fall. It may have been placed on the deck. The object disappeared before fingerprints could be taken. No-one from NOPSEMA visited the ship after the self-reporting of the four-kilogram object on the deck or before the issuing of the prohibition notice. The owner of the ship had a history of cooperation and had complied with all repair requests. The Northern Endeavour is a purpose-built ship that acts as a floating oil production and storage platform. It is owned by Northern Oil and Gas of Australia. As a result of the government's plan, NOGA has been put into administration. The administrator has received an offer from a Chinese company for the Northern Endeavour, the oil leases and the assets on Timor, including a lease over the airport on the southern side of Timor. Why is the government sending NOGA out of business when it paid approximately $320 million in taxes over three years and can provide oil to Australia? None of the original actions by NOPSEMA make sense; nor does Minister Canavan's resistance to reviewing the situation. In fact, the minister is gleeful about the prospect of winding up the company and seeing 250 Australian jobs lost.

Now, we have to ask the question: who benefits? The answer to that requires us to understand Australia's plans for the Greater Sunrise oil and gas field, which is shared with Timor. Australia wants the hydrocarbons to be processed in Australia, but Timor wants it to be done on their south coast. Quite simply, it doesn't suit the government to have an Australian company successfully operating in Timor, because it strengthens the case for production to be done on the south coast of Timor.

The government has wanted to talk about integrity for weeks but will not look at its own. The government relies on the member for Chisholm, Gladys Liu—as Chinese owned—who has reportedly been investigated by ASIO for her links to the Chinese communist party. More recently, ASIO has been investigating reports of a Chinese plot to install an agent in the federal parliament.

Australians have concerns about the way Chinese owned companies operate in Australia, and for good reason. In the past two years, nine Chinese companies have been delisted from the Australian stock exchange for governance reporting, failure to pay dividends and failure to spend funds as outlined in the prospectus. The companies delisted included Wolf Petroleum, Mandalong Resources and China Dairy Corporation. I recognise that China is our most important trading partner, but we need to bring in new rules around foreign investment and influence. The government could start with the principle of reciprocity. For example, in Italy you cannot buy property unless you come from a country which permits Italians to own their property. We have about 10 million homes in Australia, and 500,000 are owned by Chinese foreign nationals. They are acquiring homes and units at the rate of 50,000 a year.

We need to investigate what is happening with the Northern Endeavour in the Timor Sea. I believe they were hard done by by NOPSEMA. During my Senate estimates inquiry into it, NOPSEMA couldn't answer the questions. Minister Canavan needs to come clean with this because, as far as I'm concerned, something stinks with what is going on here. They want to shut down an Australian company that is paying taxes, yet we have the resources of our gas being taken off the North West Shelf by foreign investors to the tune of $54 billion a year—and they pay only $400 million in tax. Why is the government intent on not giving an improvement notice to this company? Like I said, I don't believe everything is above board. Here we have an Australian company, and probably the one that will give fuel security for Australia, yet we are not doing everything we can to ensure that it keeps the licence up there. They're looking at selling it to a Chinese company. This is oil that is much needed for the country. It holds another eight to 10 years plus in oil supply, which Australia very much needs.

Senator O'SULLIVAN (Western Australia) (13:41): I rise to inform the Senate about a recent fact-finding trip I undertook across the WA border to the South Australian town of Ceduna. The reason that I ventured to Ceduna was to observe the operation of the cashless debit card, which has been in operation in that region for longer than it has been in any of the other trial regions. In fact it has been operating since March 2016. I was intimately and perhaps uniquely involved in its rollout through my position at Generation One, as part of the Minderoo Foundation. First, I'd like to thank Rowan Ramsey, the member for Grey, for helping to facilitate the visit. His electorate is vast and sparsely populated, like much of Western Australia, with traditional rural industries dominating. He has been a strong advocate for this government's reform in the welfare sector. That is because he sees the benefits firsthand every day in communities across his electorate. I'm very glad to report that by and large the community of Ceduna supports the cashless debit card. They support its continued operations, and many even support its expanded rollout. This in part would help to reduce the stigma surrounding the card, as the more common it becomes, the less those on it will be stigmatised.

While in Ceduna I met with a wide range of stakeholders, seeking honest and robust feedback about all facets of the CDC rollout, as well as comment about the CDP and wraparound services and commentary from on-the-ground welfare advocates. I was also lucky enough to secure meetings with health professionals, retailers and leaders of the Ceduna Aboriginal Corporation. I met with representatives of the Ceduna District Council, who I'd like to thank for making the time to host me in their chambers. I met with the CEO of the Yalata Anangu Aboriginal Corporation, with the Red Cross and with Save the Children. I'd like to extend a special thanks to Paul Ronalds, the CEO of Save the Children, for taking the time to come to Ceduna to meet with me. Such is Paul's dedication and enthusiasm for his role that, when he heard I was meeting with Save the Children in Ceduna, he hopped on a plane and then on a much smaller plane to join me and his team for that meeting. Paul, your dedication is obvious, and I appreciate your taking the time to come. I look forward to working with you in the future on your many programs around Australia and, indeed, Western Australia.

Another person I want to single out for special mention is Wayne Miller. Wayne is the CEO of the Ceduna Aboriginal Corporation, and I must say that the organisation could not ask for a better leader. They couldn't find a better one if they tried, in my opinion. Wayne is only a young fella, but he's leading his community, and they are no doubt better off for it. I worked with Wayne during the rollout of the cashless debit card some years ago and, despite some pushback from the community, he and the other community leaders worked up a plan, they stuck with that plan and that plan is now paying dividends, not just in Ceduna but in the adjoining far west communities. So tribute must also be paid to the leadership groups of these communities of Koonibba, Yalata, Scotdesco and Oak Valley.

It's been a while since I've been to Ceduna, but the transformation between my visits was certainly noticeable. And it's not just me saying the town has changed since the introduction of the card. One theme that I heard consistently throughout my visit was that over the last three years the town truly has transformed. Retailers told me that thefts were down markedly since the introduction of the card. Anecdotally, alcohol related emergency department presentations are reducing and presentations to sobering-up shelters have increased. While this last point might sound counterintuitive, what it tells me is that more residents want to get on the straight and narrow and turn their lives around.

I'm not going to put the cashless debit card up on a pedestal and claim that it's responsible for the totality of the changes throughout Ceduna. The wraparound services that were put in place when the card was rolled out are no doubt contributing as well. But everyone that I spoke to, even those who had objections to the card, admitted that it was having an impact. If nothing else, they could see it as a circuit breaker that allows the support services to take effect.

Is the CDC a silver bullet? Of course it's not, and no-one is suggesting that it is. Sadly, there are occasions where problem drinkers and drug users are able to fund their habits through extraordinary cash payments, such as insurance payouts and royalties, and through cash being brought into the town by visiting itinerants. There's also evidence of people circumventing the card by buying goods, such as whitegoods, electronics or computer products, and selling them cheaply for cash. Some people are giving their card to shoppers and asking them for cash in return, often far less than what the shopper spent. While this is unfortunate, in practice, people who are doing this are effectively paying an on-the-spot fine for their actions—the difference between the cost and the sale price of the goods. Those that I spoke to do not believe that these actions are in fact widespread, and there will always, sadly, be people who will do anything they can to sidestep these laws by finding a way to drink or take illicit drugs. This is why the wraparound services are critical, because they're helping, or at least can help, people deal with their addictions and, importantly, see people move off welfare and into work.

There is also a new CDP provider in Ceduna. The local Aboriginal corporations of Ceduna, Scotdesco, Yalata, Oak Valley and Koonibba have combined to form the Far West Aboriginal Community Leadership Group. This group owns 60 per cent of the new CDP provider, called EyrePlus. The other 40 per cent is owned by PeoplePlus, an organisation with experience in the sector. This arrangement means that local people are in control of the CDP provider, allowing local knowledge and connections to be leveraged and, further, that profits from the program stay in the region, compounding the economic growth opportunities.

I was very pleased to hear that, in the six months that EyrePlus have been in operation, they've placed 67 local people into jobs, and 54 of these people are still employed. This is an absolutely fantastic outcome. CDP providers and, in fact, Indigenous corporations across Australia could take note of this ownership model and the fantastic achievement record.

After visiting Ceduna, I'm optimistic about the future of the town and the prospect of the cashless debit card being rolled out into other vulnerable communities across Australia. In Ceduna, I was told that, if the cashless debit card were to be rolled back, the town would be in a terrible place. Thankfully, this government has no plan to roll back such a successful measure. While there is no doubt that there can be improvements, I will look forward to working with the technology providers on mechanisms such as item-level blocking. This program and the associated wraparound services in Ceduna are doing exactly what they were designed to do.

Finally, I take this opportunity, which will likely be my final speech in the Senate this year, to wish everyone a very merry Christmas and the happiest of times with family and friends. May you all have a wonderful break and return safely home for your holidays, rested and ready for a terrific new decade.

Senator CAROL BROWN (Tasmania) (13:50): I thank the previous speaker for his good wishes to all senators in the chamber. It is very fortunate that in the chamber we have all four Tasmanian Labor senators. Senator Bilyk, Senator Polley and Senator Urquhart are also here, and they will absolutely support the contribution that I will be making here today. It is an issue that I have already raised in the Senate, and it is an issue that is most urgent. So I ask the government to listen to my contribution here today and act, because they need to take a fresh look at the situation that is occurring in Tasmania.

The issue that I am talking about is the crisis facing emergency food relief in my home state of Tasmania and the urgent need for the minister, Senator Ruston, to take immediate action to prevent vulnerable Tasmanians going without good, nutritious food. Currently only one of the three national emergency food relief providers operates on the ground in Tasmania. That's Foodbank. They do a good job. They're a great organisation doing great work feeding hungry Australians. Indeed, they provide more than 70 per cent of food rescued for food relief nationwide. But, in my home state of Tasmania, it is a local organisation, Loaves and Fishes Tasmania, that provides about 70 per cent of food relief to Tasmanians in need. They provide fresh nutritious food to over 200 community food programs and 38 school breakfast clubs. Loaves and Fishes partners with another national organisation, SecondBite, as part of their highly successful efforts to rescue and redistribute food to people who would otherwise go without. Indeed, SecondBite provides substantial support to transport fresh produce across Bass Strait.

The other emergency food organisation in recipient of Department of Social Services grant support is OzHarvest, who presently don't operate on the ground in Tasmania. OzHarvest, along with Foodbank and SecondBite, do great work where they operate, but two out of the three do not operate on the ground in Tasmania. All three organisations—Foodbank, OzHarvest and SecondBite—operate in every other state. This belies the insistence from the minister that only organisations that operate in every jurisdiction can receive emergency food relief grant funding from the Department of Social Services. All we are seeking from the minister is an acknowledgment that Tasmania therefore has unique circumstances—circumstances that require special dispensation from her department through the allocation of grant funds to support emergency food relief in Tasmania.

It is the case that Loaves and Fishes applied but did not receive grant money in the last round of funding for emergency food relief organisations. They were, essentially, excluded on the basis that they are a local Tasmanian organisation. It, quite frankly, beggars belief that the organisation that provides around 70 per cent of food relief in Tasmania can be exempt from being able to receive Commonwealth government assistance. Due to this exclusion, Loaves and Fishes will be forced to close their operations in southern Tasmania, severely impacting vulnerable Tasmanians in need. And I'm sure that all senators here would not underestimate the impact of a child who goes hungry nor a child who lives in fear of going hungry. And I have to say, I knew from my own personal experience from my family when I was a young child who accessed these fantastic organisations, who accessed the much needed food to be able to feed their families.

It will mean for southern Tasmania the end of emergency food provisions for 134 community food programs in southern Tasmania. It will spell the end of a successful operation that, since July of last year, has produced over 55,000 ready-to-eat meals from over 300,000 kilograms of fresh produce. Surely this cannot be allowed to occur. Already, they have had to turn away one provider in southern Tasmania seeking produce for emergency food relief hampers over Christmas—Christmas hampers. With funding support of just $150,000 a year, this can be prevented.

This comes at a time when we are seeing an ever-burgeoning housing crisis in Tasmania, with housing stress continuing to increase. Rental stress in Tasmania is now the worst in the nation. Rent rates are the highest in Australia at 30 per cent or more of family income. Low-income households are spending as much as 86 per cent of their income on rent. These are the most vulnerable people paying most of their income on rent. As a result, they face a terrible choice. They face a choice that nobody should have to face in Australia: pay the rent or buy food. All we are asking is for the government to provide special dispensation for Tasmania in recognition of the unique circumstances we face, being the only state that does not have operations from all three emergency food relief providers that receive Commonwealth government support. We have just one. This needs to be acknowledged by the minister. We need swift and urgent action to remedy this situation. An immediate injection of, as I said, $150,000 annually into Tasmanian emergency food relief would alleviate this urgent problem that we face and would prevent a crisis in emergency food relief in southern Tasmania. Beyond that, we need a review of the eligibility criteria for organisations, I believe, that can receive emergency food relief grants. The Tasmanian situation must be acknowledged and accommodated for.

I don't have to remind this place that Australia is a federation of states in which all must be treated equally. When it comes to Commonwealth government support, it is the responsibility and obligation of the minister to ensure that vulnerable Tasmanians and Tasmanian emergency food relief providers are not ignored, sidelined and overlooked. Vulnerable Tasmanians deserve better.

The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Brown.

Senator WATT (Queensland) (15:14): I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Cormann) to questions without notice asked by Senator Gallagher and Senator Walsh today.

Another day and more shocking new figures about the state of the Australian economy under this government—a government that went to the election promising the Australian people that it would deliver a strong economy and rising living standards. Month after month after month we see that those promises to the Australian people are broken by this government. This is a government that says that it prides itself on being strong economic managers. Those opposite say that the difference between them and this side of the chamber is they can deliver good economic management. Well, where is it? Month after month we try to find signs that under this government's stewardship the Australian economy is in good shape, as it promised it would deliver. But month after month we see more and more figures showing how much the Australian economy is floundering as a result of this government's lack of leadership.

Senator Scarr: It's growing!

Senator WATT: Let's have a look at the figures that have come out today. Today, the new figures show that economic growth in this country went backwards compared to the last quarter. I take Senator Scarr's interjection where he says that the economy is growing. The latest figures show economic growth went backwards compared to the last quarter. Annual growth is only at 1.7 per cent—barely growing at all. It still has a one in front of it, well below the government's forecast of 2.75 per cent. This government's last budget was predicated on an assumption that the economy would grow at the rate of 2.75 per cent over this financial year. It is currently running at 1.7 per cent.

The tax cuts that this government went to the election on were the centrepiece of this government's economic agenda. They were the thing that was going to get the economy moving, according to the government. Now we have the Australian Bureau of Statistics saying that the reduction to tax payable did not translate to a rise in discretionary spending or, to put in plain language, the tax cuts didn't work! The tax cuts have not got people spending money in the way that the government said that they would do, and that's reflected in the poor retail figures we see; that's reflected in a whole range of other data that shows how badly the economy is performing under this government.

That is, of course, backed up by wages, where under this government's stewardship we have wages growing at the lowest rate we have seen in Australian history. Since records began on this subject decades ago, we have never seen wages growing so poorly as they are right now under this government. It's no wonder then that the Reserve Bank has recently just made the point that lower wage rises have become the new normal. That is what the Australian people have got to thank this government for: six years of office, in its third term, and it has delivered a new normal when it comes to wages—and that is lower wage rises. Congratulations! I hope you're all giving yourselves a pat on the back, you good economic managers! You people who said that you needed to win the election to keep the economy strong, give yourselves a pat on the back! You have delivered a new normal, being lower wage rises.

That is not really any surprise, because we have had the Leader of the Government in the Senate, Minister Cormann, as the Minister for Finance for the last six years. The entire time this government has been in office, Minister Cormann has held the purse strings as the Minister for Finance. What he has got to show for it is economic growth going backwards compared to the last quarter, tax cuts that aren't working and the worst wages growth on record. I think Minister Cormann would be quite okay with all that, because we know that he was caught out on film saying that keeping the wages low in this country is a deliberate design feature of the government's economic policy. What kind of politician would actually get into office to deliberately keep wages low? That is the kind of attitude we have from this government, and we all know on this side of the house that that is what this government is about.

Today, Minister Cormann was asked questions about this. You would think that on another day when we have poor economic data coming out about this government you might see humility from this government. But no, not from Minister Cormann and not from this Liberal-National government, who said that it would keep the economy strong. They don't know the meaning of the word humility. Rather than being a bit humble, we see more arrogance from this government in saying, 'Everything is going hunky-dory; everything is going swimmingly; everything is going really, really well in the Australian economy.' In fact, they might as well say that Australians have never had it so good! How arrogant! How arrogant of this government that won an election, to its great surprise, and is now presiding over poor economic growth, tax cuts that aren't working and the lowest wages growth that we have ever seen. (Time expired)

Senator SCARR (Queensland) (15:19): The one thing I have learned in my over five months here is, when the Labor Party talks about economic data, you should always go to the original document and read what the actual facts say. The facts of the matter are—

Senator Wong: Does that apply to Angus Taylor too?

Senator SCARR: I'll take the interjection from—

Senator McKim: Rookie error!

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Please continue, Senator Carr—I mean Senator Scarr.

Senator SCARR: Senator Carr's has perhaps a different philosophical bent! Household disposable income has in fact increased in this country by 2.5 per cent—the fastest quarterly rise in a decade—with the ABS saying it was driven by a decline in income tax payable and interest paid on dwellings as well as continued rises in the compensation of employees. That is what the ABS has said. It is not what Senator Watt has said but what the ABS has said. I'll say it again: it was driven by a decline in income tax payable and interest paid on dwellings as well as continued rises in the compensation of employees. As Senator Cormann said, it is up to the Australian people how they decide to spend or save their tax cuts. At least this side of the chamber gave them the choice. We gave them tax cuts so they could make the decision as to what was in the best interests of their families and their households. We gave them the choice.

Let me quote what Mr Philip Lowe, Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, said in a press release just yesterday:

The US-China trade and technology disputes continue to affect international trade flows and investment as businesses scale back spending plans because of the uncertainty.

As Senator Cormann has frequently said in this place, this economy is facing difficult international issues that are not of its making. Notwithstanding that, and notwithstanding the fact that countries like Germany, the United Kingdom, South Korea and Singapore have all experienced negative economic growth this year, Australia is still producing positive economic growth. Notwithstanding those headwinds, there is still positive economic growth. We have maintained our AAA credit rating, and we're one of only 10 economies around the world to do that—an outstanding performance.

What are other people saying, other than those on the other side of the chamber in the opposition? Standard & Poor's said recently that the outlook for the Australian economy is sound. Deloitte said that the Australian economy is picking up with momentum. The IMF and the OECD are forecasting Australia to grow faster than any other G7 nation in 2020. The Reserve Bank of Australia has said that the economy has reached a gentle turning point.

To go on, in terms of the Reserve Bank of Australia's commentary:

The central scenario is for growth to pick up gradually to around 3 per cent in 2021. The low level of interest rates, recent tax cuts—

opposed by those opposite—

ongoing spending on infrastructure, the upswing in housing prices and a brighter outlook for the resources sector should all support growth.

So it is a positive story and Australia is doing remarkably well, notwithstanding the headwinds on an international basis.

What else did we hear today during question time? The Canberra bubble is alive and well. Earlier today, eight out of 12 Queensland senators supported the legislation in relation to repairing the medevac scheme—eight out of 12 senators representing the will of the Queensland people. We heard their voices loud and clear at the last election. We went to that election with a promise that we would deliver those amendments to the scheme. We delivered those today, and today we can go back to the constituents of Queensland and say, 'Job done.' Eight out of 12 Queensland senators supported that legislation. We will remind Queenslanders that four out of 12 Queensland senators did not—three from the Australian Labor Party and one from the Greens.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Scarr, I remind you that the motion to take note was on questions about the economy asked of Senator Cormann by Senators Gallagher and Walsh. I appreciate that it is a wide-ranging debate, but you do need to be speaking in broad terms, as you were in the beginning, about the economy. Please continue.

Senator SCARR: I am happy to end my contribution by noting how sound a position the Australian economy is in, given the headwinds it's facing.

Senator PRATT (Western Australia) (15:25): I rise to also take note of questions on the economy asked of Senator Cormann by Senator Gallagher and Senator Walsh. Time and time again we come into this place to talk to the government about the economy, and they pretend over and over again that everything is rosy. Senator Scarr has pointed the finger at the economic headwinds internationally, but time and time again we do not see an adequate response from this government, neither in the way they answer questions nor in the way they manage the economy. They come into this place without a plan to manage the Australian economy and deal with these headwinds.

Just this week, media reporting on the Australian Industry Group's Performance of manufacturing index has painted a very stark picture of the Australian economy, highlighting the lack of direction from the Morrison government to boost the economy. This is my own portfolio area. In manufacturing you can see the overall economic slowdown flowing down into different sectors of the economy. It shows that Australian manufacturing is indeed contracting. It is no longer growing; it is displaying its weakest performance since 2016. It shows a weakening in building materials, wood, furniture, metal products, machinery and equipment; and paper printing, textiles, clothing and paper. It also shows, very troublingly, a drop in employment and wages.

The Morrison government claimed that the economy would improve in the next quarter. When Senator Cormann answered questions on the economy in question time today, he never adequately reflected on the negative state of the economy—where and why the economy is in difficulty—because he wants to continue saying that things are rosy. He wants to continue to believe that our economy does not need government leadership and government intervention. He simply ignores the parlous state of the Australian economy.

But we can see that real growth figures are well below average, well below forecasts and well below what is needed to get wages growing again in our nation. Weak growth like this is inevitable. It is an absolute consequence of a government that has only a political strategy and not an economic plan. This government has ignored repeated calls, not only from the opposition but also from the Reserve Bank and other industry players, for a proportionate and measured stimulus that will support the economy. These calls have come from the Reserve Bank, the business community, economists and experts, and indeed from the Labor Party.

When it put forward its mediocre package on infrastructure, the government pretended that this was the kind of stimulus it was prepared to put forward. This is not an adequate economic stimulus for our economy. It does not meet the test that the experts are calling for. It's high time that Senator Cormann, when answering questions in this place on the economy, or failing to answer those questions, held his own government to account—Minister Frydenberg and Prime Minister Morrison. Every time he comes in here, it is without a comprehensive plan to support our floundering economy, boost wages and lift productivity. When the government comes in here and answers questions on the economy, there is simply nothing that it speaks to that even touches the sides of dealing with the real issues around boosting wages, lifting productivity and boosting the state of the Australian economy. As we head towards Christmas, we see very weak results in the nation's manufacturing sector. The order books and wages are down. There is a faster rate of contraction— (Time expired)

Senator HUGHES (New South Wales) (15:30): I always find it interesting, when it comes to the economy, that it's never a New South Wales senator who asks a question, because the last time the Labor Party was in power in New South Wales the economy did nothing but tank. It continued to plummet to the bottom of all rankings, and it's taken a Liberal-National government in New South Wales to bring it back up. I did enjoy, though, the very first part of Senator Walsh's question, when she said that, during the September quarter, the economy has grown. I think, ultimately, she could've stopped there, but for some reason the Labor Party has a pathological need to talk our economy down. They're determined to see the negative in everything.

Senator Watt: Just facts.

Senator HUGHES: Senator Watt comes in with the interjections and the smiles across the chamber, but really all he's looking for is to see the negative in anything—talking down the economy, talking down business, talking down all the states and all the work that's being done, even in his beloved northern Australia, with all of the work that the fabulous Minister Canavan is doing to support northern Australia. We can do that work because we have an outstanding economic record. Managing the economy is what this government does best.

But let's talk about the fact that it is the 29th consecutive quarter of annual economic growth. This is despite a raft of challenges. Senator Scarr was talking about some of the international headwinds, but we also need to consider the ongoing international trade tensions. We have two of the largest economies in the world currently in a stand-off, and this is obviously having an impact globally. We are in the centre of that, with considerable trading partners in both of them. It is therefore important that we walk an incredibly tight rope, and that is being done incredibly effectively by the Morrison government.

We also see a housing market downturn. This is turning around, but that is something that's occurred particularly in the major centres. But, of course, one of the other significant impacts on our economy, something that I'm not sure those opposite fully understand, is the drought. As Senator McKenzie so eloquently explained, never, prior to their new-found love of farming and drought, were those words so very frequently uttered by anyone opposite. The drought is having a direct impact on our economy, but this would be worse with $387 billion worth of new taxes, which, as far as anyone can work out, are still Labor policy. No-one really knows; we're not quite sure. I think the opposition leader is too busy looking over his shoulder at the member for Maribyrnong, who I think wants his old job back. The Australian people and the economy have dodged a bullet by avoiding a Labor government.

But what does the strong economy mean for everyday Australians? Talking about the drought, I'd just like to take a moment to look at some of the drought initiatives that, because of our economic position, we have been able to implement. Since the budget, there has been an additional $355 million to step up our drought response, and the latest announcement will triple this to more than $1 billion since the election as well as more than $1 billion in new interest-free loans. What does this mean for farmers? It means that the farm household allowance can now be extended to support four years in every 10, not just four years over a lifetime. We've also seen an ability to relax the off-farm income, offsetting it and increasing the cap to $100,000. This is ensuring that people are able to stay on their farms and keep food on the table as they endure one of the worst droughts in our history—in the last decade and century. If you also look at what's happened recently with the terrible bushfires, unlike those opposite we have been able to offer an assistance package, in line with the states, of $48.25 million. That's a bushfire recovery package that's only possible because of a strong economy.

Those opposite and Senator Watt—who, unfortunately, is no longer here—would fully understand the levy that had to be implemented to pay for the natural disaster recovery in Queensland because the government, under Labor, could not afford the package. That's not how it is over here. Whereas you guys opposite took drugs off the PBS because you couldn't afford to list any more, over here we are listing one new drug every day, and that's how everyday Australians are benefiting from a strong economy. (Time expired)

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Hughes, I remind you it is not appropriate to refer to the fact that senators may have left the chamber.

Senator WALSH (Victoria) (15:35): Today Senator Cormann has been asked questions about slow economic growth, about low household spending, about low wages growth and about an economy that is in trouble, and his answers can basically be summarised as: 'Everything's going fine. There's nothing to see here, and the economy is working just fine, thank you very much.' How insulting to the people who are doing it tough under this government's so-called economic leadership. How insulting to the people who are depending on this government to come up with an economic plan and a strong economy. How insulting to the people who listened to the government three months ago, when we saw the last set of figures of slow economic growth and when people were told by this government that things would improve next time. This is next time, and things haven't improved and that is a big problem for the people who are depending on this government to deliver a stronger economy.

The economy is not working fine for everyday Australians. The economy is not working just fine for the 1.9 million Australians who are looking for work or for more work. It is not working fine for those hardworking Australians who haven't had a decent pay rise under this government and who haven't had a decent pay rise in seven years. And the economy is not working just fine for the parents who are making tough decisions about whether to pay their bills or whether to pay their rent and making tough decisions at this time of year about whether they might be able to afford to take the family out or whether they need to save that money to spend it on Christmas presents for their children.

The Prime Minister has said that the harder you work, the better you do. People are working hard. People are working as hard as they can and, actually, it is this government that is asleep at the wheel. Let's take a look at this government's record on the economy, because their record is nothing short of lazy. During their seven years in power, this third-term government has been overseeing the worst economic performance since the global financial crisis. Let's not forget that Prime Minister Scott Morrison was the Treasurer for three years, and he is all over this economic outcome for the country. What we've seen under this government is declining living standards. We've seen household debt at record highs. Let's think about what that means for people. That means that people are struggling, they're doing it tough and they're very much at risk of going under. Under this government, we've got 1.9 million Australians who are underemployed or unemployed, at the same time as this government is proposing cuts to Newstart. We've got business investment at its lowest since the 1990s recession. We've got wages that are growing at just one-sixth the pace of profits. Along with this government's extraordinary economic management record, we've got a doubling of gross national debt, which has hit $400 billion for the first time in our history. And the most recent record is yet another quarter of slow economic growth—just 0.4 per cent in the last quarter.

Let's think about this government's record on wages. This government's record on wage growth is the worst ever of any government, and it doesn't seem like it's going to be getting any better. The governor of the Reserve Bank says that wages growth is subdued and is expected to remain at its current rate for some time yet. That statement is not very good news for the millions of Australians who are waiting for a wage rise and waiting for this economy to pick up so they can do better for their families and do better in their communities. This weak wage growth, of course, is contributing to Australia's economy woes because, when people can't get the wages they need, they can't spend in their local community, and the economy slows even further. That's the pattern we've got under this government. This is a government that has no plan except to tell struggling Australians they should just work harder.

Question agreed to.

Senator McKIM (Tasmania) (15:40): I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Financee (Senator Cormann) to a question without notice asked by Senator Di Natale today.

I use the word 'answer' because that's the proforma of the Senate, but 'response' would probably be a more accurate word, because the minister didn't go within a bull's roar of answering the questions that Senator Di Natale asked him. Senator Di Natale was asking Minister Cormann to shed some light on the deal—or the no deal—between the government and Senator Lambie, which ultimately has resulted in Senator Lambie voting to repeal the medevac law earlier today.

I want to focus to begin with on one particular part of Minister Cormann's answer. He was asked by Senator Di Natale whether there had been an exchange of letters between the government and Senator Lambie in regard to ensuring Senator Lambie's vote to repeal the medevac legislation. Minister Cormann would only say that he had not exchanged letters or that he had not written a letter to Senator Lambie. What about the Prime Minister? Did he write to Senator Lambie or exchange letters with Senator Lambie? What about the Minister for Home Affairs, Mr Dutton? Did he write a letter to Senator Lambie or exchange letters with Senator Lambie? We simply don't know. But what we do know is that someone is lying to the Senate and therefore lying to the Australian people.

The truth will out, as my mother always used to tell me, but I want to make the point that if there is—as Minister Cormann and the Prime Minister, in question time in the other place, said today—no deal with Senator Lambie then what Senator Lambie has done is to give her vote to the government to repeal the medevac legislation for absolutely nothing; she has got nothing out of the government. If that is true, and there is no deal or agreement, she has voted to take away a crucial medical provision that ensures sick people get the health treatment they need.

Let us remind ourselves why medevac was necessary. Hamid Khazaei died of a leg infection because of the inaction of this government. Eleven other people died in this government's care while they were in offshore detention. This government fought tooth and nail to keep suicidal children locked up on Nauru. It was only a massive public campaign that caused these children to be released from that exile last year. A woman who was raped was denied a termination by this government while she was on Nauru. Minister Dutton and Prime Minister Morrison have worn their cruelty as a badge of honour, and I truly hope that they and others are one day held to account in the International Criminal Court for how they have broken people.

I want to end with a message to the propagandists and stenographers at TheCourier Mail and The Australian: I hope you're all happy today; you have played a pivotal role in the misinformation campaign that has marred this entire debate. I'm going to name them up. Those propagandists and stenographers include Simon Benson, Joe Kelly and Renee Viellaris. I do hope you're happy with the propaganda and the stenography that you've engaged in in recent months. I hope you're happy that your cosy relationship with the authoritarians and the fascists in the Liberal-National government can continue unabated; your cosy relationship with the rampant human rights abusers in the LNP can continue unabated; your little secret drops and your sunny little interviews with the merchants of misery can continue. You, Joe Kelly, Simon Benson and Renee Viellaris, are doing the work of ministerial media advisers while you are masquerading as journalists. You've got the gall to call yourselves journalists, but you're not; you're propagandists and stenographers. I hope you're all ashamed of yourselves.

Question agreed to.

Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia—Government Whip in the Senate) (15:48): I, and also on behalf of Senators Sterle, Pratt, Lines, Dodson, O'Sullivan and Brockman move:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that the 2020 Australian of the Year Awards finalists were announced on 13 November 2019;

(b) notes that the Australian of the Year Awards has four categories, including Young Australian of the Year, which celebrates exceptional 16 to 30 year-olds who have succeeded from all different walks of life;

(c) recognises the 2020 WA Young Australian of the Year nominee, Mr Yarlalu Thomas, a Nyangumarta Pitjikarli man from Warralong, south-east of Port Hedland, Western Australia; and

(d) congratulates the other nominees from Western Australia:

   (i) Ms Annie Fogarty, AM, of the Fogarty Foundation, Perth, nominated for 2020 WA Australian of the Year,

   (ii) Professor John Newnham, AM, of the University of Western Australia, Perth, nominated for 2020 WA Senior Australian of the Year, and

   (iii) Ms Suzy Urbaniak of the CoRE Learning Foundation, Victoria Park, nominated for 2020 WA Local Hero.

Question agreed to.

Senator HANSON (Queensland) (15:49): I seek leave to amend general business notice of motion No. 327 standing in my name for today relating to the Australian dairy industry, and the attendance of a minister.

Leave granted.

Senator HANSON: I move the motion as amended:

(1) That the Senate notes that—

(a) the number of registered Australian dairy farms has fallen from 5699 in July 2018 to 5200 at present;

(b) milk production has fallen from 12 billion litres in 2000 to 8 billion litres in 2019;

(c) dairy foods play an important part in Australia's food security and human health;

(d) none of the recommendations contained in the final report of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission's Dairy Inquiry, dated April 2018, have been implemented;

(e) Australia is forecast to import more dairy products than it exports by 2023;

(f) four foreign-owned milk processors control an increasing proportion of milk production in Australia setting the price at the farm gate, and that during the period 2013 to 2017, these processors had revenues in Australia of over $160 billion but paid less than $160 million in income tax or a rate of less than 1%;

(g) the main dairy export countries, including New Zealand which is the largest dairy exporter in the world, have a regulated farm gate milk price;

(h) regulation of farm gate milk prices is correlated with growth in milk production and increasing exports, whereas Australia's export of dairy products has been in decline;

(i) on 11 November 2019, the Federal Government voted against the Protecting Australian Dairy Bill 2019; and

(j) on 2 December 2019, the Federal Government voted against debating the Saving Australian Dairy Bill 2019.

(2) That the Senate requires the Minister for Agriculture to attend the Senate on Thursday, 5 December 2019, at 3:30pm, to provide an explanation of no more than 10 minutes of the Government's plan to save the dairy industry from long-term decline.

(3) At the conclusion of the explanation, any senator may move to take note of the explanation.

(4) Any motion under paragraph (3) may be debated for no longer than 60 minutes, shall have precedence over all business until determined, and senators may speak to the motion for not more than 10 minutes.

Senator RICE (Victoria) (15:49): I seek leave to make a short statement.

The PRESIDENT: Leave is granted for one minute.

Senator RICE: The Greens do not agree with every aspect of this motion. We've been speaking to farmers across the country and we know from them that it's a complex issue and there are a range of views. Some farmers oppose re-regulation and don't want a price floor and are concerned about competition from New Zealand. The Greens want to see an approach that addresses the varied needs of dairy farmers across the country rather than knee-jerk reactions to respond to a single subsector of the broader dairy industry. But we will support this motion because we don't want to see inaction. It's taken far too long for the coalition to address the price crash of 2016, and, as the motion correctly recognises, none of the recommendations of the ACCC report from 2018 have yet been implemented. The government needs to pull its socks up and start making things happen.

Question agreed to.

Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) (15:52): I move:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

   (i) the Australian Public Service (APS) performs an essential role, from protecting our national security to supporting the most vulnerable members of our community,

   (ii) the APS is an enduring institution in our democratic system that exists to serve the government of the day but remains impartial in its delivery of frank and fearless advice, and

   (iii) for the APS to continue to meet the needs of the Australian community and adapt to a changing environment, it will need strong leadership, cultural change and long-term vision from governments of both political persuasions;

(b) notes that the Independent Review of the APS, the 'Thodey Review', touted as a 'once in a generation review', is yet to be released despite being received by the Federal Government two months ago; and

(c) calls on the Federal Government to release the 'Thodey Review' to the public before the end of 2019.

Question agreed to.