
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2012-02-27</date>
    <parliament.no>43</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>5</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>0</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" background="">
        <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SODJobDate">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;"></span>
            <a type="" href="Chamber">Monday, 27 February 2012</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-Normal">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">The Speaker <span style="font-weight:bold;">(Mr Slipper)</span> took the chair at 12:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>1733</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Private Members' Motions</title>
          <page.no>1733</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>1733</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 41(g) and the determinations of the Selection Committee, I present copies of the terms of motions for which notice has been given by the members for Moore, Melbourne, Shortland, Maranoa, Page, Lyne and Makin. These items will be considered in the Federation Chamber later today.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>1733</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Marriage Amendment Bill 2012</title>
          <page.no>1733</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r4749">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Marriage Amendment Bill 2012</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>1733</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to be the very first member to refer a bill to the Federation Chamber for further consideration.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is leave granted?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Jenkins</name>
    <name.id>HH4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Most certainly.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for Scullin and I note that leave was also given by the honourable member for Cowper.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I would have thought that the leave from the member for Scullin would have been sufficient. I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the Marriage Amendment Bill 2012 be referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1733</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economics Committee</title>
          <page.no>1733</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>1733</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms OWENS</name>
    <name.id>E09</name.id>
    <electorate>Parramatta</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Standing Committee on Economics, I seek leave to make a statement on the Corporations Amendment (Phoenixing and Other Measures) Bill 2012, in discharge of the committee’s requirement to provide an advisory report on the bill, and to present a copy of my statement.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms OWENS</name>
    <name.id>E09</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The committee has endorsed the comments of this statement. On 16 February 2012, the Selection Committee referred the Corporations Amendment (Phoenixing and Other Measures) Bill 2012 to the committee. The bill has two main purposes: the first is to grant the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, in order to facilitate payment of employee entitlements, the power to order the winding up of a company that has been abandoned, and the second is to allow petitioning creditors and liquidators to publish notices of certain administration events on a website rather than in the print media or the commission's gazette. The bill also makes other miscellaneous and technical amendments.</para>
<para>The committee considers that the bill comprises uncontroversial measures that will assist in curbing the amoral practice of phoenixing. Indeed, in a briefing issued on 23 January 2012, the law firm Minter Ellison stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The … bill contains some reasonable measures for facilitating the protection of workers' entitlements. and these measures are unlikely to affect the position of the majority of directors.</para></quote>
<para>Therefore, the committee has decided not to inquire into the bill and recommends that the House or the Federation Chamber consider the bill forthwith.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DELEGATION REPORTS</title>
        <page.no>1734</page.no>
        <type>DELEGATION REPORTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>20th Annual Meeting of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum</title>
          <page.no>1734</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SAFFIN</name>
    <name.id>HVY</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the report of the Parliamentary Delegation to the 20th annual meeting of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum, Tokyo, 8 to 12 January 2012, and seek leave to make a short statement in connection with the report.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SAFFIN</name>
    <name.id>HVY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As leader of the delegation to the 20th annual meeting of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum, I am pleased to present this report. The delegation members comprised the member for Mallee, John Forrest, who was deputy leader; Senator Chris Back; and Senator Catryna Bilyk. The Australian parliament has participated in each annual meeting of the APPF as well as the meetings that prepared for the establishment of the forum. The APPF is most relevant to Australia—the countries that participate are significant to our strategic and economic interests. Delegates have an opportunity to develop their understanding of these issues and, more broadly, of the perspectives of neighbouring parliaments, and to reach agreement on the resolutions of the meeting.</para>
<para>This meeting was significant in three particular ways. First, it was fitting that the anniversary meeting was held in Tokyo, as the APPF began there some 20 years previously. The fact that the meeting took place less than a year after the great east Japan earthquake provided a significant backdrop to the meeting. Second, the attendance at the meeting of the APPF Honorary President and former Prime Minister of Japan, His Excellency Mr Yasuhiro Nakasone, was important. Mr Nakasone was central to the establishment of the forum and has maintained his interest in and involvement with the APPF over its life. At 93 years of age, Mr Nakasone was a central figure at APPF20. His son, former foreign minister Mr Hirofumi Nakasone, was a member of the Japanese delegation at the meeting. Third, the meeting was highly successful: 326 delegates from 20 member countries and one observer country attended.</para>
<para>I now turn to the subject matter of the meeting. There were three broad subject areas: regional cooperation, politics and security, and economic matters. The future work of the APPF was also on the agenda. Before the meeting, the Australian delegation proposed six resolutions, and all six of them got up—yes, there were some negotiations; and yes, there was some give and take, as you would expect at a forum, but essentially they got up in their entirety.</para>
<para>The subjects that we put forward were: promoting cultural, educational and personal exchanges in the Asia-Pacific region; strengthening peace and security in the region; the global economic situation; food security; energy security; and cooperation in disaster risk reduction and disaster preparedness. The six resolutions are relevant nationally, regionally and internationally. Each of us spoke in the plenary session on one of these topics and negotiated the related resolution through working groups. I also participated in the working group, Negotiating the New Tokyo Declaration. That took some doing, on all of our parts! The delegation participated in all sessions of the drafting committee, where the draft resolutions from the working groups were finalised before they were returned to the plenary. Mr Forrest and Senator Bilyk represented the delegation on the drafting committee. It was pleasing, given Australia's contribution to the APPF reform process over many years, and I would like to acknowledge former Speaker Jenkins' leadership role in Australia sustaining this role at APFF20. In particular, we contributed a number of amendments to the new APPF rules of procedure. The final joint communique of the forum included 13 resolutions, and six of these were the ones sponsored by our delegation representing the Australian parliament.</para>
<para>I would also like to add that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Canberra assisted us in the preparation for the meeting with comprehensive briefing materials, as usual. The Parliamentary Library assisted us in the same vein, so I thank them both. The International and Community Relations Office provided great logistical support and the delegation appreciates this assistance. In Tokyo the ambassador, His Excellency Mr Bruce Miller, and embassy staff—in particular, the liaison officer for the visit, Mr Peter Roberts—provided excellent advice and support.</para>
<para>I will digress here. The visit provided me with an opportunity, through the ambassador, to meet up with a former colleague of mine, the former Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Timor-Leste, Dr Sukehiro Hasegawa, who has retired and is living back in Japan. He was someone I had worked with very closely, and he was able to meet the delegation and other people connected with Australia. The delegation now has greater knowledge of Japan and the importance and strength of the bilateral relationship as a result of our visit.</para>
<para>Next year's APPF meeting will be held in Vladivostok from 8 January to 12 January. I am sure it will be a cold meeting! In the report we point out that there are lead times for participation in the APPF annual meetings and suggest that delegation members be identified by October—normally, they are not; this will make it work a lot easier. We also suggest that it would be helpful if members of our delegation attended an initial briefing meeting with the members of the incoming Australian delegation to provide some continuity. In the past, Australian delegations to the APPF annual meetings have been led at Presiding Officer level, which has provided continuity—and I ask you, Mr Speaker, to turn your mind to that.</para>
<para>I thank my colleagues the member for Mallee and Senators Back and Bilyk for their cooperation and highly professional representation of the parliament. We were 'Team Australia' and worked very effectively, and we were noticed. I was quite proud to lead the delegation. I would also like to thank our Serjeant-At-Arms, Robyn McClelland. She not only accompanied us but participated with us and was able to work with us in such a collegial way. With Ms McClelland we had five in the delegation, and she represented Australia admirably—and I thank her. I believe the delegation represented the parliament effectively. I thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the honourable members for granting leave to present the report.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FORREST</name>
    <name.id>NV5</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to make a few remarks with respect to the report.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FORREST</name>
    <name.id>NV5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In my view the APPF is a very significant forum of the Asia-Pacific Rim nations. In my years in the parliament I have had the opportunity to participate fairly extensively. My first meeting was in Lima, Peru, in 1996. I participated again in 2000, when Australia hosted the APPF. In 2011 I was due to go to Ulan Bator, Mongolia, but at the last minute was unable to attend because there was serious flooding in my constituency and I did not think it appropriate to be away. That was significant, and I refer to it because I had the opportunity in Tokyo to speak on natural disaster relief arrangements and I was really pleased that our delegation performed well in respect to that resolution and quite a few others.</para>
<para>People would say that APPF is just another talkfest. That may be true to a casual observer, but I think that it is very important. The consistent contribution made by nations like ours and the fact that we were noticed in Tokyo—and many of the chairmen of the various committees we served on said that and in fact gave us privileges that would probably not normally be available to others—is important because Australia has made a consistent contribution.</para>
<para>I wanted to support the remarks by the member for Page with regard to our secretarial support from Robyn McClelland. It was excellent and it contributed to the success of this delegation. I also wanted to comment that it is a great shame that the Australian public do not see us working in forums like this where partisanship is put aside and the national interest has priority. I was very proud to make a contribution to that in Australia's best interests.</para>
<para>I also commend to you the two recommendations at the end of the report, Mr Speaker, about the timeliness of appointment of delegates. There was not a lot of time for us to be prepared for this delegation. In fact I arrived at the first meeting with less than 24 hours notice. Senator Bilyk was much the same. I was surprised at that meeting when I was advised that I would be the deputy leader of the delegation. In the interests of better continuity, I would like these two recommendations to be given serious regard by you. I am not proposing that we appoint permanent delegates to APPF forums in the future—although I note that Canada and New Zealand do that and their delegates there were quite regularly at these forums—but that there is an overlap, an opportunity for those members who participated in the previous forum to brief and have a chat with the new delegates coming forward. I think that would be a very useful thing to do and it would add to our ability to contribute to this important forum.</para>
<para>I too want to thank my colleagues, the member for Page who led us very well, Senator Bilyk and Senator Back, and I feel very proud that I have made a contribution in the national interest to this very important forum. I thank you for letting me make a few remarks.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>1736</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011, Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011</title>
          <page.no>1736</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <p>
              <a type="Bill" href="r4718">
                <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a type="Bill" href="r4736">
                <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a type="Bill" href="r4737">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1736</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>HK5</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011 and the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011 amend the Social Security Act 1991 and the Social Security Act 1999 to enable state and territory agencies such as the Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal in the Northern Territory to trigger income management through referrals. The Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill also amends the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 to enable the minister to designate states, territories and areas in which income management can be implemented. This in effect provides the government the necessary flexibility for the operation of income management in the five trial sites announced in the 2010-11 budget.</para>
<para>Protecting the welfare of Indigenous children—indeed, all Australian children—is the fundamental responsibility of any government. When intervention is required to protect children, to respond to threats against children, the government must be ready, willing and able to step in and protect those most vulnerable in our society.</para>
<para>The change of government in 2007 was not a good thing for the people of the Northern Territory. In fact it would be the hallmark of a policy shift that has been detrimental to Territorians, particularly Indigenous Australians. Labor decided to smash the coalition's commitment to doing what was right and what was needed in the Northern Territory, namely, the emergency response. The ideological pursuit of opposition to the Northern Territory intervention caused widespread collateral damage and undid the good work of the former coalition government. Labor through their various incarnations, firstly, the Rudd government and now the Gillard government, are opposed to real welfare reform. They are opposed to promoting measures that will actually help not burden the people concerned. This minister says she not only really believes in reform, in change, in helping people in the Northern Territory, and indeed all Australians, but she proclaims the urgency of this bill, all the while having fallen asleep at the policy wheel.</para>
<para>The other side were vocal in criticising income management. Now they profess it is an important part of our welfare system. The government is now picking winners. It is okay, for example, to have this in the Northern Territory but not in the minister's electorate. It is okay for the government-nominated trial states but not in the Treasurer's or the Prime Minister's electorates. If it is good enough for parts of Australia, for some Australians, we on this side say that it is good enough for all Australians.</para>
<para>This government has now had an epiphany that it should somehow work hand in hand with other agencies, with state and territory agencies such as the Northern Territory Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal. My congratulations to the Gillard Labor government for coming to a realisation of this and for adopting the approach that we have pursued for years. The hypocrisy of the government simply knows no bounds. This bill, however, is a welcome measure. Together with elements of the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory legislation package, which I will come to shortly, the objectives are important and the coalition hopes that the desired outcomes are realised. But we will not be holding our breath. This is a government which is big on promises. It makes agreements; its leader, the Prime Minister, signs those agreements—then she rips them up. Whilst courage and conviction are not in great supply on the other side of the chamber, dysfunction and disunity are in abundance particularly today.</para>
<para>Suddenly the government is concerned about school attendance. Indeed, this bill seeks to amend social security legislation that underpins the Improving School Enrolment and Attendance through Welfare Reform Measure or SEAM. This bill will enable local tailoring of this measure to allow for greater intervention in the Northern Territory's Every Child, Every Day initiative. Combined, these measures will hopefully support greater improvements to school attendance. Moreover, under the amendment arrangements a parent may be required to attend a compulsory conference to discuss their child's school attendance and to enter into a school attendance plan. The bill mandates the parent then complies with the plan. The bill provides for parent income support payments to be suspended where a noncompliance occurs.</para>
<para>When the government chose to depart from the successful measures of the emergency response, they chose to ignore the inevitable consequences of this and how it would have an impact on the welfare of Indigenous children. When the Gillard government chose to water down and to soften the previous coalition government measures, they confirmed to the Australian people that they were more interested in populism than progress and they were more interested in press statements and releases than in sound public policy.</para>
<para>The measures enacted in this bill are another classic example from the Gillard government of a government desperate to be seen to be doing something. The coalition supports these measures, but the coalition also supports a proactive approach to welfare, not a reactive one. We support comprehensive policy development, not quick fixes designed to patch over endemic issues. The government has contributed to—indeed, has caused—many of the problems that it now proudly proclaims it will fix. This government is not taking the tough decisions. It is not providing hope, reward and opportunity to Territorians—indeed, to all Australians. The government is merely playing politics with an issue close to my heart and close to the hearts of many people on this side of the chamber.</para>
<para>The Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs talks about income management. She proclaims how great it is. I challenge her here and now to introduce income management to the APY lands in northern South Australia. Use the powers she has right now and do something for these people in one of the most remote parts of the country. The people of the APY lands are crying out for income management, no group more so than their Women's Council that I visited a few months ago. If the government is truly committed, then order income management for the APY lands which this legislation will enable to be done.</para>
<para>The coalition supports these measures and, therefore, this bill. We have little confidence in the government, however, that what will be done and necessary will come to fruition. I fear they will not do. I hope that the government go some way to proving me wrong, for if for nobody else's sake it is for the sake of our brothers and sisters and their children in the Northern Territory and in places like the APY lands who have been so wilfully neglected by a government so utterly weak and incompetent, so bitterly divided and dysfunctional.</para>
<para>Let me turn to the other bills, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill and the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill. Firstly, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill incorporates additional measures for tackling alcohol abuse by increasing the powers of the minister to suspend, modify or cancel liquor licences and individual permits issued in prescribed areas. Current legislation provides that, once the minister grants an exemption for a permit or licence to be issued, the terms, conditions and enforcement of such is the responsibility of the Northern Territory government as legislated through the Northern Territory Liquor Act. The measures also provide powers to the minister to request the Northern Territory government appoint an independent assessor to examine any licence or premises where the minister has reasonable grounds to believe that a particular licensed premise anywhere in the Northern Territory is linked to substantial harm to Indigenous people.</para>
<para>An additional measure provides and empowers the Commonwealth minister to approve all alcohol management plans for Indigenous communities. The measures proposed in this bill are in line with the policies and measures established by the Northern Territory government. It should be noted that the Labor government has not proposed any new or additional alcohol control or management initiatives to enhance existing measures. The government has merely duplicated existing measures in order to appear to be taking a strong stance on alcohol management.</para>
<para>I turn to land reform. Township leasing arrangements are fundamental in facilitating private home ownership and commercial development in Aboriginal communities. The Labor government has not actively pursued this vital reform in government, with the Northern Territory Emergency Response monitoring report dated October 2011 noting:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Following feedback from the land councils on these proposals, township leasing is now being pursued as a longer term priority, unless traditional owners initiate discussions.</para></quote>
<para>The Labor government have now incorporated this measure into their 10-year plan. While the coalition is supportive of this measure, it should be highlighted that this must be considered as a priority.</para>
<para>The bill seeks to expand measures introduced by the former coalition government's community store program where stores were assessed and outback stores were supported to enter a community in order to raise the quality and quantity of food products and reduce the prices of food and household items. All measures in these bills are to be reviewed after seven years of operation. A sunset provision of 10 years is incorporated.</para>
<para>While long-term behavioural change and structural change in Indigenous communities cannot be achieved overnight, allowing any government measures to run for seven years before a review sends the wrong message. It says in reality that this area is not a priority. It says the issue is not one demanding urgent attention. Labor's approach in this area lacks leadership, lacks vision and lacks any new ideas.</para>
<para>Pursuant to the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill, an exemption is required to be granted by the minister to obtain a liquor licence or permit in an alcohol protected area. All licences and permits are then issued and regulated by the Northern Territory government through the provisions of the Northern Territory Liquor Act. This bill grants the power to the federal minister to modify, suspend or cancel liquor licences and permits. Those powers to be conferred are essentially a duplicate of the powers already vested in the Northern Territory minister and the Northern Territory Liquor Commissioner. Monitoring, suspending or cancelling of liquor licences and permits is currently the responsibility of the Northern Territory minister and the Northern Territory Liquor Commission. Any intervention in this area by the federal minister will, therefore, lead to duplication of effort by governments or confusion by permit holders and licensees over which minister or which regulations are in force.</para>
<para>The coalition amendments, circulated in my name, remove any potential confusion or duplication of effort by clearly specifying when and how the federal minister may act. The amendments, if adopted, would require that prior to issuing a determination to modify, suspend or cancel a liquor licence or permit the minister must first write to the Northern Territory minister and the Northern Territory Liquor Commission setting out the issue and the proposed action. The Northern Territory minister and the Northern Territory Liquor Commissioner must then respond in writing within the specified consultation period with any comments or actions that they consider appropriate. The amendments require that the federal minister must have regard to those comments prior to making any determination.</para>
<para>These amendments ensure that any federal intervention in the management of the Northern Territory Liquor Act does not duplicate or complicate the legislation of the Northern Territory or actions of the Territory government. The amendments reserve the right of the federal minister to make a determination where the Northern Territory government is unable or fails to take appropriate action to address harm caused by alcohol abuse. I therefore commend the coalition amendments to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SAFFIN</name>
    <name.id>HVY</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 and cognate bills. Firstly, I recognise and applaud the work of the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs for working with a commitment and a will to consult and to improve people's lives in an area that is not an easy area to legislate for. That is what it is about, but it is not always easy to achieve when we are dealing with laws in this place. The minister has put a lot of time and both intellectual and physical effort into achieving that. I start by commending her for that work.</para>
<para>I listened to the member for Menzies giving his contribution. I reject the notion that the government is playing politics on this. That is nonsense. This legislation is about people's lives. It is an area that has challenged all governments. I reject outright the member's glib words, which can be thrown around so easily. There was a lot of consultation. As with any consultation, some people said they were not consulted enough. The reality is for this legislation meetings were held in more than 100 communities and town camps, together with public meetings in major towns. There were hundreds of discussions with individuals, families and other groups across the Northern Territory. Those meetings were held from the end of June to mid-August 2011. The consultations were overseen by the independent Cultural and Indigenous Research Centre of Australia. The centre's assessment was that the consultations were fair, open and accountable. What more could you ask for? At the end of any consultation, having such a report done by an independent body means that something was done right.</para>
<para>In the consultations, Aboriginal people said that getting more children to school, increasing the number of Aboriginal people in local jobs, improving housing and reducing alcohol related harm were top priorities. Indeed, they are top priorities for communities across our nation. They are priorities that Aboriginal people identified in these consultations for which meetings took place regularly over several months. They rightly want those things. There were meetings with the Northern Territory government's Chief Minister and other ministers and officials working to develop a forward-looking policy approach. The legislation had to align with the range of reforms the Northern Territory government is taking to lift school attendance, tackle alcohol abuse and improve housing. The Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory package of bills is one element in the Australian government's continued commitment to Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>Turning to alcohol, the legislation provides that the Northern Territory Emergency Response alcohol restrictions be continued and strengthened. It also provides that alcohol management plans established by local communities be directed at minimising alcohol related harm. Whilst this is about Aboriginal communities, in looking at these alcohol management plans, something may be gained by all of us. Alcohol does contribute to a lot of harm across Australian society and in communities. Where an alcohol management plan is approved and in place, consideration will be given to lifting the restrictions under the Stronger Futures legislation. If restrictions are lifted, the Northern Territory Liquor Act will apply, including for enforcement. But where communities want to retain the Stronger Futures restrictions, they will be able to do so.</para>
<para>The legislation also provides for the Commonwealth to require the Northern Territory Licensing Commission to provide to the Commonwealth minister reports on levels of alcohol related harm and the impact of policy measures in the Territory. From the government's perspective, being able to get the information needed to make good decisions in the future is particularly important to knowing how we are tracking and to honing the policy settings to achieve better outcomes. That is what it is about: achieving better outcomes. The legislation also provides for a joint Commonwealth-Northern Territory review to be conducted in two years from commencement of the legislation. The review will examine the impact of the legislation and the Territory's strategies to address alcohol related harm. This will allow both governments to continue working together to make progress.</para>
<para>Another key feature of the package is that there is a clear commitment from the Australian government to negotiating voluntary long-term leases. The government will not be extending the compulsory five-year leases acquired under the original NTER legislation. As a separate issue, the legislation provides the Australian government with the ability to address land tenure restrictions in Northern Territory legislation. The aim is to enable the Aboriginal landholders of town camps and community living areas to have the opportunity to make use of their land for a broader range of purposes, including economic development and private home ownership, which are really important. There are also key review and sunset provisions in the legislation.</para>
<para>In closing, I would like to make a few points. I have here a copy of a statement that came out of website of the Australian Human Rights Commission. There are comments from the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Mick Gooda. I would like to quote a couple of them because they are quite telling and, coming from someone such as Social Justice Commissioner Mick Gooda, it is a key view and an important view from a key person. Commissioner Gooda said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I call on Parliament to work constructively in a bipartisan way to address the issues confronting our communities in the Northern Territory.</para></quote>
<para>I hope that bipartisanship is a key feature of this package of legislation because we owe it to people to turn our minds to working in the best and most constructive way we can. To quote Commissioner Gooda further, he says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… every child has the right to be educated. We need to make sure we provide every opportunity for this to happen. It’s critical for our kids to attend school.</para></quote>
<para>I cannot see anyone in this place disagreeing with that statement. He went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The implementation of any proposed measures under the Stronger Futures Bills, such as school attendance and alcohol management, must be done in a culturally safe and culturally secure way.</para></quote>
<para>I agree with the commissioner in that regard.</para>
<para>I would like to say that, having spent the last year being part of the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition for Indigenous Australians, as it was called, I probably had to turn my mind a lot more to some of the issues in the legislation than some other members might have had to. I note that I served on that panel with the honourable member for Hasluck, who is sitting ready to speak in this debate as I expected him to. It was a good experience for all sorts of reasons, but one of them was that it also challenged some of the views I had about ways we could achieve better outcomes and help in that area. Even though it was on constitutional recognition, all the other issues were still brought up. As the honourable member for Hasluck would know, it was at times challenging to listen to such forceful people—well-published people with strong, compelling and known views. It was an enriching experience that certainly helped me better understand—beyond the issue of constitutional recognition—and to bring that understanding into this place.</para>
<para>I also thank the minister and Prime Minister for having given me the opportunity to serve on that panel. I will close there. I do not think my voice will hold out much longer. I have been challenged with laryngitis but was listed to speak. I thought it was important to do so today. I will leave it at that.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WYATT</name>
    <name.id>M3A</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011. I acknowledge the comments made by the member for Page because I think she made a very salient point in noting the fact that a learning process occurred for her through our interactions with some of the Indigenous leadership who sat around that table. But there were not only Indigenous people; there were non-Indigenous people whose contributions have been significant to the debates over probably the last decade. There are many others who, in the past, also contributed to some of the direction setting that has occurred in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.</para>
<para>This bill proposes some key reforms that I think are fundamental not only to the shift in the way that services are delivered but also to creating the opportunities for people within those Northern Territory communities to become part players within the process of the reform. The next stage is the part that concerns me—that is, the red tape that applies in the way of regulation and guidelines. It is there that the intent of parliaments and ministers becomes murky, with the interpretation and application of the fairly broad initiatives within this. If we do anything at all—if we want to make a difference—we have to involve Aboriginal communities as equal partners in the process of reform and change. They have to be able to sit in that process and have access to information and knowledge that enables them to make informed consent decisions collaboratively with the senior bureaucrats who will be sitting with them. I note the Senate is doing a series of consultations, and it is a pity this consultation is occurring after this bill has been introduced into the chamber. I would have preferred to have argued that we consult first and then frame the legislation so that we had a process embedded that would require government agencies, in working through and implementing these solutions, to be imbued with the mindset of those who deliver.</para>
<para>Change through legislation does not occur easily. There is always a time lag. But anywhere you have an equal basis of decision making—and where you contribute to the debate through the way that you shape and form your own aspirations and so contribute to the direction setting of the legislation—it is much more enduring and effective. I commend the minister for focusing on some key areas, particularly the alcohol and substance abuse element. Alcohol, taken in moderation by any individual, is a good relaxing agent; it enables you to lose some of those inhibitions and at least have conversations. But the challenge is when it becomes a destructive habit that harms and ruins families and communities, so I would certainly support those measures.</para>
<para>On land issues, the debate in this country has never before gone to the extent that we are taking it now—where the consultation involves talking about the subdivision of Aboriginal lands to enable families to build homes of their own in the communities where they have lived for some time. In fact, what we have done—and all governments have done this—is enter into housing programs, put them in place and then expect change to occur. But we have to remember that we have here the oldest living culture which has never really lost many of the threads and elements that have been significant and important to it. In that context, change does bring conflict. Change also brings about disproportion in the way in which engagement and planning occur. I think the cultural practices that have long prevailed and have at times been used as a reason not to proceed should never prevent what needs to happen—and that is that people should sit face to face, work through the issues and reach real solutions that make effective and efficient use of the resources that Commonwealth, state and territory governments provide, in the context of the change being mooted.</para>
<para>I would also urge very strongly that the provisions in the legislation to do with alcohol and controls around the distribution of alcohol have built into them a better evaluation process. When we implement a framework for change to reduce the abuse of alcohol and a process which we hope will significantly improve the outcomes, we need to evaluate the things that work and ensure that people within a community can use best practice to determine how effective their community is in taking forward measures that will make a difference.</para>
<para>In reading the bill I was quite heartened by the fact that there are some constructive aspects to it. The enforcement of food security has always been a concern to me, given what I have witnessed over a long period of time. I know from working in the health area that you try to encourage community stores to provide a nutritious and balanced range of foods, but you also try to encourage community stores to be effective in providing an avenue for food on a regular basis. Often I have read stories about or been involved in discussions about a community store having collapsed because the manager has had problems—and the community has then had to struggle.</para>
<para>I think alcohol and housing, the community land approach, and food security and community stores are three critical areas that for some time have languished. Let me say that from a bipartisan perspective, in fact in this House from a tripartisan perspective, the approach to these is a common one and there is that support. So I anticipate that if we do this well we will see the types of changes we all have argued for. I have listened to Noel Pearson, Mick Gooda and many other leaders around this country who have argued for reform that will ensure the security of pathways not only for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities but for families and children—so that we break the nexus with ills and dysfunction and we strengthen the role of the family within the community. I see elements of that in this legislation if it is implemented in concert and in partnership.</para>
<para>I referred earlier to informed consent decision making. I think that is one of the things that is missing in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs. What we tend to do is establish the legislation, develop the programs—or cobble together many of the existing programs—and look at how we can better deliver them given the circumstances. While the intent is good and it is driven from Canberra, it nevertheless is an imposition of a framework on top of people whose daily lives are often influenced by those who make decisions from afar.</para>
<para>Let me reflect back to the Reformation period in the history of world civilisation. When people had access to knowledge and information, they were then able to influence their own destinies and become strong by becoming a voice in that process. I think we as Australian governments over the periods to come have to adopt a different approach. In the apology the former Prime Minister said, 'If things aren't working then let's look at alternative solutions, let's look at different ways of doing business.' I would hope that those elements within this bill are considered in that context because I can see that, at the end of a 10-year moratorium, for a couple of the areas that are referred to, change will not be as significant as we would have hoped.</para>
<para>No community, no family and no individual have really progressed when you provide a nanny state framework. If we empower them to become the shapers of their own destiny, if we empower them to be part of an equal decision-making process and if we give them the capacity to change their own circumstances while providing support from the expertise of the agencies that prevail at both Commonwealth and state levels, I think we will see real and meaningful change. I am optimistic that there are many elements of this bill that will achieve that, and that is aided by the inclusion of other matters such as information about criminal history. I can take people to reports in which the criminal history of some individuals running Aboriginal communities or running community stores has not been a factor that has helped any community at all.</para>
<para>I think the other thing we have the opportunity to do is to build the human capacity of those within communities to contribute to the shaping of what is delivered within their community through this process. It is the front end, in many aspects, to significant reforms that can occur within education and health. The only thing that I find slightly distracting is when we apply a whole-of-community approach to income management. Let me say that there are people within those communities whose income management skills are equal to those of any other person who lives in this country. I would rather see us give more focus to providing some upstream work around the understanding of financial literacy, budgetary processes and budgeting, and costs—and then working that through.</para>
<para>I do not resile from the fact that this legislation will support those who have aspirations for their children, those who want the circumstances in which their families live and reside to be better than what they currently are, those who want to provide the pathways to a home environment in which there is the support and love that leads to educational opportunities and leads to a place where their children feel safe and comfortable—where alcohol is not a factor in the abuse that some experience. This bill will provide the legislative framework that will enable some of the change that is needed.</para>
<para>I ask the minister to give serious consideration in the implementation process to her agencies looking at the way in which state, territory and Commonwealth senior public officers negotiate and work with communities. I also ask the minister to consider the outcome of the detailed consultations that will occur in the Senate inquiry—what they bring back in the messages from Aboriginal communities. I have seen in the media reports that there is some anger about the lack of consultation. There is an expression that is often used in Aboriginal communities of 'seagulls' who fly in and fly out but who never leave a solution. They talk and then disappear. I would hope that we do not contribute to that concept in the implementation of the programs that support this bill.</para>
<para>I do support the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011. I think that we have the opportunity, with a tripartisan approach, to make an incredible difference in working far more effectively with the Northern Territory government and, certainly, far more effectively with Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise on behalf of the Australian Greens to oppose the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011. We oppose the bill, not because we do not support stronger futures for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people but because we do.</para>
<para>We support stronger futures for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as we do for all Australians, not just in the Northern Territory but across the country. But stronger futures for Australia must be underpinned by equality and respect for our first peoples. This bill is not underpinned by equality or respect. It is an extension of the top-down, punitive, discriminatory and flawed Northern Territory intervention initiated by the Howard government and perpetuated by this Labor government. It is only a few weeks since the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians presented their report recommending a series of changes to our Constitution which would go some way to righting the wrongs of the past and to recognising Indigenous Australians. Such a referendum would further challenge the false and damaging assumption that Australia was a nation born from a land devoid of people when instead we are a country first cared for by one of the world's oldest living cultures. Constitutional recognition would be another step towards healing this shameful legacy.</para>
<para>It was only last week that we as a nation had an opportunity to reflect on the fourth anniversary of the apology to the stolen generations, and still so much needs to be done to bring about true reconciliation in this country. We need to match the words of the apology with actions that deliver equality. This bill, however, is yet another example of the government's inability to extend the commitment to recognition, reconciliation and equality across its legislative agenda.</para>
<para>With this bill, the government is seeking to continue and expand the discriminatory measures introduced by the Howard government's Northern Territory intervention. It is an intervention which has failed to put in place measures that genuinely overcome disadvantage, an intervention which has failed to deliver better overall outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and an intervention which will fail to deliver stronger futures for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.</para>
<para>One look at the <inline font-style="italic">Closing the Gap in the Northern Territory Monitoring Report</inline> shows how much work there is still to do: school attendance has declined since 2009; child hospitalisation rates have increased; incarceration rates continue to rise, with Indigenous people more than 17 times more likely to be incarcerated than non-Indigenous people in 2008; and incidences of personal harm and suicide have doubled since 2007. There is no evidence that any positive changes in education and employment have come from this flawed intervention.</para>
<para>The use of spin to justify poor policies will remain a necessity until the approach in the Northern Territory changes. I am a big believer in the principle that you do not make people's lives better by taking away their rights. This expansion adheres to the long-held and ultimately flawed principle that punishing people will lead to changes in behaviour. These old approaches are typified by negative measures such as income management and the suspension of welfare payments, which are justified with the use of reports that are all too often derived from perfunctory consultations by government employed outsiders and framed to meet a predetermined outcome. They generally lack the quantitative rigour which is necessary.</para>
<para>Stronger Futures consultations have come under fire for poor process and reporting. Analysis based on independent recordings of the consultations reveals striking discrepancies between opinions expressed by communities and the view of opinions present in the report. A top-down intervention is unnecessary for effecting change in the community, and other ideas proposed by the communities themselves are being ignored by the consultation process.</para>
<para>The government point to some areas they say have improved, such as personal and community safety, to justify a continuation of the intervention. An increased feeling of safety is hardly surprising given that some policies associated with the intervention have seen money spent on more safe houses, police and Aboriginal liaison officers. These investments obviously produce results, they improve services and they address wider community disadvantage. The key point here is that an emergency intervention, with its discrimination and punitive approach, is not needed in order to make these investments a reality.</para>
<para>The Improving School Enrolment and Attendance through Welfare Reform Measure, or SEAM program, is another example of an unnecessarily punitive policy that achieves some benefit through the elements of investment contained within it that could be achieved in other ways. SEAM is now being extended, despite the fact that DEEWR have admitted the trials could not be directly linked to educational outcomes. It was made clear in Senate estimates recently that the positive and more consistent results from SEAM are delivered through case management and personalised involvement with families rather than any measures that punish parents.</para>
<para>Consistently better outcomes are delivered when the primary policies focus on engagement between parents and schools. The positive investments contribute to improving school attendance. More teachers, better training, bilingual education, community involvement, better parental engagement with schools, action to address children's hearing health and more investment in case management would all deliver better outcomes than SEAM is able to. It is these suggestions that were most prevalent in the Stronger Futures consultation with communities, not a preference for punitive measures.</para>
<para>Despite this, money is still being funnelled into truancy measures which alienate people and take an old-fashioned, punitive approach. This approach, aimed at punishing parents, does not build the trust or partnerships that are needed or build the ability of parents to take responsibility for their child's education in positive ways. The $1.5 billion spent so far would have delivered significantly better results had it been directed to service investments and programs rather than signs, bureaucracy and income management.</para>
<para>These programs are extremely costly. To date, the bill for the current income management process in the Northern Territory sits at around $450 million and the policy remains one of the most criticised across the NT. The money used to income-manage people would produce far better results if it were directed to services and programs based on collaboration and community involvement and partnership.</para>
<para>A recent report by the Equality Rights Alliance into women's experiences of income management in the Northern Territory, funded by the government, shows that, of the 168 surveyed, 74 per cent said that the BasicsCard does not make it easier to look after their families. Most women reported that it just added difficulties and costs to paying for goods and services. The report also showed that most women surveyed had an apparent lack of understanding as to the purpose of the program or why they were on it and 70 per cent said they did not feel safer since the introduction of income management.</para>
<para>In their submission to the Senate inquiry on this legislation, the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples highlighted the general lack of robust baseline data and evidence in support of policies initiated in the intervention. The government needs to be investing in policy measures that have solid evidence to support them, not repeating the same failed policies over and over. If we were to implement sound community based initiatives that we know are effective, that would provide communities with the ability and opportunity to control and improve their social and economic conditions—elements that are a key component of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which Australia has endorsed.</para>
<para>Engagement in the Northern Territory and with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities must be fundamentally altered if the rights set out in the UN declaration are to be honoured. That will happen when we adopt policies that are considered and that originate from real, consultative engagement with a sound evidence base. When this occurs, a well-chosen set of statistics and a well-oiled PR machine will not be needed to justify the approach. The benefits for communities and individuals across the Northern Territory will be self-evident.</para>
<para>The government's stealthy expansion of income management measures is a sign they have failed to learn their lesson in the Northern Territory. In the words of Barb Shaw:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Loss of autonomy, resources and opportunities in communities is driving many people into the larger town centres. The overcrowding situation with housing has not improved. More and more Aboriginal children are being removed from families, another silent statistic. There is a deteriorating social situation in these larger towns, with crime on the increase.</para></quote>
<para>The government remain unable to effectively develop and implement policies alongside communities in the Northern Territory that work. This legislation will only further entrench this, not just in the NT but now in other parts of the country as income management is extended to other states and territories to allow for the quarantining of income support payments.</para>
<para>Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities must be allowed to take responsibility for their own affairs. This legislation is a step in the wrong direction and the government is missing yet another opportunity to take a new approach in the Northern Territory. Extending ineffective measures is a waste of money. Punishing parents by cutting income support flies in the face of existing knowledge and opinion, including of the government's own departments. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to work out that by investing in community services you improve outcomes for communities and address disadvantage. The Australian Greens are committed to proactive and positive policies which deliver long-term benefits for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and not costly punishment schemes which diminish the ability of those peoples to develop the capacity to build their own stronger futures as they define them.</para>
<para>The government continues to act in a way contrary to the evidence and the opinions of experts and the community. This is precisely why we have seen more than $1.5 billion spent on the intervention without seeing the necessary improvements. The Australian Greens—in particular my colleague Senator Rachel Siewert, who has worked tirelessly to uncover the real impacts of government policies on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples—have strongly and consistently stood up to the government over the issue of the intervention. I have serious doubts about extending a program which is already operating and returning underwhelming results. That is why I will be voting against this legislation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs GRIGGS</name>
    <name.id>220370</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I listened with great interest to the member for Melbourne. I have actually spoken to a number of Aboriginal women in the communities who receive the BasicsCard. They think it works really well for them. They know that they have guaranteed money that cannot be touched. So for them it is working quite well.</para>
<para>I rise to contribute to the debate on the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011. The debate on this bill encompasses a compilation of legislation known as Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory, which includes the social security bill and other legislation amendment bills. These bills amend aspects of the Northern Territory Emergency Response, or the intervention, as it is more colloquially known, which was introduced by the Howard government in June 2007 and is subject to sunset in August this year. In essence, this bill has three focus points: to introduce various measures for the control and regulation of alcohol in protected areas of the Northern Territory; to provide the Commonwealth with powers to regulate town camps and community living areas in the Northern Territory; and to provide the Commonwealth with the power to regulate community store licences in the Northern Territory, including the power to impose conditions on licences granted to store managers and owners. In addition, this suite of bills amends the social security law underpinning the government's school enrolment and attendance measure, thus allowing for the suspension of income support to parents who fail to meet certain compliance arrangements.</para>
<para>Tackling alcohol abuse is a significant portion of this bill. Alcohol consumption and abuse levels are extremely high and have been identified and reported on many times as primary factors associated with child abuse, assaults, domestic violence, social dysfunction and numerous other problems plaguing Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. I acknowledge that there are critics of this bill with respect to measures directed at alcohol misuse in the Northern Territory, who indicate that without a floor price on alcohol these measures are unlikely to be successful—that is just one opinion.</para>
<para>Land reform is a means to provide the government with a platform to secure tenure, economic development and homeownership opportunities within Indigenous communities across the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>The largest portion of this bill relates to food security. It has been recognised that, over time, the question of food quality has become a major issue, one that is being linked with health concerns. Part of the intervention saw the introduction of a licensing system for community stores. The Stronger Futures bills seek to expand on this original premise and extend the licensing scheme to cover all shops that are a key source of food, drink and grocery items to Indigenous communities. Having been to some of the communities prior to and during the intervention, I can say that there has been a significant change to the food that is being provided in the communities. The intervention measures have been revisited over the past four years, including a subtle rebranding to Closing the Gap, resulting in the reversal or softening of some of the original measures, including reversal of the suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, the removal of the process to suspend the permit system for access to Aboriginal land and the redefinition of the term 'income management' in the Social Security and other Legislation (Welfare Reform and Reinstatement of Racial Discrimination Act) Act 2010.</para>
<para>In June 2011 the government released its discussion paper <inline font-style="italic">Stronger Futures for the Northern Territory</inline>, following which, between June and August, a consultative process was undertaken within the Northern Territory. The minister has said: 'There were more than 470 consultation meetings in over 100 hundred towns and communities.' The member for Melbourne suggested that consultation was not occurring—that is evidence that it was. In research as a result of the consultation and provided by an independent analysis of data relating to the intervention to September 2011, the government identified several key areas as issues requiring urgent attention. It will be not be a surprise to members to learn that school attendance and educational achievement were two of those areas, along with economic development and employment and the tackling of alcohol abuse.</para>
<para>The then Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Ms Macklin, in a policy statement issued on the day that this legislation was introduced into the parliament, stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Australian Government, in partnership with the Northern Territory Government, is now acting on the issues people said were the most urgent—</para></quote>
<para>this was identified four years ago, but it is good that the government has come on board now and says that it is tackling it. She said it was looking at:</para>
<list>getting children to school to get a decent education</list>
<list>tackling alcohol misuse</list>
<list>providing decent housing, and</list>
<list>building strong local economies and increasing job opportunities.</list>
<para>They are all part of the reason the intervention was introduced under John Howard. I note that the minister has also said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Australian Government is determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past but to work together with Aboriginal people to build stronger futures together.</para></quote>
<para>I think we all want that.</para>
<para>This bill is another example showing that this Gillard Labor government is desperate to be seen to be doing something. While supporting the introduction of these measures, the coalition also highlights the need for a proactive approach to welfare, not a reactive one. We on this side of the House support comprehensive policy development followed up with strong management and implementation measures, not quick fixes or patches that are designed to gloss over endemic issues and that result in mismanagement, waste and a failure to achieve the desired outcomes. Too often the Gillard Labor government has tripped at the implementation stage and failed to deliver on its promises.</para>
<para>The intervention in the Northern Territory as introduced by the Howard government remains an issue of contention; there is no doubt about it. There is division and misunderstanding, not just among Aboriginal people, within the communities, but among their supporters and their opposition, who are broadly spread across all facets of the Northern Territory and Australian populations. As we heard, the member for Melbourne is one of those critics of the intervention. But, as I said, I have seen the results of this. While there is still a long way to go, it does seem to be working. That is why I encourage more agencies to work together to build on what has been learnt and why I encourage more people to get results. But you are only going to get that by learning the lessons of the past. Reverend Dr David Gondarra, a Northern Territory elder, is reported in an article by Amanda Midlam on the On Line Opinion webpage as saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The recent consultations report shows that Government has failed to take seriously our concerns and feelings. This report is simply a reflection of pre-determined policy decisions …</para></quote>
<para>He goes on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Stronger Futures report has created a lot of anger and frustration due to the lack of process and the ignorant way in which the views of the people have been reported. We therefore reject this report.</para></quote>
<para>However, within the same article, an Amnesty International spokesperson is reported stating that Amnesty International has:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… called on the Gillard government to move on from the mistakes of the past, warning its Stronger Futures legislation is just a re-badged NT intervention …</para></quote>
<para>Further:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Amnesty International is concerned Labor hasn't done enough to remove the discriminatory aspects of the intervention in the new legislation.</para></quote>
<para>In the same vein, the Northern Territory elders and community representatives group claimed the consultation report 'is simply a reflection of pre-determined policy decisions'. They say, 'This is shown clearly by the absence of any commitment to bilingual learning programs as well as the proposal to introduce welfare cuts and fines to parents of non-attending school children.' However, on the contrary, many Indigenous leaders, including Noel Pearson, Marcia Langton and Bess Price—a good friend of mine—have called for a 'move forward instead of backwards' building on the measures from the intervention, accusing critics of the intervention of 'imagining an ideal Aboriginal society without any of the dysfunction that is actually suffered on the ground'.</para>
<para>The coalition amendments proposed by my friend and colleague the member for Menzies are designed to tweak and improve on the measures already in existence and being introduced by the Stronger Futures legislation. One such point is that relative to the power of the federal minister to modify, suspend or cancel liquor licences and permits—a power that essentially duplicates that of the Northern Territory minister and Northern Territory licensing commissioner. The coalition amendment in this area specifies that prior to issuing a determination to modify, suspend or cancel a liquor licence or permit the minister must first write to the Northern Territory minister and the Northern Territory Licensing Commission setting out the issue and the proposed action and that a written response be invited from the Northern Territory minister and the Northern Territory licensing commissioner within the specified consultation time frame, with appropriate comment or action. At this point, any decision by the federal minister must have regard to the comments and actions as advised by the Northern Territory minister and the Northern Territory licensing commissioner.</para>
<para>The amendments recognise the right of the federal minister to make determinations where the Northern Territory government is unable to or fails to take appropriate action to address the harm caused by alcohol abuse. The amendment in this regard clarifies when the federal minister may act. The last thing we need is more buck-passing between the state and the Commonwealth. Territorians are very parochial about the Commonwealth telling them what they need to do.</para>
<para>From my own experience it is very evident that the intervention, Closing the Gap or, as is being proposed, Stronger Futures for the Northern Territory are issues which will remain contentious regardless of stakeholder involvement. In talking with constituents and Aboriginal representatives, I find that many support the measures currently in place, contrary to what the member for Melbourne says. But, in fact, from my experience, many of the women particularly see the value of welfare quarantining, which enables them to know they have money available for the purchase of food, clothing and medications. It is not perfect but at least it is a step in the right direction.</para>
<para>Recently I spoke to a group of Indigenous mothers in the Palmerston area of my electorate. Several women volunteered for income quarantining for no other reason than to ensure they had money to spend on children in their care each fortnight, to make sure they had food and clothing. Without intent to offend, the level of education across not only the Indigenous population within my electorate is cavernous. There are those that actively engage in education systems and encourage kids from preschool through to university and beyond. On the other side of the coin, there are those dysfunctional family units, a large percentage ravaged by alcohol and drug abuse, which fail their kids by not taking the appropriate responsibility, by not seeking out a better life for them or by not, in some cases, providing basic needs.</para>
<para>Behavioural issues are largely as a result of alcohol and drug related activities. It is my observation that unfortunately the level of abuse increases with a falling level of education standard. This has a twofold effect. Not only does it require intervention in terms of the income quarantining in many instances, but from a generational perspective the risk of repeating and prolonging the circumstances which invoke such action remains.</para>
<para>Introduction of the school enrolment and attendance measures, along with many local state and Territory programs set in place to work with and adjunct to this legislation, has broadened the initiatives in place for income management. As already indicated, the coalition amendments in this area are designed to tweak and improve on this already viable program. Hopefully the result will be more kids attending school.</para>
<para>Within my electorate there are a number of Aboriginal communities, as I have said. As is the case across the Northern Territory and broader Australia, the residents within these communities are not static in number. Resident numbers ebb and flow with family comings and goings. Often visitors remain for long periods, and it seems to happen more when the wet season is upon us. I have been to the Bagot community a number of times. People there have told me that when visitors come it causes problems for the community, because they drink alcohol. It is an urban community and often the police do not come and police it, despite the fact that there is an alcohol prevention sign there. The police do not want to come and fine these people, who are already disadvantaged. This issue is putting pressure on the council. I encourage the community and the relevant agencies to work together to come to a solution. They need to work together to build on what we have already put in place.</para>
<para>I think everybody wants to make sure that this situation gets better, but there is no quick fix. The more that we learn from pilots that we have undertaken in the past and other measures, the more we can build on them for the future. All stakeholders need to work together. This is not going to be fixed overnight; it is a long process. The statistics that we have seen are encouraging, giving us cause to be positive and to work together in this area.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to voice my support for the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011 and the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011. The Gillard Labor government, like the Rudd government of the 42nd Parliament, is committed to working alongside, for and with Indigenous communities to build a better future together. My first day at work in this parliament was the day the member for Griffith gave an apology to the stolen generation. It was an incredibly moving day. That was after parliament had started with the welcome to country outside the parliament for the first time in the history of Canberra. It was a great way for me to start my work in this parliament.</para>
<para>The Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011 has three main aims: tackling alcohol abuse, reforming land rights and promoting food security in the Top End. As the Chair of the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs that is currently conducting an inquiry into foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, I have gained already, with the hearings that we have had, an insight into how important it is to tackle alcohol abuse throughout Australia, particularly in those communities where it is a problem, and, unfortunately, that is often Indigenous communities.</para>
<para>We should all be encouraged by <inline font-style="italic">Closing the g</inline><inline font-style="italic">ap—</inline><inline font-style="italic">Prime Minister</inline><inline font-style="italic">'s</inline><inline font-style="italic"> report</inline> because Indigenous lives are slowly being changed and communities are slowly being transformed. As the Prime Minister said, the progress is gradual but it is progress nevertheless. They are slow and steady steps in the right direction that we need to make as a nation. We are increasing access to early childhood education for Indigenous four-year-olds in remote communities and we are confident that we are on track to halve the infant mortality rates for Indigenous children under five by 2018. Anyone who has young children knows how these dry statistics take on a completely different meaning when one think of one's own children and what it would be like to have the sort of mortality rates in our suburban areas that are being experienced in some parts of Australia. Also, NAPLAN results show that we are making good progress in halving the gap in reading, writing and numeracy, and retention rates to year 12 are now nudging 50 per cent—steps in the right direction. I remember when I was a union organiser working in private schools at Wadja Wadja High School in the Woorabinda community and seeing the work that went into those communities to make sure that kids stayed at a private school and an Aboriginal community college—and other Aboriginal schools around Queensland. I commend all the teachers and teachers aides who work in these schools.</para>
<para>But there is still much to be done to improve education, employment and health outcomes for Indigenous Australians. There are still lessons to be learned and things we can do better, and that we must do better. The Labor government is committed to consulting fully with Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory regarding the Northern Territory Emergency Response. The report into the Northern Territory intervention <inline font-style="italic">Stronger futures in the Northern Territory</inline> found that people continue to feel hurt at the way the Northern Territory Emergency Response was initially implemented, irrespective of the motivations for it. But the report also found that Indigenous people do want government to strengthen measures to boost school attendance, create employment opportunities—thus giving the dignity of work—reduce alcohol related violence and improve housing. This bill will help support Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory and continue our efforts to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. It introduces measures to tackle alcohol abuse, ensure food security in remote communities and assist economic development in town camps and community living areas.</para>
<para>The related bill, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011, will also make some amendments to improve the operation of restrictions on extremely violent or sexually explicit material. Alcohol abuse sadly remains one of the biggest challenges facing Indigenous communities. We know that in remote communities in the Northern Territory consumption of alcohol is 1.5 times the national level. Alcohol contributes to 30 per cent of domestic violence incidents at least, and alcohol related crime is four times the national level. This bill will enable an independent review of the effectiveness of various laws that are concerned with alcohol related harm. The joint Commonwealth-Northern Territory review is required to ensure that the laws are working together and achieving a safer and healthier community. The bill also empowers the minister to direct the Northern Territory government to appoint an assessor to investigate particular licensed premises when the minister has reasonable grounds to believe that the premises are linked to substantial related harm.</para>
<para>The bill will also ensure that alcohol management plans put in place by local communities are more effective in reducing alcohol related harm. By working directly with communities and empowering them to develop their own plans, Indigenous communities are able to develop solutions that work for them and that are particular to their own needs. I have seen that already in the FASD inquiry where local people have come up with plans—some of them based on personalities—and in the local situations they have already achieved some success. I am confident that these measures will improve upon efforts to tackle alcohol abuse and harm in the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>The <inline font-style="italic">Stronger futures</inline><inline font-style="italic"> in the Northern Territory</inline> report also found improvements in food security over the last four years with a healthier range of food available in remote community stores. This builds on that success. We want to further improve access to healthy food in remote communities. The bill removes the heavy-handed approach to licensing where any non-compliance would result in a licence being revoked. Instead, this bill will introduce a daily penalty of up to $2,200. This will encourage stores to improve their performance but will not close a store altogether, with sometimes disastrous consequences and flow-on negative impacts on a community.</para>
<para>This bill also improves opportunities for private home ownership and economic development in Indigenous communities. The Northern Territory government has an opportunity to amend its legislation to enable Aboriginal landholders to use their land for a broader range of purposes. If the Northern Territory does not do this, the Commonwealth minister will have the power to amend Northern Territory legislation to enable the government to grant individual rights to land. Any economist or student of society would know the benefits that come from land being able to be passed down as it gains in value. It means that wealth can be passed down through generations. This will enable title holders to build their own homes and run businesses in town camps and community living areas, further empowering Indigenous communities.</para>
<para>The Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 strengthens our efforts to improve school attendance. It enables the government to implement income management in five new sites in disadvantaged communities in South Australia, New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland—in fact, just down the road from my electorate of Moreton. Income management has proven to be a valuable tool for government to use to help to nudge families back on track.</para>
<para>Obviously, this is a tough and confronting area for governments to delve into. On the one hand, Australians have the right to spend their money however they so choose, as long as they are not breaking any laws. But on the other hand vulnerable Australians, particularly children, need to be able to live in houses where the rent is paid, where there is food on the table and where they have all those other fundamental rights that any decent society would agree are part of a minimum standard. When the individual rights and the group expectations are competing with each other, the government must act to find the right balance. In these communities, income management will apply to vulnerable families and individuals, including parents referred by child protection authorities, people assessed by Centrelink as being vulnerable to financial crisis or at risk of homelessness and people who volunteer for income management.</para>
<para>This bill also includes measures to support parents in their efforts to ensure that their children attend school. People may have their income support payment suspended if they fail to enrol their child in school or make every effort to ensure that they attend regularly. The government will provide social work and other support services to assist families. However, if they do not comply with the attendance plan or access the help available then their income support payments will be suspended. Once a person engages with the school or complies with the attendance plan then payments will be reinstated—a bit of a carrot and a little bit of stick.</para>
<para>In a former life, before going to the dark side and becoming a lawyer, I was a teacher for 11 years. I know the opportunities that come from education. When I see the schoolchildren who come to Canberra to have a look at democracy in progress, I think of those remote Indigenous communities that do not have these opportunities that education brings. So many people, on this side of the House particularly, have only received their opportunity in life through education.</para>
<para>As I said at the start of this speech, it has been four years since Kevin Rudd delivered the apology to the stolen generation. It is just about four years since my first speech. In my first speech, I talked about a lot of friends from my home town of St George. I talked about a lot of my Indigenous friends there—some of them people who I played football with—who had died. In that four years, the list of people from my hometown—relatively young people like me—who have died has got longer and longer, with people like Jockey Weatherall and Cecil Long dying. Jockey Weatherall died only last week. Cecil Long is part of the Long story of family tragedy, being the third of three brothers who I knew and played football with who have died.</para>
<para>Obviously, much has to be done in the Northern Territory. Much has to be done around Australia. Much has to be done by this government to ensure that we get the balance right. It is a balancing act. It is tough. There are tough decisions for government to make and we are balancing those against tough personal decisions. People make individual decisions as to how they are going to act in their communities, but obviously government needs to get the settings right. I commend the bills to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr STONE</name>
    <name.id>EM6</name.id>
    <electorate>Murray</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011 and the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011. These three bills are very important when it comes to support and wellbeing for both Indigenous and other disadvantaged groups, individuals and families across Australia. The three bills are all important bills that the coalition supports, although with some amendments.</para>
<para>The first bill amends the Social Security Act 1991 and the Social Security Administrative Act 1999. It enables income management to be triggered by referrals from state and territory agencies. It also enables a minister to specify states, territories or areas in which the vulnerable long-term welfare payment and disengaged youth management measures will apply. It allows for continuing income management if there is a change in residence, so people will not be able to up and move to escape the measures that are meant to help them.</para>
<para>It also gives the authority to permit a school attendance plan to be entered into with parents that may lead to the suspension of income support payments if the plan is not complied with. This sounds a very punitive measure but it is an important one and gives us a full set of tools to help young children have continuing and ongoing good quality education. However, no amount of education or attendance at school is going to help if that school has poor teaching or poor infrastructure or teachers at the school do not teach the children in a language that they can understand. I am very pleased to be part of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, which is currently looking at how we can make sure young Indigenous children can, when they attend school for the first time, learn in a traditional language or in Kriol. These children must be taught in an English as a second language environment so that they can also become fully competent in English.</para>
<para>The second bill comprises three measures tackling alcohol abuse, land reform measures and food security measures. The third bill repeals the Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act 2007 and makes amendments to relevant acts. It also makes amendments to existing principle legislation as part of the government's Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory program.</para>
<para>I want to particularly focus on the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011. It enables targeted, place based income management. In determining how best to proceed with this bill, there were five locations chosen from around Australia where disadvantaged communities would trial a project that had a number of aspects and facets. One of those areas that have that pilot is the City of Greater Shepparton, which is a key part of my electorate in Murray. I have participated in the early planning for the trial introduction of Better Futures, Local Solutions: Place-based income management. I was concerned at the beginning, and I continue to be concerned, about how we are going to get an excellent outcome out of quarantining the welfare of some of our most disadvantaged individuals and young families. We are going to see this income management applying to vulnerable families and individuals from 1 July 2012. It will apply to parents referred for income management by the state child protection authorities. It will apply to people assessed by Centrelink social workers as being financially vulnerable—which could include people referred by housing authorities because they cannot pay their rent and they are in danger of becoming homeless—and it will apply to people who volunteer for income management. Income management can quarantine up to 70 per cent of their welfare payments. Clearly, this situation will require those individuals and families to have a very strong sense or understanding of financial management and how to manage on a very tiny cash budget when previously they had a larger welfare payment to spend.</para>
<para>This schedule makes minor legislative changes to allow these child protection vulnerable welfare payment recipient and voluntary income management measures to apply to these new populations. Why am I worried about these new measures in my city of Greater Shepparton? Greater Shepparton consists not only of the larger metropolitan area of Shepparton-Mooroopna but also of very tiny towns like Toolamba, Tatura, Dookie and others. For a start, we do not seem to have any real incentives built into the program to encourage teenage parents into education or training. For example, if you are a young parent—and I am talking about very young parents in some instances—with a young child, we are almost bereft of public transport in places like Toolamba, Tatura and Dookie. How do those young parents, who have to suddenly learn how to manage what is left of their welfare payments very differently, get to training when there is no public transport and no child care? Unfortunately, since this government has ceased to fund the occasional childcare program Take a Break, we do not have places for children whose mothers—it will typically be the mothers—must take some time to train at the Goulbourn Ovens TAFE, which is in Shepparton and is a 20- or 40-minute drive away from where they live, usually in very cheap accommodation. That cheap accommodation is usually a very long way from public transport or from child care. There is no suggestion anywhere that those particular problems are being taken into account.</para>
<para>There is also a lot of duplication. We already have the state government program Best Start, which supports children from birth to eight years old. The Best Start program seems to be okay and seems to have all the elements that are desired, yet now we are going to have this government's Communities for Children, which is for the cohort of birth to 12 years of age. How are these two programs going to be coordinated? Are they simply going to compete for the kids or compete for the funding that is around? It seems absurd to me. I am also very worried about what happens if a young person cannot get to their classes as part of complying with their welfare quarantining. Are there no sanctions at all? When I ask these questions locally I am told, 'Well, I am sure there will be some way to manage that when the time comes.' The time is coming very quickly and we need to sort this out very fast indeed.</para>
<para>There is also a very great difference between quarantining someone's welfare and giving them a BasicsCard to go to the one store in their town or community. In a very remote community you have only one place to go to buy your food, but in a place like Shepparton-Mooroopna there are literally scores of food-selling outlets. They range from big supermarkets, to small supermarkets, to farmers markets where a lot of our local people now go. These farmers markets, where they can buy the cheapest, freshest food for cash, are only on weekends or every second weekend or so. Are these welfare quarantined individuals with their BasicsCard going to be able to take advantage of these farmers markets and buy fresh produce cheaply? Will they somehow be able to negotiate with the stallholder in advance and said, 'Look, I've got this piece of plastic from the Commonwealth; will you honour it?' This is a problem. I have been asking the coordinators at Centrelink how they are going to handle this. What have they planned and what are they doing, given that the commencement of this project is fast approaching? They tell me: 'Well, someone else is working on that. We think it will be okay, but of course this is new territory and we cannot be sure. We do not know how many stores are going to cooperate yet. We just think it will all be okay in the end.' I am very concerned about our young teenage parents with this BasicsCard. How are they going to manage the business of getting good value for money? I do not want them to be stigmatised either when they queue up in the checkout line with their BasicsCard, which will soon become known for what it really is and what it implies.</para>
<para>I am also concerned about the planning and the very strong possibility of duplication. We have layer upon layer of advisory committees, reference panels and the like associated with this project in the City of Greater Shepparton. I am aware of at least three layers of advisory panels and NGOs who are already getting together, supplemented by new players. There are so many of these layers and they are so complex that there is now to be a very well paid facilitator—a coordinator—of these layers of advice and panels so that Centrelink can move forward with this program. I would rather that very well paid facilitator was directly engaged with assisting the young people who will be seeing their welfare quarantined than supporting a brand-new bureaucratic structure of the same old people attending the same sorts of places and going through the same stale agendas month after month, talking to each other as they do at so many other venues. I wish that we could cut through all of that and focus very much on the individuals on the ground with something that is really going to work for them. Let me move on to talk about the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011 and the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011. Much of these bills is focused on alcohol abuse and the incredible destruction that alcohol makes happen in small and large communities of Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory. Existing alcohol protections will be preserved in alcohol protected areas, with additional provisions that enable the geographic areas covered by these measures to evolve or change over time according to the needs of local people.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! It being 1.45, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the honourable member will have the opportunity of continuing her remarks.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>1758</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>World War II</title>
          <page.no>1758</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PRENTICE</name>
    <name.id>217266</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish to congratulate the member for Solomon, who continues to promote the interests of her constituents and the city of Darwin. The weekend of 11 and 12 February saw the 70th anniversary of the bombing of Darwin in 1942. However, following the member for Solomon's motion which was unanimously passed by this House last November, this event is now recognised as a national day of significance. I was pleased to join the member for Solomon and other colleagues at the commemorative service, and I congratulate the Mayor of Darwin, Graeme Sawyer, and the hundreds of volunteers who organised such an impressive event. Not many people are aware that the Japanese dropped more bombs on the city of Darwin than they did in their attack on Pearl Harbor. Tragically, more than 250 people were killed and many more were injured. Darwin made a vital contribution to the defence of Australia during World War II. I congratulate all those involved in raising awareness of this significant day.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Giblin, Mr Royce</title>
          <page.no>1758</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LYONS</name>
    <name.id>M38</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Royce Giblin, along with his playing partner, Peter Gibson, on their recent victory in the Riverside veterans four-ball best ball stableford golf tournament, in February. Royce has been a beacon of the Launceston community for many years. He ended his 35-year career in the police working as a senior constable in Launceston, ignoring overtures for further promotions in order to remain as a hands-on police officer in the community. Since his retirement, Royce has taken on the role of assisting with the rehabilitation of a local man who was involved in a car accident and unfortunately now has a disability. Royce takes him to golf and really assists him. This shows that Royce's thirst for helping out in the community is still as strong as ever. This community mindedness can also be found in Royce's family, with his son Phil and daughter-in-law Raelene both becoming life members of Launceston Football Club. Raelene was also named AFL volunteer of the year. I would like to thank Royce and his family for the hard work they do in my wonderful community of Bass. I once again congratulate Royce on his recent win and wish him many more happy hours on the golf course. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>South West Sydney Community Alliance</title>
          <page.no>1758</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CRAIG KELLY</name>
    <name.id>99931</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I find myself compelled to draw the attention of the House to my disappointment in some comments made by an elected Labor councillor on the Liverpool City Council, who is also a former Greens candidate. The councillor has used the website of the South West Sydney Community Alliance, a website that in its current form is being used to campaign against the construction of two giant intermodal rail freight terminals in Moorebank. The website's domain, I understand, is owned by this councillor. He has used this website as a platform for extremist statements. I completely disassociate myself from the extremist statements and completely condemn the councillor concerned for making them. It is very concerning that Liverpool City Council have used ratepayers' funds to pay for posters and bumper stickers advertising this site, unaware it has been used to express these deranged conspiracy theories. Further, such extremist statements not only are irrelevant to the fight against the intermodal terminals but are counterproductive and undermine our cause. They are not befitting of a person holding an elected office in Australia. I hope that others involved in highlighting the folly of building two giant intermodal freight rail hubs in the middle of a residential area also condemn and distance themselves from these statements. Nonetheless, I will continue the fight against the intermodal terminals being built in this inappropriate location and I will do so using logic, reason and scientific facts, not irrelevant extremist statements. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Ipswich Business Enterprise Centre</title>
          <page.no>1759</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Friday I had the privilege of attending the Business Health Check two-day seminar run by the Business Enterprise Centre Ipswich Region in my electorate. I often say that, after the funding I secured for the upgraded Ipswich Motorway, the funding I secured in the 2007 election for the Ipswich Region Business Enterprise Centre is the most important finding for my community that I have secured. The $1.2 million we provided plus the extra $100,000 we provided for the small business advisory service have enabled hundreds and hundreds of businesses in Ipswich, Somerset and the western corridor to get assistance. From Goodna to Grandchester to Grantham, the Ipswich Region Business Enterprise Centre has provided assistance to flood-affected businesses, small communities, agribusinesses and farmers in the whole of the Ipswich and West Moreton region. I thank Tony Axford for the work they have done. It is great that they have also initiated the Indigenous business enterprise centre to assist our Indigenous brothers and sisters with business advice, mentoring, counselling and help. It is great that the Ipswich Region Business Enterprise Centre has been so forthcoming for and so committed to small business. Small business is the engine of my community. Five million Australians work in small business, and I worked in small business before I was elected in 2007. I know how important it is and I congratulate the BEC Ipswich Region for their wonderful work.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Macedonia</title>
          <page.no>1759</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SIMPKINS</name>
    <name.id>HWE</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On Wednesday, the parliament will be graced by the presence of a delegation from the Republic of Macedonia. It is a great opportunity for Macedonian people from the electorate of Cowan and from many electorates across the country to welcome these representatives of the Macedonian parliament. The President of the Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia, His Excellency Mr Trajko Veljanoski, will be here. Accompanying him will be the MPs Mr Ilija Dimovski; Mr Milorad Dodevski; Mr Djevat Ademi; Mrs Cvetanka Ivanova; Mr Marjan Madjovski, Head of the Cabinet of the President; and Mr Ivan Cvetanovski, Associate on Support of the Activities of the President. It is, as I said before, a great opportunity for the Macedonian people within Australia. They have made a fabulous contribution, particularly within the electorate of Cowan. I have in excess of 1,000 Macedonians in my electorate and I am very keen to see the issues that concern them and the issues of concern to Macedonian people across the whole country raised in this parliament. It is a great opportunity with this delegation coming through on Wednesday.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Blair Electorate: Building the Education Revolution Program</title>
          <page.no>1760</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Friday I also had the privilege of attending the Marburg State School. In my electorate of Blair in South-East Queensland we have received $105 million for 64 local schools under Building the Education Revolution. In fact, many of those schools received benefit in such a way that they assisted the flood evacuation recovery. For instance, at places like Fernvale and Esk the halls acted as the flood evacuation centres for local communities. Without the building of those halls there would have been simply nowhere for local communities to go to as they had to rush away from flooding waters. For example, the Redbank Creek in Esk broke the banks and went through the township. In Fernvale the Brisbane River did likewise.</para>
<para>But it is small country schools that have benefited so much, including Prenzlau State School, with $300,000. It was great to be there with Terry Hermann. The road off the Warrego Highway to Prenzlau State School is named after the Hermann family. The school was built in 1894. The new library will help the couple of dozen kids who go to that school. It is a farming community that has been settled there for many years. Terry said his great-grandfather would have loved to have been there but his grandfather attended the school. It is great that he could be there and provide assistance and it is great for local school community. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Student Services and Amenities Fee</title>
          <page.no>1760</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SOUTHCOTT</name>
    <name.id>TK6</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week represented orientation week for university students around Australia. I had the opportunity to go to Flinders University in the electorate of Boothby and attend orientation week there. While I was there I met with a number of students from Flinders University who are beginning their courses or continuing their courses. One of the things that came up commonly was a massive concern from students who are already struggling with budgets, with what they have to pay in rent and for their studies, about Labor's new tax of a student services and amenities fee. This is a fee of $263 per year. Universities have had the choice of whether or not to apply it, but this came up as a topic which students were very concerned about. What we see is the Labor Party increasing the pressure on the cost of living for all Australians. It is not just families who are feeling the impact through rising electricity prices, rising energy costs and the carbon tax to come later this year; also university students are feeling the pinch as the Labor Party have now put another tax on students: their student services and amenities fee of $263 a year. It was a great opportunity to be up at Flinders University. I also was able to have a tour of Flinders University Hall as well.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lyons Electorate: Agriculture</title>
          <page.no>1760</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LYONS</name>
    <name.id>M38</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in this Year of the Farmer to thank the federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Senator the Hon. Joe Ludwig; the Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Sid Sidebottom, the member for Braddon; and the Chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture, Resources, Fisheries and Forestry, the Hon. Dick Adams, the member for Lyons, who came into my electorate last week and visited the north-east region. This is an area of prime farmland with numerous dairying and cropping opportunities. The group toured the north-east and visited the Headquarters Dam, which has recently been finished, the Razz rhubarb farm and the Bridgestowe lavender farm.</para>
<para>This is an area of great potential for Tasmania, largely due to four irrigation schemes that are being worked on in the area. One, the Headquarters Dam, is already finished and another is to be completed soon. The topic of discussion was the Scottsdale DSTO. There are four firms that have been shortlisted for that wonderful project and they, along with the CSIRO and the University of Tasmania, are working out how they can add value to the products of the north-east. I was particularly impressed by Jarrod Nichols, a real innovator in farming who provides rhubarb for the major supermarkets and who is a fantastic innovator in farming in the north-east of Tasmania. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Water</title>
          <page.no>1761</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr STONE</name>
    <name.id>EM6</name.id>
    <electorate>Murray</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Everybody knows, particularly in the southern Murray-Darling Basin, that non-strategic water buyback is a killer. It makes our irrigation systems less efficient. It distorts the price for water in the irrigators market. It drives money back to the banks, that is for sure—it is all about retiring debt. So we were pleased when the minister for water, Tony Burke, some little while ago said: 'I understand this. I'm going to put a moratorium on any further government tenders.' We were shocked therefore a few days ago to find that these tenders are back on the shelf—they are back in business. We are going to see the tenders of this government rolled out with our drought stressed, debt stressed irrigators now once again pushed by their bank lenders to put their water up for sale. When you sell your water you sell your productivity. When you sell your water you make your neighbours have to pay a lot more for their irrigation services because your irrigation system is less efficient. It is called the Swiss cheese effect.</para>
<para>Minister Tony Burke heard about that right across the basin. His Murray-Darling Basin Authority chair and its committee understand this very well. The Tony Windsor led regional standing committee came out with, as a No. 1 policy recommendation, no more non-strategic buybacks. So why have we got this government reneging completely on the promises it made just months ago, putting a tender back into the system, putting enormous pressure back on our irrigation farmers, who cannot go on producing food like they should? <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Macarthur Electorate: Athletics Achievers</title>
          <page.no>1761</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MATHESON</name>
    <name.id>M2V</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to congratulate some very talented athletes in Macarthur for their recent success representing my electorate at both the state and national levels. I recently recommended these athletes to the Australian Sports Commission to receive some funding and I am pleased to say that they were all very successful.</para>
<para>These athletes included Nicole Sandrone from Cobbitty for the jumping equitation championships; Shannon Huntly-Wei from St Helens Park for the national handball championships; Kurt Hacking-Gadsby from Campbelltown for the national trampoline championships; Lana Rogers from Harrington Park for the Australian surf lifesaving championships; Mitchell Dawson from Narellan Vale for the men's Australian gymnastics championships; Katelyn Mills from Mt Annan for the women's artistic gymnastics championships; Joshua Ashkar from Mt Annan for the Australian school swimming championships; Nickaela Malby from Douglas Park for the New South Wales showjumping championships; Anna Laman from Kentlyn for the Australian athletics and cross-country championships; Corey Rowland from Camden South for the Australian schools hockey championships; Taylor Thomson from Woodbine for the Australian hockey championships; Christopher Sandrone from Cobbitty for the New South Wales open go-karting titles; and the Junior Rhythmic Group for rhythmic gymnastics.</para>
<para>The SPEAKER: Order! In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>1762</page.no>
        <type>MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I advise the House that I have asked the Minister for Trade to act as Minister for Foreign Affairs and to answer any questions for that portfolio.</para>
</speech>
</debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>1762</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Labor Party Leadership</title>
          <page.no>1762</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABBOTT</name>
    <name.id>EZ5</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Given that one-third of her parliamentary colleagues and a quarter of her cabinet colleagues have today expressed their lack of confidence in her, how can she claim to have a mandate to continue as Prime Minister?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I say to the Leader of the Opposition that I always give him full marks for audacity, if not consistency. He comes into this parliament having survived his leadership issues by one vote. It is no wonder the Leader of the Opposition got some new suits after he became Leader of the Opposition. The rest of them were covered with blood!</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister will return to the substance of the question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Let me be very clear with the Leader of the Opposition and the Australian people about the circumstances of today. As I have just explained to the Australian people, we met this morning and I have the overwhelming support of my colleagues. As a united team, we will be there providing the government this nation needs. We will be ensuring that we are managing the economy today in the interests of working people while we build the economy they will need tomorrow, so that they will have opportunities and prospects for themselves and for their children. At the same time, we will be providing the benefits that working families need. Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, we will not be cowering in the face of the challenges of the future. We will be addressing those challenges and building a clean energy future, ensuring that we share the proceeds of the mining boom.</para>
<para>To the Leader of the Opposition, who comes into this place to talk about trust and confidence, I say this. Australians can trust me to get the job done and they can have the confidence that, in the hardest of circumstances, I will win through in their interests, no matter how relentlessly negative the Leader of the Opposition is.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABBOTT</name>
    <name.id>EZ5</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Prime Minister. How can the Prime Minister claim to be leading a united team when the former Prime Minister and the former foreign minister said that the Prime Minister had 'lost the trust of the Australian people' and 31 of her caucus colleagues backed the former Prime Minister?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind the Leader of the Opposition that he comes into this parliament with half of his colleagues not supporting his leadership—they would have preferred Malcolm Turnbull. Sitting here as I do during question time I can sometimes see the member for Wentworth eyeing up a spot on the Leader of the Opposition's back. To the Leader of the Opposition, I say—</para>
<para class="italic">Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Prime Minister will pause. She will be heard in silence for the balance of this answer.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>To the Leader of the Opposition and to his colleagues—</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Robb interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The honourable member for Goldstein will leave the chamber under the provisions of standing order 94(a).</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Goldstein then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>To the Leader of the Opposition and to his colleagues I say this. I anticipate today that in question time the Leader of the Opposition will be focused on the Labor Party. I can assure him of this: we are focused on the nation's future. The Leader of the Opposition will never come in and ask a question about that because he has no policies, no plan, just negativity as his offering to the Australian people about the nation's future. We will stay on task. We are impatient to keep governing and making the decisions that this nation needs so that it has the future it deserves.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gillard Government</title>
          <page.no>1763</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEILL</name>
    <name.id>140651</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. How will the government continue to get the things done that the nation needs for the future?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Robertson for her question. I know that she is determined that for the community she serves in this parliament she provides the benefits they need today but she also is shaping the future that they will live tomorrow. I am not surprised that whenever the word 'future' is used in this parliament we have uproar and laughter from those opposite because they have nothing to say about the nation's future. Unlike the opposition, the approach we take is that there is not a day to lose to build the future this nation needs; there is not a day to lose to build a future in which we fairly share the benefits of the mining boom and this becomes a boom for the many, not for the few; there is not a day to waste to make sure we make the right decisions now so we have the economy we will need in the future, a clean energy economy, a high-skill economy, a high-wage economy, offering people the benefits of jobs and then a better job and then the opportunity to start their own small business if they choose to do so.</para>
<para>Here we see that there is not a day to waste to keep improving Australia's schools. They do not want the Leader of the Opposition's cutbacks; they want a continuation of a reform agenda that will get their children a better education. There is not a day to waste in continuing to roll out our health reforms, which will mean that there will be more doctors, more nurses and more ability for people to see a doctor in an emergency department, on time, or to get their elective surgery when they need it. There is not a day to waste to make sure that our nation is not at a standstill whilst the rest of the world moves on. We live in a remarkable age of opportunity as the global economy changes and as our regional economy changes, and there is not a day to waste as we go about seizing the benefits of those changes. That is what we are determined to do. As a Labor government, whilst we build that prosperity we are determined to look after those who need our care the most, particularly Australians with disabilities through the building of a national disability insurance scheme. There is not a day to waste and we are getting on with that job.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>1764</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to advise that the Federation Guard are at question time. I am told they are not in uniform but they are wearing brown shirts. On behalf of all honourable members I would like to acknowledge their presence and thank them for the work they do on behalf of our nation.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
</debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>1764</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gillard Government</title>
          <page.no>1764</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JULIE BISHOP</name>
    <name.id>83P</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, my question is to the Prime Minister. I remind the Prime Minister of this statement by the member for Griffith:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It wasn't K. Rudd who made a pre-election commitment on a carbon tax. It wasn't K. Rudd who made a particular commitment to Mr Wilkie on the question of poker machines. It wasn't K. Rudd who had anything to do with the East Timor Solution or the Malaysia Solution.</para></quote>
<para>Isn't the member for Griffith right that, far from being the cause of a good government going bad, he is in fact a whistleblower on a bad government getting worse?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Before I call the Prime Minister, I would like to point out that standing order 98(c) provides that a minister can only be questioned about matters of public affairs, administration or proceedings pending in the House, being matters for which the minister is responsible or with which the minister is officially connected. The practice of the House is that questions about political party leadership per se, about the statements and actions of the party members, officials and backbench members and about party meetings and processes have been ruled out of order. I direct members to <inline font-style="italic">House of Representatives Practice</inline> pages 538 and 539. There would be questions to the Prime Minister about the leadership and government as it effects its operations that would be in order. The Prime Minister could be questioned about the work of ministers in her administration and of cabinet, and ministers can be questioned about their work and their administration. As Speaker I have no desire at all to restrict members in their ability to hold the government to account, but I am obliged to ensure that they do so in a way that is consistent with the standing orders and the practice of the House. I would counsel all honourable members to observe my remarks.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Deputy Leader of the Opposition raises carbon pricing. Yes, I am in favour of putting a price on carbon and we achieved it last year against the opposition of those shouting out now. It is a bit interesting that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition asked this question, because she was in favour of pricing carbon until she decided that instead of being deputy leader to Malcolm Turnbull she would be deputy leader to the current Leader of the Opposition. She was in favour of pricing carbon until the minute she was against it. Let the record show the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has a track record of working alongside the member for Wentworth in support of a price on carbon. This question is motivated by pure hypocrisy.</para>
<para>On the question of problem gambling and making arrangements so that people are less likely to lose money that they cannot afford to lose and less likely to jeopardise their family's future, we faced a circumstance in which, because of the opposition of those who now seek to ask this question, there was not the support in this parliament for the scheme Mr Wilkie would have preferred. So instead we are bringing to the parliament the biggest package of reforms to address problem gambling the nation has ever seen. It remains to be whether or not the opposition will vote in favour of it or against it.</para>
<para>On the question of asylum seekers, heavens above, the opposition were all in favour of stopping the boats until they decided their political interests meant there should be more boats. If the opposition ever decides to put the national interest in front of their political interests, just let us know.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JULIE BISHOP</name>
    <name.id>83P</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, my supplementary question is to the Prime Minister and arises from her answer to my previous question. I remind the Prime Minister of her statement that, 'The 2010 election was sabotaged.' Is the Prime Minister claiming that all the faults of this government can be attributed to destabilisation by the member for Griffith and none to her own lack of judgment?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The supplementary question is ruled out of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pyne</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, on a point of order: firstly, the Prime Minister is responsible for her own statements and, secondly, she is responsible for the conduct of her government. This goes directly to the attributing of blame for failures that have occurred under her government. Therefore she is responsible for answering the question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The honourable member for Sturt will resume his seat. I call the honourable member for McEwen.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Employment</title>
          <page.no>1765</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, my question is to the Treasurer. How has the government supported Australian jobs and delivered economic growth? How will it keep delivering for working people into the future?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SWAN</name>
    <name.id>2V5</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for McEwen for that very important question. The reason so many of us on this side of the House went into public life in the first place is because we respect the dignity of work. We understand the importance of jobs—not just the number of jobs but the quality of jobs, the pay and working conditions that go with jobs and how important they are to the peace of mind of working families right around this country.</para>
<para>We understood at the height of the global financial crisis and the global recession how important policies were to support economic growth and jobs. That is why in this country over the past four years 700,000-plus jobs have been created whilst around the world unemployment is at eight per cent and nine per cent. So the creation of jobs and support for economic growth go right to the core of this government's economic agenda. We now have low unemployment. We have a huge pipeline of investment. Unemployment is at 5.1 per cent. We have an economy which has grown by seven per cent since the start of the global financial crisis, whereas around the world economies have not got back to where they were. The legacy of that for them is double-digit unemployment, with whole sections of communities simply destroyed by massive unemployment and business closures.</para>
<para>On this side of the House, we understand that jobs must be our No.1 priority to support economic growth and to meet the challenges which are posed by growth in our region. We also understand that there are patchwork areas of our economy where people are doing it tough. That is why we must put in place a range of policies which will support growth right across our region, particularly in small business. That is why we want to use the proceeds of the minerals resource rent tax to give a very big tax cut to 2.7 million small businesses right across our country to keep their doors open and to support employment—it is simply stunning that those opposite are opposing that tax cut for small business. It is why we want to invest in skills—$3 billion. It is why we are investing in infrastructure, particularly the NBN. It is why we are putting a price on carbon. Fundamentally, it is why we want to bring the budget back into surplus in 2012-13. Strict fiscal policy is the key to supporting employment.</para>
<para>I heard the Leader of the Opposition say that he was committed to reducing expenditure. He has a $70 billion hole in his budget bottom line and he had the hide before question time to go before the journalists of Australia and somehow pretend that he was going to reduce public expenditure—with a $70 billion hole in his budget bottom line. We are committed to jobs. We are committed to strict fiscal management. We are committed to investing in the future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Member for Griffith</title>
          <page.no>1766</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I remind the Prime Minister of her statement:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Kevin Rudd … always had very difficult and very chaotic work patterns.</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member will refer to the member for Griffith by his title.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Certainly, Mr Speaker. The member for Griffith:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… always had very difficult and very chaotic work patterns—</para></quote>
<para>his leadership was paralysed and chaotic, and he was always looking for the next picture opportunity. Why did the Prime Minister appoint the member for Griffith as Minister for Foreign Affairs if she held that view of him?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Griffith has served this nation as Minister for Foreign Affairs with distinction, following many of the initiatives in foreign policy that he entered into for this nation when Prime Minister. Amongst those major achievements include the creation of the G20—because of how important it was for our nation to be at the top table when the world came together to manage the global financial crisis—and include the work he did to see the creation of the East Asia Summit, so that we have in the one body all the right players around the one table that has a broad mandate, and enables us within our region to talk about security questions, political and strategic questions, as well as economic matters. These are important developments.</para>
<para>Of course, as Minister for Foreign Affairs he has been advocating around the world our claim to be on the United Nations Security Council. He has also been centrally involved in events arising from what has happened in Egypt, Libya and Syria, as the world has come together both to make its voice heard on those events and to provide practical support. That answers the member's question. He has served with distinction as foreign minister. In all of that time, as he so served, of course the only thing that the opposition ever questioned him about in this parliament was when they were looking for cheap political advantage rather than engaging in the serious questions of foreign policy that are so important to our nation's future.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I ask a supplementary question. If the Prime Minister thinks the minister is so good—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>will she reappoint him?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The honourable for Sturt does not have the call. As I indicated, during this trial period there could be two supplementary questions. If a proposed supplementary question is ruled out of order, you do not get another shot. If this trial works, I am disposed to expanding the number of supplementary questions, but we are during the trial period.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>1767</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs D'ATH</name>
    <name.id>HVN</name.id>
    <electorate>Petrie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport. Will the minister outline how the government's record infrastructure investment is building the Australian economy and how will the government's long-term reform continue to build the nation for the future?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank very much the member for Petrie for her question. In recent weeks, I have yet again been in her electorate looking at the Moreton Bay rail link—an important infrastructure proposal which we are delivering in her seat. When we came to office, we inherited an infrastructure deficit. More than 20 separate warnings from the Reserve Bank of Australia said that a failure to invest in infrastructure and skills was holding back our economic capacity. We set about addressing it. That was the case even though those opposite, when in government, had a $334 billion windfall in the budget in terms of additional receipts from what was anticipated in the budget papers.</para>
<para>We set about getting the policy framework right through establishing Infrastructure Australia. We then set about on the big investment decisions. We have doubled the roads budget. We have increased the rail budget by more than 10 times. We have committed more in urban public transport since 2007 than was invested by all previous governments from Federation right through to 2007. They are the commitments that we have made. But it has not just been in investment. We also understand that you have to get the regulatory environment right, which is why we have moved from 23 transport regulators down to three—single regulators in rail, heavy vehicle and maritime—providing a boost to the economy of $30 billion over 20 years. But there is much more to be done. We also have a plan, and legislation will be introduced in coming weeks, to revitalise Australian shipping—an industry that is vital for our security, for our environment and for our economy. That industry was neglected and, indeed you can argue, consciously downtrodden by those opposite with a strategy to replace the Australian flag with flags of convenience on our coast, with all of the repercussions that that has. We on this side of the House will take action on these issues.</para>
<para>We have also taken action on the issue of safe roads by making sure that those hard-working truck drivers who keep the country going can drive safely without pressure being put on them. Those opposite are not even sure if they will say yes to that—a fundamental reform that is so important for the safety of all those who drive on our roads, not just truck drivers but all those who share the roads with them. We on this side of the House are determined to get the big issues right. We are determined to continue to advance the reform agenda that we have been putting in place since 2007 in spite of the relentless negativity of those opposite.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Carbon Pricing</title>
          <page.no>1767</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs MIRABELLA</name>
    <name.id>00AMU</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the finance minister right when she says the member for Griffith's suggestion of a review of the carbon tax could have a very negative effect, or is the resources minister right when he says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… there is a lot of concern in industry at the moment about the price we've locked in … whether we've locked in a price that's to our disadvantage as a nation.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question. The government brought to this parliament legislation for carbon pricing at the right price in order to drive a transformation in our economy to a clean energy future. At that time, we understood the circumstances of industries that trade with the world and trade at a world price, which is why we have created a multi-billion dollar Jobs and Competitiveness Program to support those industries and to support those jobs. It should disappoint all Australians that the opposition came into this parliament and not only voted against that, but they also voted against a $300 million support plan for the steel industry—that is, having gone round the country pretending that they are interested in blue-collar jobs, when it came to recording their vote in this parliament in favour of blue-collar jobs they refused to do so.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister will return to the substance of the question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Our carbon pricing legislation has got it right. Through that legislation we will continue to support jobs, particularly blue-collar jobs. We will implement that legislation alongside our other major programs and policies to support blue-collar jobs and to support manufacturing. Unfortunately, the opposition has locked itself into cutting half a billion dollars out of that and then ending assistance to the car industry, putting at risk 46,000 blue-collar jobs. So I suggest to the member who asked this question she would be better off focusing her energy on working within her own political party to end this hypocrisy—they talk about blue-collar jobs but they never vote for them.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economic Competitiveness</title>
          <page.no>1768</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Industry and Innovation. The minister would be aware of the closure of Australia's biggest tomato farm, run by the Philip family, which saw the loss of 100 jobs, and of Coles's recent announcement that they will reduce the price of fruit and vegetables by 50 per cent. Australia is already a net importer of fruit and vegetables and within four years will be a net importer of all food. An estimated 150,000 small businesses and 100,000 farmers are under threat from Woolworths's and Coles's 88 per cent market share compared to America's 23 per cent. Can the minister advise whether the government is going to act on this oligopoly, have another whitewash, or continue government as a spectator sport?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Kennedy for his question. I certainly understand the concerns that he has raised. The circumstances of the closure of the Philip family tomato farms are extremely unfortunate. The government will do all it can to help the employees who have been affected by it.</para>
<para>Like the member for Kennedy, the government, of course, has been following very closely for some time now the developments in our supermarket sector in Australia and the competitive issues that are there. The government is extremely aware of concerns about the behaviour of some of the major players in the retail sector. It is the role of the independent commission and consumer watchdog, the ACCC, to monitor and ensure a competitive market. The ACCC has appropriate powers to undertake that task and the Chairman of the ACCC has made clear in a number of statements that the ACCC is focusing on conduct by the supermarkets and has been urging players to give him the evidence he needs to take the issues forward. He has said the following about this issue:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We've been urging suppliers to give us some evidence to take things forward (in a prosecution) but we've been having trouble getting that. Too many of them are scared. At the moment all we've got is third-party hearsay.</para></quote>
<para>He said the ACCC 'urged suppliers to talk with the ACCC about these issues'.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Katter</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On a point of order: there are no breaches of the Trade Practices Act. I do not allege that. What I am saying is that they have got 88 per cent of the market. They do not have to breach the act.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Randall interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There is no point of order. I do not need the assistance of the member for Canning instructing me to clear the gallery.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I understand the member for Kennedy's concerns about this issue. We have to allow the Chairman of the ACCC the opportunity to do his job. I am sure that if the Chairman of the ACCC believes that he and the ACCC need further powers to deal with some of these competition issues in relation to the retail sector, he will come forward to the government and indicate that that is the case. At a broader level in the economy, the government are taking a number of steps to try to alleviate the pressure on small businesses in particular. We are endeavouring to distribute the benefits of the resources boom to assist small business through two key things. One of them is to reduce company tax and the other is to introduce an instant asset write-off of up to $6,500 for as many assets as small businesses can purchase within a financial year. We are doing constructive things to support jobs and small business in this economy, and all of it is opposed by the coalition.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I ask a supplementary question. It is a structural issue. They have 88 per cent of the market. They are not in breach of the act. A lot of people would say they are, but I do not believe they are in breach of the act. Will the minister please say what he is doing about the fact that they have 88 per cent of the market? In America it is 23 per cent and they are squealing. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
    <electorate>Charlton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Kennedy for his continuing questions in relation to the issue, because it is extremely important. The government are completely mindful of the situation in the retail sector and the competition issues that exist. It is properly the domain of the ACCC to deal with this issue. The ACCC chairman is cognisant of the issue and has indicated that on the public record. Should he need further powers, the government are certain that he will come forward and indicate that that is the case, and we would properly consider such a submission.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Employment</title>
          <page.no>1769</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAMPION</name>
    <name.id>HW9</name.id>
    <electorate>Wakefield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. How is the government supporting Australian industry and jobs today and delivering for working people into the future?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
    <electorate>Charlton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Wakefield for his question. I understand it is his birthday today, so I acknowledge that. On this side of the House, we manage the economy to benefit the working people of this country and to grow jobs. Labor governments know how best to manage the economy for jobs growth. Australia does have low unemployment at 5.1 per cent. Real wages in this country have continued to grow. By contrast, unemployment in the United States is above eight per cent and real wage growth is stagnant.</para>
<para>Our economic strength has been achieved while also delivering on Labor's values of fairness and equity. We removed Work Choices to improve fairness in Australian workplaces. We have introduced paid parental leave. We have doubled investment in school education. We have upgraded facilities at schools around the country. We have created 130,000 new training places. We are investing more than $36 billion in transport infrastructure projects around the country. This side of the parliament is making an historic investment in the National Broadband Network, which will drive productivity improvements, improve living standards and create new business opportunities for businesses all around the country. This side of the parliament understands the importance of introducing a carbon price so that we can separate our economic growth from growth in pollution. On this issue, anyone who argues that we as a nation can do nothing about climate change is betraying our future—our environmental future and our economic future. We are investing in the skills and training to give Australians a fair share of the mining boom. We are helping small business.</para>
<para>Every single thing that the government is doing on the economy is opposed by the coalition. Falsehoods are constantly told. Let us not forget that not many months ago the Leader of the Opposition claimed the coal industry would be destroyed by a carbon price—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The minister will become directly relevant or will resume his seat. The minister has the call but he must be directly relevant to the question before the chamber.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>This is directly relevant because it is about jobs and industry. The fact of the matter is that, since the government introduced our carbon price plans and legislated our clean energy package, almost $20 billion of investment has been announced in the coal industry, and the Leader of the Opposition said the industry would be destroyed. There are falsehoods told.</para>
<para>On this side of the parliament, we are managing the economy for the working people of this country. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAMPION</name>
    <name.id>HW9</name.id>
    <electorate>Wakefield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Can the minister explain how the government will support thousands of workers at Holden's Elizabeth plant?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
    <electorate>Charlton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This is an extremely important issue, so I thank the member for Wakefield for his supplementary question. Here again the government is managing the government to support jobs, and the motor-vehicle-manufacturing sector of this country is extremely important to our economy. Take, for example, the fact that 15 per cent of the research and development expenditure in our manufacturing sector is in the car industry alone. The car industry directly employs 46,000 people; another 200,000-odd people indirectly depend upon the industry. It is extremely important that that industry, which is at the high-value-added end of our manufacturing, achieves government support.</para>
<para>On the other side of parliament we have the contrary story. The opposition would take—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! As the minister is being no longer directly relevant, he will resume his seat.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Asylum Seekers</title>
          <page.no>1771</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I remind the Prime Minister of the revelation by the former foreign minister that:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… decisions which were taken, in my absence often, and then announced and implemented, often without my knowledge, in the case of various decisions like the Malaysia solution for example, and then off they went only to discover they didn’t work.</para></quote>
<para>Will the Prime Minister now end the denial and end the chaos on our borders that the failure of cabinet to work together has helped to create by unreservedly restoring the proven border protection policies of the coalition that her government abolished?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>To the member, who knows a great deal about this: I ask why it is that, if he is genuinely interested in dealing with border security and stopping the boats, as he claims, when the government made a good faith offer to implement the solution that the opposition says was its preferred solution—that is, a detention centre on Nauru—and when the government made a good faith offer to do that in parallel with implementing our arrangement with Malaysia, the opposition instead decided that it would prefer to see more boats? The reason for that is absolutely clear. The opposition has taken a calculated, cynical decision that it is in its political interests to see more boats, no matter what the risks to human lives and safety.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Ewen Jones interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pyne</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A point of order on relevance, Mr Speaker: I fail to see how smearing the opposition could be directly relevant to the question that she was asked.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister will be directly relevant.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I was very directly asked about implementing the policies of the opposition, and I am being very directly relevant to that. We entered into a good faith set of discussions to come to an understanding across this parliament on an issue of importance to the nation.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Ewen Jones interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The honourable member for Herbert will remove himself under the provisions of standing order 94(a).</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Herbert then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The opposition walked away because it decided it would rather see more boats and more risks to lives than work with the government towards a solution. I say to the member who asked the question: as he well knows, the stated policy of the opposition now about turning back boats is one that was not implemented by the Howard government in its later years and is one that would put at risk the lives of men and women who work in our Australian Defence Force—people who have committed their lives to serving our nation. It would put their lives at risk. I say to the member who asked the question, and I say it very proudly indeed: we will never join with the opposition in risking the lives of ADF personnel with such a policy. We will never do that. In answer to the member's question: we will never do what you ask. We will never risk those lives in the way that you want to for your cheap politics.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>1772</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation. How is the government supporting working people by delivering economic policies that invest in their future?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Blair for his question. He is interested in the future for his constituents in Ipswich. He knows the courtesy of a Labor government: 43½ thousand of his voters who are working at the moment will get an increase in superannuation. He also knows that economic change in Australia is inevitable. Unlike the flat earth society opposite, we do not argue that change can never happen. We do not mislead the Australian electorate and say to people, 'You don't have to change; you can stay as you are.' What he also knows is that only the Labor government are the people who are committed to helping people get through change. We are doing it in three ways. We are doing it through making sure people have jobs and fair conditions at work, we are doing it by making sure that we can help families make ends meet and we are also doing it by ensuring a good future for people in the areas of both social justice and their retirement.</para>
<para>In terms of ensuring fairness, our credentials are second to none, because we repealed Work Choices and got the Fair Work Act. We stand for having modern awards and ensuring that whilst business can prosper people do not get ripped off in the workplace. In terms of jobs our credentials are, again, out there. Whilst this year will be a difficult year for employment in Australia as we weather the economic storms of Europe, there is no doubt that our unemployment numbers, most recently at 5.1 per cent, are the envy of the Western world. How did the opposition react when we heard that good economic news? They had that spanked-bottom look on their faces!</para>
<para>We talk about skills. We are the government that is spending more on skills than any other government ever before. It is on our watch that we have seen more apprentices being trained and more people getting the training they need so they can adjust and find new jobs as the new economy rises. We are also helping families make ends meet. That is why we want to make sure that the corporate tax rate is reduced from 30 per cent to 29 per cent. That is why, on 1 July this year, as the carbon price is introduced, we will see the tax-free threshold go up to $18,000. Who would have believed it was possible to lift the threshold that high? Only a Labor government believes that. That is what we have managed to accomplish.</para>
<para>I also said that we are helping people into the future by making sure that we have a fair raft of social justice measures. That is how we help deliver a strong economy, by making sure no-one gets left behind. Only one political party in Australia is supporting an increase in superannuation from nine per cent to 12 per cent. Only one side of Australian politics is abolishing the 15 per cent tax paid on superannuation under $37,000 and only one party in Australia is fair dinkum about the National Disability Insurance Scheme.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gillard Government</title>
          <page.no>1772</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHRISTENSEN</name>
    <name.id>230485</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I remind the Prime Minister of her written agreement with the member for Denison that underpinned her ability to form a minority government last year, her pledge before the 2010 election, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead,' and her agreement with the member for Griffith not to challenge him, the night before he was dumped as leader—all of which were broken. I ask the Prime Minister: is there any promise you are not prepared to break?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order: I refer to the written ruling that you read to the House earlier in question time today, when you gave fair warning that questions such as that should be ruled out of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pyne</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Sturt will resume his seat. The question is allowed. I call the honourable Prime Minister.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A little bit earlier in question time I said that what the opposition would do today is concentrate on the Labor Party and what we would do is concentrate on the nation's future. So I say to the member who asked this question that he clearly has no interest at all in tackling climate change or seizing a clean energy future for our country. He is prepared to back the Leader of the Opposition as they wander around the nation on the one hand saying, 'Let's stand still; let's do nothing,' and then on the other hand saying, 'Let's have our own scheme and charge each family $1,300 for the scheme we have designed, which we know will not work.' Whereas the truth—and everybody in this parliament actually knows it—is that they will never—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs Bronwyn Bishop</name>
    <name.id>SE4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, on a point of order: I request that the Prime Minister be directly relevant in answering her question. The question was: are there any promises that she will not break?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member will resume her seat. The Prime Minister will focus on the specifics of the question asked by the honourable member for Dawson. The Prime Minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There were three policy issues raised in the question. I know, of course, that the opposition has got no interest in policies, no interest in the nation's future—just says no to everything. But when I am asked about three policies I am going to answer on the three policies. Unlike the opposition, we are focused on the nation's future. Unlike the opposition, we will not wander around pretending that it is good enough to stand still. We will not wander around pretending that there is a way of addressing climate change efficiently that does not involve putting a price on carbon—that is, we will be clear and accurate with the Australian people, the way the member for Wentworth was when he was Leader of the Opposition, the way former Prime Minister John Howard was when he took an emissions trading scheme to the 2007 election.</para>
<para>The member also asks about other policy questions. If he wants to address problem gambling then he will vote with the government on the biggest package of reforms ever to be brought to this nation's parliament to address problem gambling. If he genuinely cares, if this is anything other than cheap politics, then he will be honour bound to do that having raised the issue.</para>
<para>More generally, I say this to those members opposite as they continue their negativity, their denial of the nation's needs and of building the nation's future. Whilst they stay stuck in that cheap negativity we will be getting on with the job: not a day to lose to build the prosperous future that our nation wants; not a day to lose to make sure that children have the best education, that we have the best health care, that we have a national disability insurance scheme; and not a day to lose as we address the pressing challenges as our economy restructures, as our regional economy restructures. We understand that those opposite will carp and whinge and moan and say no. We will just get on with the job.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On reflection, in future I will rule such a question out of order on the basis that it does not conform with standing order 100(d)(iv). The imputations contained in the question mean that, in future, a similar question will not be permitted.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Abbott</name>
    <name.id>EZ5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I move—</para>
<para class="italic">Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I will give the call to the Leader of the Opposition to move what he is about to move when the House returns to silence.</para>
<para class="italic">Dr Mike Kelly interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The honourable member for Eden-Monaro will remove himself from the House under the provisions of standing order 94(a). The Leader of the Opposition has the call.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Eden-Monaro then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MOTIONS</title>
        <page.no>1774</page.no>
        <type>MOTIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gillard Government</title>
          <page.no>1774</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABBOTT</name>
    <name.id>EZ5</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately—That the Prime Minister explain to the House how the extraordinary public revelations of the dysfunction, division and chaos at the centre of this government over the last 18 months will end with today’s bloodletting. Further, how the government will now address the real problems facing the Australian people, namely:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) cost of living pressures exacerbated by the carbon tax;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) the border protection chaos caused by the government ending policies that worked; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) pressure on jobs that government policies are just making worse.</para></quote>
<para>Mr Speaker, standing orders must be suspended because it is absolutely crystal clear to the Australian people that we have a divided, dishonest and incompetent government. Today, one-third of the caucus and one-quarter of the cabinet agreed with the coalition's assessment of this government. We all know that the Prime Minister and her backers are saying that, somehow, the result today was good news for the Prime Minister. How can the Prime Minister claim to have the confidence of this House when 31 members of the caucus voted for someone whom the member for Bendigo last week called a psychopath? How can that be good news for this Prime Minister? This is why standing orders must be suspended.</para>
<para>Fundamentally, this Prime Minister has a trust problem, and that is the most important issue that should be before this House—the trust problem that this Prime Minister has, which was on display yet again just a half an hour before question time. We all know that last week the Prime Minister ferociously attacked the then foreign minister. She said: 'The government that Kevin Rudd had led had entered a period of paralysis. Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister always had very difficult and very chaotic work patterns. Government, by contrast, requires consistency, purpose, method, discipline, inclusion, consultation, which the member for Griffith did not have.' So here we have, last week, the Prime Minister's candid assessment of the member for Griffith, and what does she say today? She says: 'We must honour his many achievements. Kevin Rudd led this nation through the global financial crisis. He delivered the apology to the stolen generations. He has been an amazing advocate of Australia's interest on the world stage, and he has made so many other remarkable achievements.' He has made so many other remarkable achievements, except that he was the greatest prima donna the Labor Party has ever known, because that is what she said last Thursday.</para>
<para>Standing orders must be suspended because this Prime Minister has a trust problem and a truth problem. This Prime Minister cannot even maintain a consistent position from Thursday to Monday. That is the problem with this Prime Minister. She did not tell the truth to the former Prime Minister in June of last year, she did not tell the truth to the Australian people before the election about the carbon tax, she did not tell the truth to the member for Denison about poker machine changes and she cannot even tell the truth today. That is why standing orders must be suspended. That is the most important matter before this House.</para>
<para>Over the years I have had a lot of disagreements with the member for Griffith, but he was right when he said last week that the Prime Minister 'has lost the trust of the Australian people'. But it is not just that the Prime Minister has lost the trust of the Australian people—the Prime Minister has not delivered good government to the Australian people. Kevin Rudd, the member for Griffith, nailed that last week when he said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It wasn’t K Rudd who made a pre-election commitment on a carbon tax. It wasn’t K Rudd who made a particular commitment to Mr Wilkie on the question of poker machines. It wasn’t K Rudd who had anything to do with the East Timor solution or the Malaysia solution. These were initiatives and decisions taken uniquely by the prime minister.</para></quote>
<para>Standing orders must be suspended because this is a government with a fundamental problem identified by the former Prime Minister and the former foreign minister. There is the faceless men problem, there is the trust problem and there is the problem of a Prime Minister who has no core beliefs.</para>
<para>Do not think that the faceless men are going to go away—oh no! We know what the faceless men are doing. They are at work today, and they will be at work in the future, because they just cannot help themselves. And that is not me speaking, that is the minister for resources—someone who has no confidence in this Prime Minister, someone who has no confidence in a government run by this Prime Minister and someone who has told the truth. I congratulate him for telling the truth, because there is a truth deficit disorder in the modern Labor Party and no-one suffers from that dreadful political syndrome more than this Prime Minister.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Danby interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition will pause for a moment. The member for Melbourne Ports will remain silent for the rest of the leader's contribution.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABBOTT</name>
    <name.id>EZ5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It is no secret that I am not the greatest admirer of the Australian Labor Party, but I pity a once great party that has been brought low by such unworthy people. There was a party that once worked, in the immortal words of Ben Chifley, 'for the betterment of mankind'. What has it been reduced to? It has been reduced to a party that is simply a vehicle for the ego and the ambition of this unworthy Prime Minister.</para>
<para>I say to the Australian people that we are so much better than this. I say to the Australian people that we can have better government. I say to the Australian people that better days are coming, because we are a great country being let down by a seriously bad government. Nothing at all is going to change as a result of today's vote. We will still have the carbon tax, which will clobber the jobs and the standard of living of every Australian family. We will still have the appalling chaos on our borders created entirely by the decisions of this government and maintained by the extraordinary stubbornness of this Prime Minister, who does not have the decency or the humility to admit that there are policies that worked. And we will still have a Prime Minister who is far more focused on her job than she is on protecting the jobs of Australian people. Everything this Prime Minister said today—and this is why standing orders must be suspended—is about protecting her job. Everything that this Prime Minister has said or done in this House betrays the fact that this Prime Minister fundamentally lacks the magnanimity necessary to hold the great office of Prime Minister.</para>
<para>There is a better way, but only the coalition can deliver to this country the stable government that it deserves. Only the coalition can give this country the hope, reward and opportunity that the Australian people need and deserve. Only the coalition can give us a strong economy because we will get government spending down and productivity up. If you get government spending down you take the pressure off interest rates and you allow taxes to be responsibly reduced. We will get productivity up because we are not run by faceless men—the same faceless men who dictate the policy of this government when it comes to workplace relations.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Byrne interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The honourable member for Holt will remain silent.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABBOTT</name>
    <name.id>EZ5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Over the last few days the Australian people have been embarrassed by the spectacle of this Prime Minister humiliated as a once great political party tears itself to pieces. But things will improve. Do you know how they will improve? They will improve with an election. I say to the member for Griffith that if he really does believe in people power then that is what he should want—an election. He should want an election because the prime ministership of this country should never again be the plaything of the faceless men; it should always be in the gift of the Australian people, and none but the Australian people should choose. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JULIE BISHOP</name>
    <name.id>83P</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion. It is important that the House suspend standing orders because this House and the Australian public deserve an honest explanation from this Prime Minister—a Prime Minister who has a passing acquaintance with the truth; a Prime Minister who in recent days has unleashed her dogs of war to incite an unprecedented wave of vitriol and public vilification against a former leader of the Labor Party and a former Labor Prime Minister. It is important that standing orders are suspended so that the Prime Minister can explain why she sent out her lieutenants to describe a former Prime Minister of this nation and a former foreign minister of this nation as 'a psychopath with a huge ego', as 'deeply flawed' and having 'great weaknesses', as someone 'disloyal to the labour movement', as a person 'whose behaviour became increasingly erratic' and as someone who 'showed contempt for cabinet, contempt for the parliament and contempt for the Australian public'.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. This motion is for a suspension of standing orders. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition was quite prepared to move multiple points of order the last time that I spoke on one of these suspensions. I ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to come back to the question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House is entirely correct. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will focus on the motion moved by her leader.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JULIE BISHOP</name>
    <name.id>83P</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The suspension must be allowed so that the Prime Minister can explain why her lieutenants called the foreign minister somebody with chaotic work patterns who sabotaged the 2010 campaign. The Prime Minister appointed this—on her assessment; on Labor's assessment—'deeply flawed individual with a personality disorder' as foreign minister. Labor say that he was fit to be the foreign minister of this country. On that basis—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is now making allegations on the basis of a motion that is for a suspension of standing orders. They did not seek leave to do so.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Dutton</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You are being frivolous.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Dickson will remove himself from the chamber under the provisions of standing order 94(a). I, as the chair, will determine whether a point of order is frivolous.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Dickson then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is defying your ruling. She must speak to the substance of the motion before the chair, which is the suspension of standing orders.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will focus on the motion.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JULIE BISHOP</name>
    <name.id>83P</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Standing orders must be suspended so that the Prime Minister can explain how the extraordinary public revelations of the dysfunction, division and chaos at the centre of the government over the last 18 months will end with today's bloodletting. On Labor's own assessment of their former leader and of their current leader, their choice today was between a psychopath and a sociopath, with the Labor Party in continuous group therapy for the last three years. It is important that we suspend standing orders because some of these comments were made by the Prime Minister, who saw fit to conduct a campaign of vilification from the prime ministerial office, another example of the squalid culture of the Prime Minister's office that gave rise to the riots on Australia Day. That is why standing orders must be—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat now. She no longer has the call. The question is that the motion be agreed to. I call the Prime Minister.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Truss interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Nationals will remove himself from the chamber under the provisions of standing order 94(a). He specifically said that my ruling was outrageous and he is lucky that he has not been named. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. I have withdrawn the call from her. I asked her to focus on the motion before the chair. I have given the call to the Prime Minister.</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">The member for </inline> <inline font-style="italic">Wide Bay</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome this debate.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pyne</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order on the actions that you have just taken against both the Leader of the National Party and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Given the unprecedented nature of removing the call from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, I ask you, Mr Speaker, to explain the basis for that action so that we are aware of how we should conduct ourselves in the future rather than perhaps simply making the same mistakes again—if indeed they did make mistakes.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The reason that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was required to resume her seat was because she was not being relevant to the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, on a separate point of order, the Prime Minister has not been able to begin her contribution. I would ask that the clock be started again.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House will resume his seat. The question is that the motion be agreed to. The Prime Minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GILLARD</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome this debate, because it is about the priorities of the Australian nation. The priorities of the Australian people should be debated in this House—their focus on jobs; on making lives for their families; on the benefits that their families need so that they can support themselves; on a great education for their children; on their young people being able to get apprenticeships or university places; on health and on making sure that they can go to an emergency department, see a doctor when they need to and get elective surgery; and on making sure that our nation has a stronger and fairer future. And those things are the focus of the government.</para>
<para>What should be the subject of debate in this parliament? We can have the squalor of the opposition's approach or we can focus on managing the economy in the interests of working people. We can focus on the more than 700,000 jobs already created under this Labor government. We can focus on an unemployment rate of 5.1 per cent when around the world nations suffer unemployment rates of double that. We can focus on what is needed in 2012 to support Australian jobs in manufacturing. I would happily have a debate about our plan for manufacturing versus the half-a-billion-dollar cut and the end of assistance to the car industry being advocated by those opposite. I would happily debate our plans to keep tens of thousands of Australians in work as opposed to the plans of the opposition to end those jobs. That is the proper business of this parliament. In this suspension, what the opposition seeks to do is carve out parliamentary time for its squalor rather than for the purpose of talking about Australian jobs.</para>
<para>At the same time, we have the opposition saying, 'Let's devote parliamentary time to the pursuit of our naked political interest, not to important issues like how we seize a clean energy future.' They are embarrassed to be reminded, time after time, of their contradictions and hypocrisy on pricing carbon. Former Prime Minister Howard is repudiated by this shambolic opposition, former Prime Minister Howard is dispensed with as if he had never said that there should be an emissions trading scheme.The opposition do not want to have that debate because they do not want the Australian people to understand that their plan is about costing Australian families $1,300 each and that their plan is about taking tax cuts and pension increases and family payment increases away from working families. They do not want that debated in this parliament so they continue these cheap tricks.</para>
<para>They do not want debated in this parliament our plans for health reform versus their plans for health cutbacks. This Labor government has delivered an historic health reform agreement and in 2012 it is being rolled out around the nation, meaning that there are more doctors and more nurses and more healthcare services available. They never want to debate health, because they have got plans for cutbacks now, just as the Leader of the Opposition had plans for cutbacks when he was a long-serving minister for health in the Howard government. They do not want that debated; they just want to focus on the cheap politics. They do not want debated what is happening in Australian schools, because they do not want Australians to know that they have plans to cut back money going to disadvantaged schools, they have plans to cut back money going into improving teacher quality and they have plans to cut back money going into the infrastructure that kids need to learn in the 21st century, like computers in schools. They never bring on a debate about those issues—that is, quality education from this Labor government versus their plans for cutbacks in schools.</para>
<para>Nor do they want to debate our plans to roll out the National Broadband Network, or the achievement by this Labor government of the structural separation of Telstra, because they do not want Australians to know that they are committed to pulling the broadband out of the ground, making sure that this nation falls behind world standards, and to losing all the jobs come with it. Despite the bravado of the Leader of the Opposition at the start of the parliamentary year, the last thing they want is a debate about the economy in 2012. The last thing they want to do is debate the government's plan for a new skills agenda—an agenda for Australians to have the high-skills high-wage jobs of the future—or the government's plan for a budget surplus, because they are hoping that no-one notices the fact that until they cut $70 billion of services for working families they cannot even get the budget to the starting line. They do not want to be debating the government's programs and plans for managing this structural change in our economy, change that is putting pressure on some sectors but is full of opportunity for the future. They do not want Australians to understand the new benefits that this Asian century can bring to our economy, which will come as our region grows and prospers. We can prosper with it.</para>
<para>Instead, they would rather focus on their endless game-playing and their endless politics. That is because they are focused on cheap politics, whilst we are focused on the future. In the Leader of the Opposition's own motion he points to three issues. Cost of living—let us have a debate about their Coles and Woolies tax to fund their ridiculous paid parental leave scheme, which as usual is destined to give the biggest benefits to those at the top. They have never found a billionaire they did not want to shovel money at.</para>
<para>The Leader of the Opposition mentioned border protection in his motion—let us debate that and the plans the opposition has to put Australian lives on the line and to put Australian lives in danger. The opposition would rather profit politically than protect the men and women who serve in the Australian Defence Force. The Leader of the Opposition has also talked about jobs. The last thing he really wants to do is have a debate in this parliament about jobs, standing proudly as he does for the end of steelworking jobs, standing proudly as he does for the end of car industry jobs, standing proudly as he does for denying Australians the jobs and opportunities of the future, because he has got no plans to build the future we need.</para>
<para>The House should not agree to this motion. It should not follow the Leader of the Opposition down the road of negativity. Australians expect us as a government and as a parliament to have them at centre stage: their needs, their dreams, their prospects and their future. That is our focus as a government as we are impatient to get on with the work that will deliver to those working people today and build them the future that they want. The House should reject out of hand this further squalor from the opposition for what it is.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I also rise to speak against this motion to suspend standing and sessional orders. This is the 41st time that the opposition have unsuccessfully moved a suspension of standing orders and they do it for one purpose—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pyne</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I appreciate the theatre of the Leader of the House wanting to have a say because he cannot bear to miss out. Surely the time—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There is no point of order. The Leader of the House has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Those opposite do this day after day for two reasons: (1) because they do not have anything to say about Australia's future in the great policy debates before this nation, and (2) so that for a brief period they can sit on the government benches. What we have put up with since 2010 is the longest dummy spit in Australian political history! And we see it again here today: they have two speakers, but their great objection is that we here on this side have two speakers. Let me say this: we only need one person to beat you lot and that person is the Prime Minister!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question before the chair is that the motion for the suspension of standing and sessional orders moved by the honourable Leader of the Opposition be agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Gillard</name>
    <name.id>83L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para> Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper.</inline></para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
          <division.header>
            <body>
              <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [15:19]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Peter Slipper)</p>
            </body>
          </division.header>
          <division.data>
            <ayes>
              <num.votes>69</num.votes>
              <title>AYES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Abbott, AJ</name>
                <name>Alexander, JG</name>
                <name>Andrews, KJ</name>
                <name>Andrews, KL</name>
                <name>Baldwin, RC</name>
                <name>Billson, BF</name>
                <name>Bishop, BK</name>
                <name>Bishop, JI</name>
                <name>Briggs, JE</name>
                <name>Broadbent, RE</name>
                <name>Buchholz, S</name>
                <name>Chester, D</name>
                <name>Christensen, GR</name>
                <name>Ciobo, SM</name>
                <name>Cobb, JK</name>
                <name>Entsch, WG</name>
                <name>Fletcher, PW</name>
                <name>Forrest, JA</name>
                <name>Frydenberg, JA</name>
                <name>Gambaro, T</name>
                <name>Gash, J</name>
                <name>Griggs, NL</name>
                <name>Haase, BW</name>
                <name>Hartsuyker, L</name>
                <name>Hawke, AG</name>
                <name>Hockey, JB</name>
                <name>Hunt, GA</name>
                <name>Irons, SJ</name>
                <name>Jensen, DG</name>
                <name>Katter, RC</name>
                <name>Keenan, M</name>
                <name>Kelly, C</name>
                <name>Laming, A</name>
                <name>Ley, SP</name>
                <name>Macfarlane, IE</name>
                <name>Marino, NB</name>
                <name>Markus, LE</name>
                <name>Matheson, RG</name>
                <name>McCormack, MF</name>
                <name>Mirabella, S</name>
                <name>Morrison, SJ</name>
                <name>Moylan, JE</name>
                <name>Neville, PC (teller)</name>
                <name>O'Dowd, KD</name>
                <name>O'Dwyer, KM</name>
                <name>Prentice, J</name>
                <name>Pyne, CM</name>
                <name>Ramsey, RE</name>
                <name>Randall, DJ</name>
                <name>Robb, AJ</name>
                <name>Robert, SR</name>
                <name>Roy, WB</name>
                <name>Ruddock, PM</name>
                <name>Schultz, AJ</name>
                <name>Scott, BC</name>
                <name>Secker, PD (teller)</name>
                <name>Simpkins, LXL</name>
                <name>Smith, ADH</name>
                <name>Somlyay, AM</name>
                <name>Southcott, AJ</name>
                <name>Stone, SN</name>
                <name>Tehan, DT</name>
                <name>Tudge, AE</name>
                <name>Turnbull, MB</name>
                <name>Van Manen, AJ</name>
                <name>Vasta, RX</name>
                <name>Washer, MJ</name>
                <name>Wilkie, AD</name>
                <name>Wyatt, KG</name>
              </names>
            </ayes>
            <noes>
              <num.votes>72</num.votes>
              <title>NOES</title>
              <names>
                <name>Adams, DGH</name>
                <name>Albanese, AN</name>
                <name>Bandt, AP</name>
                <name>Bird, SL</name>
                <name>Bowen, CE</name>
                <name>Bradbury, DJ</name>
                <name>Brodtmann, G</name>
                <name>Burke, AE</name>
                <name>Burke, AS</name>
                <name>Butler, MC</name>
                <name>Byrne, AM</name>
                <name>Champion, ND</name>
                <name>Cheeseman, DL</name>
                <name>Clare, JD</name>
                <name>Collins, JM</name>
                <name>Combet, GI</name>
                <name>Crean, SF</name>
                <name>Danby, M</name>
                <name>D'Ath, YM</name>
                <name>Dreyfus, MA</name>
                <name>Elliot, MJ</name>
                <name>Ellis, KM</name>
                <name>Emerson, CA</name>
                <name>Ferguson, LDT</name>
                <name>Ferguson, MJ</name>
                <name>Fitzgibbon, JA</name>
                <name>Garrett, PR</name>
                <name>Georganas, S</name>
                <name>Gibbons, SW</name>
                <name>Gillard, JE</name>
                <name>Gray, G</name>
                <name>Grierson, SJ</name>
                <name>Griffin, AP</name>
                <name>Hall, JG (teller)</name>
                <name>Hayes, CP</name>
                <name>Husic, EN (teller)</name>
                <name>Jenkins, HA</name>
                <name>Jones, SP</name>
                <name>King, CF</name>
                <name>Leigh, AK</name>
                <name>Livermore, KF</name>
                <name>Lyons, GR</name>
                <name>Macklin, JL</name>
                <name>Marles, RD</name>
                <name>McClelland, RB</name>
                <name>Mitchell, RG</name>
                <name>Murphy, JP</name>
                <name>Neumann, SK</name>
                <name>Oakeshott, RJM</name>
                <name>O'Connor, BPJ</name>
                <name>O'Neill, DM</name>
                <name>Owens, J</name>
                <name>Parke, M</name>
                <name>Perrett, GD</name>
                <name>Plibersek, TJ</name>
                <name>Ripoll, BF</name>
                <name>Rishworth, AL</name>
                <name>Roxon, NL</name>
                <name>Rudd, KM</name>
                <name>Saffin, JA</name>
                <name>Shorten, WR</name>
                <name>Sidebottom, PS</name>
                <name>Smith, SF</name>
                <name>Smyth, L</name>
                <name>Snowdon, WE</name>
                <name>Swan, WM</name>
                <name>Symon, MS</name>
                <name>Thomson, CR</name>
                <name>Thomson, KJ</name>
                <name>Vamvakinou, M</name>
                <name>Windsor, AHC</name>
                <name>Zappia, A</name>
              </names>
            </noes>
            <pairs>
              <num.votes>2</num.votes>
              <title>PAIRS</title>
              <names>
                <name>Coulton, M</name>
                <name>Rowland, MA</name>
                <name>Crook, AJ</name>
                <name>Melham, </name>
              </names>
            </pairs>
          </division.data>
          <division.result>
            <body>
              <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
            </body>
          </division.result>
        </division></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS</title>
        <page.no>1781</page.no>
        <type>PARLIAMENTARY OFFICE HOLDERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Speaker's Panel</title>
          <page.no>1781</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Pursuant to standing order 17, I lay on the table my warrant nominating the honourable members for Oxley, Newcastle, Bass and McEwen to be members of the Speaker's panel to assist the chair when requested to do so by the Speaker or Deputy Speaker.</para>
<para class="italic">Mrs Mirabella interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I would ask the member for Indi to withdraw the unparliamentary remark.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House has an advantage over me insofar as I did not hear the remark. Is the honourable member for Indi prepared to assist the House by withdrawing the offensive term?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs Mirabella</name>
    <name.id>00AMU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I will assist you, but I do not understand why the word 'Mensa' is unparliamentary.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That is not what she said.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs Mirabella</name>
    <name.id>00AMU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, I did.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>When an honourable member says that he or she did not say something, unless I hear it, I have to accept that honourable member's word.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I accept that. We are all accountable for our own actions.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>1781</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>1781</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Documents are presented as listed in the schedule circulated to honourable members earlier today. Details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline><inline font-style="italic">,</inline> and I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the House take note of the following documents:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation—Report for 2010-11.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Commonwealth Grants Commission—GST revenue sharing relativities—2012 update.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Infrastructure and Communications—House of Representatives Standing Committee—Broadening the debate: Inquiry into the role and potential of the National Broadband Network—Government response.</para></quote>
<para> </para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>1781</page.no>
        <type>BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rearrangement</title>
          <page.no>1781</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I ask leave of the House to move a motion relating to the order of business today in the House and for tomorrow in the Federation Chamber.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Selection Committee's determinations for Monday, 27 February 2012 being varied and the order of business for today in the House and for tomorrow in the Federation Chamber being varied as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) in the House, after the presentation of documents and Ministerial Statements (if any), the order of business being as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Notice No. 1, private Members' business relating to the Fair Work (Job Security and Fairer Bargaining) Amendment Bill 2012—further proceedings occurring as far as possible in accordance with the determination of the Selection Committee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) Notice No. 2, private Members' business relating to the Fair Work Australia investigation—mover and next member speaking, 10 minutes each, debate to be adjourned to the next sitting and then stand referred to the Federation Chamber; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) Government business until 8pm.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) in the Federation Chamber, on Tuesday 28 February 2012, Standing Order 193 (Members’ three minute constituency statements) being suspended and the order of business being as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the resumption of debate on Mr Bandt's motion relating to Sovereign Wealth Fund—further proceedings occurring as far as possible in accordance with the determination of the Selection Committee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the resumption of debate on Ms Hall's motion relating to Teal Ribbon Day—further proceedings occurring as far as possible in accordance with the determination of the Selection Committee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the resumption of debate on the motions to take note of committee and delegation reports presented in accordance with standing order 39(e)—further proceedings in respect of each report occurring as far as possible in the order, and in accordance with the periods of time, previously determined by the Selection Committee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the resumption of debate on Mr Abbott's motion relating to the Fair Work Australia investigation - the remainder of speech time limits and further proceedings occurring, as far as possible, in accordance with the determination of the Selection Committee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the resumption of debate on the second reading of the Marriage Amendment Bill 2012—further proceedings occurring as far as possible in accordance with the determination of the Selection Committee; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) Government business until 10pm.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) any variation to this arrangement to be made only by a motion moved by a Minister.</para></quote>
<para>I thank the opposition for their cooperation in this matter. This will ensure, as a result of changes to the sitting timetable this morning between 10 o'clock and 12 noon, that the member for Melbourne is still able to move his private member's bill. I wanted to ensure also that the Leader of the Opposition was not disadvantaged by not being able to speak in this chamber as is appropriate for the Leader of the Opposition. He and the first speaker on behalf of the government for his private member's business relating to Fair Work Australia will be able to debate in this chamber. The rest of business that was set down for the main chamber and the Federation Chamber will be debated in the Federation Chamber tomorrow afternoon. I again thank the opposition for their cooperation in this matter.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It is always good to see an outbreak of peace.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1782</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Report and Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
          <page.no>1782</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 39(e), I present the following reports for consideration in the Federation Chamber later today:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Standing Committee on Agriculture, Resources, Fisheries and Forestry, Advisory reports on the Wild Rivers (Environmental Management) Bill 2011 and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Mining, Petroleum and Water Resources) Bill 2011, together with the minutes of proceedings;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, Examination of the Annual Report of the Integrity Commissioner 2010-11;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, Review of the Defence Annual Report 2009-2010;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, report of the Inquiry into the operation of the insurance industry during disaster events, together with the minutes of proceedings and evidence received by the committee, and</para></quote>
<para>In accordance with standing order 39(f) the reports were made parliamentary papers.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DELEGATION REPORTS</title>
        <page.no>1783</page.no>
        <type>DELEGATION REPORTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentary Delegation to the 57th Annual Session of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly</title>
          <page.no>1783</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 39(e), I present the report of the Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 57th annual session of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. This matter will be considered in the Federation Chamber later today.</para>
<para>In accordance with standing order 39(f) the report was made a parliamentary paper.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE</title>
        <page.no>1783</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Academy Awards</title>
          <page.no>1783</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CREAN</name>
    <name.id>DT4</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The House will be aware that today this year's Academy Awards have been announced and another Australian has won an award.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Hunt interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CREAN</name>
    <name.id>DT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thought that was cause for congratulations rather than mirth. Congratulations go to the Australian editor, Kirk Baxter, who has won the editing Oscar for his work on the <inline font-style="italic">Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. </inline>He was up against some heavy competition because <inline font-style="italic">Hugo</inline> and <inline font-style="italic">The Artist</inline> were both considered the favourites. Also, for those who may recall, this is the second Oscar Kirk Baxter has won, because he and his colleague Angus Wall won it last year for their work on <inline font-style="italic">The Social Network</inline><inline font-style="italic">. </inline>This highlights the depth of talent in the Australian film industry. It is not just the people in front of the camera who are winning awards but those responsible for the production, direction and editing. Mr Baxter is one of two Australians nominated for this year's Oscars. I also acknowledge Grant Hill, who is the producer of the Best Picture candidate, <inline font-style="italic">The Tree of Life</inline><inline font-style="italic">. </inline>We wait to hear the outcome of that award.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>1783</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fair Work (Job Security and Fairer Bargaining) Amendment Bill 2012</title>
          <page.no>1783</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r4741">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Fair Work (Job Security and Fairer Bargaining) Amendment Bill 2012</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>1783</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This bill introduces a set of amendments to the Fair Work Act addressing a number of problems that have arisen, being the subject of much public discussion over recent months. These amendments will make it more likely that disputes will be resolved and will require Fair Work Australia to give greater attention to the core issues of workloads, job security and work-life balance. The bill will also remove the incentives we have seen all too apparently that exist for powerful employers to use legal tactics as a way of avoiding good faith and bona fide negotiation in the resolution of disputes by negotiation.</para>
<para>Members will recall that in October last year Qantas clearly demonstrated the power imbalance that still exists between everyday working Australians on the one hand and large corporations on the other. Qantas decided to take extreme action and ground the airline. No prior notice was given and under the current rules no prior notice was needed. A large corporation flexed its muscles, caused widespread disruption and got exactly what it wanted. Effectively Qantas held a gun to its own head, blamed the unions and then waited for Fair Work Australia to intervene and terminate all industrial action. That might have been legal but it was not right. Unfortunately, the actions of Qantas may have inspired other companies to use similar tactics. In December the shipping company POAGS locked out their workforce in Freemantle and Bunbury. As my colleague Scott Ludlam said, the workers had been targeted after using work bans to protest about safety concerns and POAGS dragging out the agreement negotiations for 12 months.</para>
<para>A number of these amendments are aimed at addressing the situation where powerful employers escalate industrial disputes in an aim to get some perceived tactical advantage. As a first measure, the bill will require companies to give three days notice prior to a lockout or any change in normal operations in preparation of a lockout. This is not onerous. It simply imposes the same time limit on companies that already applies to workers.</para>
<para>Secondly, and critically, the bill will also require Fair Work Australia to consider whether employer response action is proportionate in the circumstances or whether the action has been taken to make an application more likely to succeed. If either of these applies, then Fair Work Australia can only suspend industrial action rather than terminate. This would ensure that companies cannot bypass the bargaining process through a Qantas style approach. It would minimise the likelihood of such tactics repeating and put the pressure back on parties to come to an agreement.</para>
<para>Thirdly, Fair Work Australia would also be given better tools to deal with serious industrial action. At present, Fair Work Australia can only suspend or terminate either everything or nothing at all. This is the approach that Fair Work Australia has determined is the only option open to it under current law, and I refer to the decision of National Tertiary Education Industry Union v University of South Australia [2010] FWAFB 1014, especially at paragraph 11. The amendment that is contained in this bill would redress that situation. It would make it clear that Fair Work Australia can terminate that part of ongoing industrial action that poses the relevant threat under the section. It can also suspend that part. It can allow the part that poses no threat to continue. As such, Fair Work Australia will be able to ensure a tailored response while making sure that the public interest continues to be protected.</para>
<para>One of the issues that was at stake during the Qantas dispute was the job security of employees. Given that about 60 per cent of employees in the modern workforce are engaged in insecure work, it is hardly surprising that employees are concerned about the security of their employment. The less job security people have, the less choice they have. We should be able to choose whether to have a mortgage or to rent, but so often for so many everyday Australians that choice is forced on them by the unreliable nature of their employment. This bill will make it explicit that job security is a permitted matter for the purposes of enterprise agreements. It will also make it clear that workloads will be a permitted matter for enterprise agreements. These matters will also become objects of the Fair Work Act and factors that Fair Work Australia takes into account when making any workplace determination.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, it seems that rights at work are under attack not just from large corporations such as Qantas, POAGS or Schweppes. In Victoria we have witnessed the ongoing saga of the nurses dispute, where the critically important issue of nurse to patient ratios is unresolved. The nurses and employers are bargaining under a federal system because there is no state system anymore. The dispute remains unresolved because the Victorian government has deliberately refused to bargain because it believes it will get a better outcome before a legally hamstrung Fair Work Australia. As a result, the dispute has been strung out over 106 days, to the point where many nurses are now considering resigning because they do not know what else to do and there is nowhere they can turn to get the whole of their dispute resolved.</para>
<para>Items 11 and 14 of this bill address a very significant problem with the operation of the act. At the moment, bargaining representatives may be bargaining about legitimate matters, yet not all of those matters may be capable of being resolved by way of an industrial action related workplace determination. As a result, it may be in the interests of one of the parties to have disputes resolved by way of workplace determination instead of negotiation. This can lead to a prolonging of disputes and can encourage parties to take tactical steps in anticipation of achieving a workplace determination. It also works against the objects of the act, which prioritise dispute resolution through enterprise bargaining.</para>
<para>One example is bargaining in state governments or state public sector agencies where the bargaining representative of the employees is pursuing what would ordinarily be understood to be a permitted matter in an enterprise agreement, such as a claim about the number or identity of staff to be employed, yet the employer asserts that such a matter cannot be included in a workplace determination because of constitutional limitations. In such an instance, the employer may prefer the matter to be resolved by workplace determination and may take steps it considers make it more likely to achieve that outcome. Other examples may arise in the future should the jurisprudence ever evolve such that certain subject matters, although otherwise permitted matters for enterprise agreements, will never, as a question of principle, be included in workplace determinations. In such instances, whichever party considers it would benefit from such a limitation may take steps to achieve a workplace determination instead of reaching a full resolution of outstanding matters by agreement with the other party.</para>
<para>The new sections 423(6A) and 424(1A) would encourage parties to resolve all the matters in dispute between them. It would require Fair Work Australia to be satisfied that, to the extent any matters in dispute could not be resolved by way of workplace determination, there must be an agreed and binding method of resolving these outstanding matters. The object of these new sections is to ensure that all legitimate matters in dispute between the parties are resolved fully and finally with a priority given to resolution by agreement provided that industrial action may be suspended if Fair Work Australia considers it appropriate to do so. This sections are of general application and will apply to all applications for termination of industrial action. To the extent that they apply to state governments or state agencies to whom certain constitutional limitations apply, these provisions will help resolve disputes fully and finally, something that is additionally important in those instances where there may be no other mechanism of finally and fully resolving those disputes under a relevant state law. I refer here to Re Australian Education Union and Australian Nursing Federation; Ex parte Victoria (1995) HCA 71 paragraphs 80 to 81. Fair Work Australia retains its powers to suspend but not terminate industrial action. Further, if the only reason that matters in dispute cannot be finally and fully resolved is one bargaining representative's failure to consent to an acceptable process of resolution, then that party's industrial action can be suspended. In other words, one cannot rely on one's own refusal to consent to an acceptable process of full and final dispute resolution as an excuse to continue industrial action that Fair Work Australia would otherwise consider ought not take place. I greatly respect the work that nurses do and this bill respects the work that nurses do. I urge the parliament to respect the work that nurses do and pass the bill.</para>
<para>The bill will also insert a provision that requires enterprise agreements to have a dispute resolution provision that allows Fair Work Australia to arbitrate where all other measures have failed. I note this approach was endorsed by Labor at its national conference last year. It is a sensible approach and I hope that leads them to support this bill. Lastly, the objects of the act will be amended to ensure that better work-life balance is taken into account by Fair Work Australia, that the question of workloads is taken into account and that we also end the anomalous situation where the Reserve Bank is required to take into account the promotion of full employment in Australia but Fair Work Australia is not. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Bill read a first time.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 41, the second reading will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>1786</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fair Work Australia</title>
          <page.no>1786</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ABBOTT</name>
    <name.id>EZ5</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Fair Work Australia investigation into the Health Services Union and Member for Dobell commenced in 2009;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the investigation started with the Industrial Registrar in January 2009 and was taken over by Fair Work Australia when it commenced operation in June 2009;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) Fair Work Australia representatives said the investigation would be completed by the end of 2011, with Fair Work Australia Director Terry Nassios telling a Senate Estimates committee in May 2011 that the investigation should be completed by 'the latter half of this year' and Bernadette O'Neill, the Acting General Manager, saying in October 2011 that 'Mr Nassios has advised me that he still expects to complete his investigations by the end of this year';</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the investigation remains ongoing despite an employee of the Australian Government Solicitor, Craig Rawson, being provided with a letter containing 'proposed findings' in December 2010; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the investigation into the Health Services Union and the Member for Dobell has taken more than three years and is yet to be completed; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to provide an assurance that there has been no political interference in the Fair Work Australia investigation into the Health Services Union and the Member for Dobell.</para></quote>
<para>Back in January of 2009, more than three years ago, a very important investigation was begun into serious misuse of the moneys of the 70,000 lowly paid members of the Health Services Union. This is a very serious matter because union members have an absolute right to expect that their money will be used for the purposes of the union and for the purposes of advancing their industrial interests, and will not be misused for personal purposes, for political purposes and for family purposes of union officials. And there is strong evidence, much of which is in the public arena, that hundreds of thousands of dollars of union members' dues have been used to fund political campaigns of the now member for Dobell, formerly the general secretary of the union, and used to benefit the families of senior officials of the union. And, I regret to say, there is strong evidence, much of which is in the media, that members' dues were used to procure prostitution services for then officials of the union. This is an absolute disgrace.</para>
<para>If union members and the Australian public more generally are to have any confidence in the administration of justice, in particular if they are to have any confidence in the just operation of Australia's industrial system, matters of this seriousness must be swiftly investigated and justice must be swiftly done. But that has not happened.</para>
<para>The investigation began in January 2009. Towards the end of last year, when the investigation had already been going on for well over 2½ years, an assurance was given by a Fair Work Australia director that the investigation should be completed by the latter half of last year. The acting general manager gave an assurance in writing in October of last year that the investigation was expected to be completed by the end of 2011. Further, back in December 2010, an employee of the Australian Government Solicitor was provided with an official letter containing proposed findings in this investigation.</para>
<para>So back in December 2010 proposed findings were available. Twice last year Fair Work Australia gave assurances that the matter would be completed by the end of the year and still there is no conclusion to this saga. This gives rise to a very strong suspicion of, at the very least, an institutional go-slow, but possibly political interference in the operation of what should be an organ of justice.</para>
<para>I do not lightly question the integrity and professionalism of any official body. As a former minister for workplace relations, I worked with the former Industrial Relations Commission and in those days it was a body that dispensed impartial justice. I do not say that the body has been necessarily corrupted since then, but I do say this is a terrible look. It is a terrible look because since the current government took over, almost all of the senior appointments to Fair Work Australia have been former union officials.</para>
<para>We know that there is an incestuous relationship between the trade union movement of this country and members of the current government. Just about all the senior members of the current government are former union officials. It is a big union family which has links through the union movement from Fair Work Australia to the government and that would be threatened should Fair Work Australia's investigation be brought to a swift conclusion and charges laid. I do not question the professionalism of Fair Work Australia, but I urge Fair Work Australia, in the interests of its own good name, to not further delay this vital investigation.</para>
<para>There is another important factor that needs to be considered—that is, the extensive contact that has taken place between ministers in this government and Fair Work Australia. When a member of the opposition front bench contacted a minister in the New South Wales government about investigations into the member for Dobell, ministers opposite lined up, one after the other, to denounce political interference, even though a member of the opposition front bench by definition is not in government. Yet what we now know is that on at least seven occasions there was direct contact between ministers in this government, including none other than the Prime Minister, and Fair Work Australia over this matter.</para>
<para>There was a phone call between Fair Work Australia and the Prime Minister's chief of staff, first denied and then admitted. There were numerous emails and phone contacts between the former minister for workplace relations and Fair Work Australia, and there has been at least one phone conversation between the current minister for workplace relations and Fair Work Australia on this matter. We do not know for sure that there has been collusion between the government and Fair Work Australia over the investigation itself, but there certainly has been collusion over the media management of it. We know that because emails released under FOI prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt.</para>
<para>This motion is important because it is about maintaining the integrity of our institutions and it is about maintaining honesty in government, something which this Prime Minister seems to find so incredibly difficult. This Prime Minister needs to explain all of the contacts between her and her office, and her ministers and their offices, and Fair Work Australia. She needs to detail the precise content of all of those contacts. And she needs to explain why it is political interference for an opposition frontbencher to talk about an investigation but it is somehow entirely benign for ministers to heavy officials of Fair Work Australia.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister also needs to explain just how the interests of justice, as opposed to the political survival of this government, are furthered by the unconscionable time that this investigation has taken—it is now in its fourth year, yet far more complex investigations have been completed in far less time. The Fitzgerald royal commission into illegalities in Queensland took less than three years. The Wood royal commission into corruption in the New South Wales Police Force took less than three years. The Cole royal commission into the construction industry took less than 18 months. The Watergate investigation took less than 18 months. The Empire State Building was built in one year and 45 days—far, far quicker than this investigation! And do you know, Mr Deputy Speaker, it has already cost more than $1 million?</para>
<para>Members opposite might be interested to know that, when there was a problem with expenses in the House of Commons, revelations were uncovered in May 2009, charges were laid in February 2010 and convictions, including prison sentences, were brought down by January 2011. Instead of swift justice we have had, I fear, a corruption of the process of justice. That is why the Prime Minister has to explain. That is why this motion should be supported.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Ley</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In a month's time I will have been in this place for some 16 years. One thing I learnt in my very earliest days here was that, when the leader of your party is on his or her feet, it is a good idea to get yourself into the chamber to listen to what he or she might have to say—and, of course, it is one of the roles of the whip to make sure people are aware that he or she is on his or her feet, and people usually dutifully race in to support their leader.</para>
<para>But I was intrigued by what took place here this afternoon, and I think it reflects the feeling of many who sit on the opposition back benches towards the Leader of the Opposition's tactics with this motion, and indeed whether he is right to be playing this political game with what is very much an independent inquiry. One minute into his speech, seven members of the opposition were in here to support their leader—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Secker</name>
    <name.id>848</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. This is in no way relevant to the motion before the House; it is just a bit of mischief.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Barker will resume his seat.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Barker should not be concerned, because it gets better: within two minutes there were nine members, within four there were 16, within five there were 27, within six it built to 30 and at about the 31st minute it reached its crescendo at 31!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Morrison</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order on relevance. I ask you to bring the member for Hunter back to the motion. I know the member for Hunter is good at counting numbers and relaying them here in this place, but I do not think it is relevant to the motion.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Cook. The member for Hunter is reminded of the motion before the House.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I will move on, except to say that theirs is a parliamentary party of some 71 members—and there was a crescendo of 31. So where were these other members? I would like to think some of them were out there thinking about the things we have been thinking about as a parliamentary party.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Schultz</name>
    <name.id>83Q</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I remind the member for Hume that he is interjecting from outside of his place and he does not have the call. The member for Hunter has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Somewhere tonight, if not everywhere in the eurozone, members of parliaments, their officials, their departmental heads and their advisers will be thinking about where to jump next in dealing with their economic crises—and something similar will no doubt be taking place in the United States, who look upon our economy with in wonderment and with envy. And here in Australia, those of us on this side—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Morrison</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Hunter, I think, is defying you. He is clearly not being relevant to the question. If he does not have anything relevant to say on this matter then he should just sit down.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Cook will resume his seat. I again remind the member for Hunter of the motion before the House. I can repeat it for him if he likes, but I am sure he has a copy of it.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will get off the important issues facing the country and get back to the muckraking—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The motion before the House relates to Fair Work Australia.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I will address it very directly, Mr Deputy Speaker. Let's go through it then. Mr Abbott, with great fanfare, although with little support from his own back bench, wants the House to note—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Hunter will refer to members by their titles.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I am sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition wants the House to note:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the Fair Work Australia investigation—</para></quote>
<para>I won't read the whole thing—</para>
<quote><para class="block">… commenced in 2009—</para></quote>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Hunter has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, it did—we have no problem with that; that is fine. The motion continues:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the investigation started with the Industrial Registrar—</para></quote>
<para>Yes, that is fine; it seems to be a matter of fact to me—</para>
<quote><para class="block">… (c) Fair Work Australia representatives said the investigation would be completed by the end of 2011—</para></quote>
<para>Okay, these are generally statements of fact—</para>
<para>… (d) the investigation remains ongoing—</para>
<para>A bit of a statement of the obvious, I would have thought—</para>
<quote><para class="block">despite an employee of the Australian Government Solicitor, Craig Rawson, being provided with a letter containing 'proposed findings' in December 2010—</para></quote>
<para>That is a fairly big point—</para>
<quote><para class="block">… (e) the investigation into the Health Services Union and the Member for Dobell has taken more than three years and is yet to be completed.</para></quote>
<para>That is a statement of fact, so what are we debating here this afternoon? Are we having a debate or is this a misuse of parliamentary procedure to launch an attack on an individual who I would have thought all members in this place would agree is entitled to procedural fairness and natural justice?</para>
<para>I would have hoped that every member of this place accepts those principles as the golden thread which holds our legal system in this country together. If no-one on that side agrees, certainly some of their senior colleagues agree. For example, former Prime Minister John Howard in this place in 2007 with respect to an earlier investigation said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… a lot of people who are under investigation end up having nothing to answer for. It's a police investigation and the appropriate thing for me to do is to let the police investigation run its course and then if it is appropriate I will have something to say.</para></quote>
<para>That was a very sensible contribution by the former Prime Minister, the former member for Bennelong.</para>
<para>All the issues raised by the Leader of the Opposition in his motion were dealt with very considerably and in great detail in Senate estimates just in the last sitting week. I do concede that the Leader of the Opposition lodged his motion prior to those Senate estimates processes. That is understandable. He was not to be aware that they were forthcoming. But he might have considered, given what was said in Senate estimates a fortnight ago, withdrawing the motion. That would have been the sensible thing to do.</para>
<para>On that, I refer the House to just one of the statements made by Bernadette O'Neill during estimates. She is the general manager of Fair Work Australia. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I am aware of the allegations that there has been some political interference in the investigations and take them very seriously. I have absolutely no reason to conclude that there has been any such interference in the investigations.</para></quote>
<para>We have a senior official, an independent arbiter, before Senate estimates providing us with that statement. She is a respected official. Notwithstanding that, the Leader of the Opposition, seeking to make political capital, comes in here and directly challenges what she has had to say. I say to the House that that is inappropriate. I am a person who knows a little bit about trial by media. I will not say much more about that. I will let Justice Lucy McCallum of the New South Wales Supreme Court speak for herself. She said, 'People should never assume, surprisingly, that everything they read in the paper is correct.'</para>
<para>Most of what the Leader of the Opposition raised today was taken straight out of the countries' news sheets. He made no attempt to make any reference to what was a fairly full conversation in Senate estimates just over a week ago. Rather, he relied almost entirely on allegations and accusations, as he himself described them, rather than sticking to the facts. I appeal to the Leader of the Opposition and to every member in this place to be very careful because if Mr Thomson is cleared in these inquiries—and that is obviously a possibility—he will not have been the first person to fall victim to rumour and innuendo and various media reports. The person who next becomes a victim of that might be someone sitting on the other side. Who knows? It could even be the Leader of the Opposition himself. So the Leader of the Opposition has to be careful not to get too carried away. I know he is a little bit excited because from time to time since the last election he has had visions of himself sitting in the Prime Minister's chair during question time. But I have some news for him: the sort of tactics that he has embraced and adopted today here in the House are not conducive to his aspirations and will not help him get there. For the sake of our democracy and procedural fairness, he should take a new course.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>1791</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011, Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011</title>
          <page.no>1791</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <p>
              <a type="Bill" href="r4718">
                <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a type="Bill" href="r4736">
                <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a type="Bill" href="r4737">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1791</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr STONE</name>
    <name.id>EM6</name.id>
    <electorate>Murray</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In continuation, let me say that there are very important measures in the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill and in the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional provisions) Bill. They deal in particular with the issue of alcohol related harm to Aborigines in communities in the Northern Territory. We all know that there are some very heavy drinkers in the Northern Territory, and not just Indigenous people. We also know there are a lot of Indigenous communities that are strictly dry; there is no alcohol allowed. Despite that great diversity, it is important that we try to have appropriate Commonwealth and Northern Territory alcohol licensing laws which are aimed at reducing alcohol related harm to Indigenous peoples.</para>
<para>There is a terrible consequence, for example, when pregnant women drink alcohol, whether they are Indigenous or not. We know that foetal alcohol spectrum disorder can be a consequence of women drinking when pregnant, and there are significant numbers of Indigenous children who are now at risk or who have in fact become victims of FASD. I want to commend communities such as the women of the Fitzroy Crossing area in Western Australia, who have tackled the issue of alcohol themselves and have, through local empowerment and local education, tackled the heavy drinking that was once of almost historic proportions in their community. Now they are tackling the issue of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, and I commend that community.</para>
<para>I also need to stress that there needs to be cooperation and coordination between the Territory and Commonwealth laws in relation to all alcohol selling and allowing of consumption of alcohol. It is important that the current alcohol restrictions in Aboriginal communities are appropriate and that they are reviewed from time to time. Of course the main focus should be the strengthening of alcohol self-management plans to bring about local solutions, focused on harm minimisation, for Aboriginal communities. I mention again places like Fitzroy Crossing, in Western Australia, that are great role models for self empowerment for making real gains.</para>
<para>This legislation also includes land reform measures that enable:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the Commonwealth to make amendments to Northern Territory legislation relating to community living areas and town camps to facilitate voluntary long term leasing, including for the granting of individual rights or interests and the promotion of economic development.</para></quote>
<para>This is an issue which the coalition tackled quite some time ago. We know that communalism is a very important traditional way of life for Indigenous peoples, but it has disadvantages in the 21st century. Often a young couple or, indeed, a long-established family needs to have some capacity for long-term leasing of their homes. They need to have security of tenure and they need to be able to gain bank loans using assets that they might have in community settings. This is an important area of work. These measures will enable:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… opportunities for private home ownership in town camps and more flexible long term leasing including for business activity in community living areas.</para></quote>
<para>We have to normalise life for Indigenous peoples who aspire to the same economic opportunities as others in this country.</para>
<para>Finally, these bills have food security measures which try to improve access to fresh, healthy food through remote community stores. I am shocked whenever I go to remote communities and see what is on the store shelves. Often there is only processed food that is usually well past its shelf life and is at exorbitant prices. I look around the communities and see young children suffering the consequences of poor nutrition, children who have not seen fresh fruit and vegetables in a very long time. Anything we can do to improve food security measures for these Indigenous communities we must pursue. So while we need to amend these bills to make them better I do support their overall thrust.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEPHEN JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
    <electorate>Throsby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In introducing this package of bills to the House, the then Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs spoke of the government's vision and objectives that are driving us in our plan to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">A stronger future, grounded in a stronger relationship between government and Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A relationship built on respect for Australia’s first peoples, for their custodianship of the land, for their culture and for their ongoing contributions to our shared nation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This is a respect that is about much more than sentiment. It is about the approach we take to our work, and the approach we take to working together.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">This is the approach we took to consultations after we first came into government.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">These conversations revealed the depth of hurt felt by Aboriginal people by the sudden and rushed implementation of the Northern Territory Emergency Response.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">And informed our amendments, including the reinstatement of the Racial Discrimination Act in the Northern Territory.</para></quote>
<para>I can find no finer words with which to enter this debate on this important package of legislation.</para>
<para>I am very pleased to speak today on the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 and associated bills. Together, these bills form a part of the government's next steps in the Northern Territory, undertaken in partnership with Aboriginal people and the Northern Territory government. The Gillard government is working with Indigenous people to improve services in areas such as health, education and housing, as part of an unprecedented effort to improve life expectancy and opportunities for Indigenous people. Ending this unacceptable disadvantage will take time. It will also require a sustained effort by all governments and by businesses, not-for-profit organisations, Indigenous Australians and the wider community.</para>
<para>The <inline font-style="italic">Closing the Gap</inline> report tabled in this place by the Prime Minister recently shows that the foundations are now in place to build lasting changes right across the country. Progress made so far, as outlined in the report, includes the fact that we are on track to meet the under-five mortality target, with a continued decline in mortality rates for Indigenous children—falling by 48 per cent from 1991 to 2010 across the three jurisdictions in which long-term comparisons are possible. That is something I am sure all members in this place would rejoice in. Overall Indigenous mortality rates have declined by 36 per cent from 1991 to 2010 in, again, the three jurisdictions for which reliable data are available for this period. Indigenous children are doing better at school, with strong improvements in NAPLAN results for Indigenous students in seven of the eight areas in which we can assess progress at the national level. Again, I am sure that these are improvements all members in this House would rejoice in.</para>
<para>The introduction of these bills follows extensive consultations, as the minister set out in her second reading speech, with the Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory on how the Australian and Northern Territory governments might work with Aboriginal people to expand their opportunities and build stronger futures for themselves and their children. In the consultations, Aboriginal people said that getting more children to school, increasing the number of Aboriginal people in local jobs, improving housing and reducing alcohol related harm were the communities' top priorities.</para>
<para>The Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory package of bills is one element of the government's response and continued commitment to meeting these top priorities. The Stronger Futures Bill provides that the Northern Territory Emergency Response alcohol restrictions will be continued and strengthened. It also provides that alcohol management plans established by local communities be directed at minimising alcohol related harm. The bill also provides for the Commonwealth to require the Northern Territory Licensing Commission to provide reports to the Commonwealth minister on levels of alcohol related harm and the impact of policy measures in the Territory. Getting this information ensures we are able to make the right policy decisions in the future. The bill also provides for a joint Commonwealth and Northern Territory review to be conducted in two years from commencement of the Stronger Futures legislation. The review will examine the impact of the Stronger Futures and Territory strategies to address alcohol related harm. This will allow both governments to continue working together to make real progress. The member for Murray spoke about her experiences in relation to some of the stores in the area covered by this legislation. It goes to the issue of food security. A consistent message in the consultations with the minister and the government and in evaluations was that the remote community stores have improved over the past four years. They are now offering a healthier range of food and are generally better managed. We will continue to improve licensing arrangements for community stores by replacing the current system, in which the only remedy for noncompliance is licence revocation. We will introduce, through measures in this bill, daily penalties for noncompliance of up to $2,200 to encourage stores to improve their performance and improve it quickly. Licensing will be more clearly focused on supporting food security in remote communities. In the future a community store will be required to have a licence to operate if it is an important source of food, drink or grocery items for Aboriginal communities.</para>
<para>The Australian government has made a clear commitment to negotiating voluntary long-term leases in the area of housing and land reform and will not be extending the compulsory five-year leases acquired under the original NTER legislation. The Australian and Northern Territory governments will continue to negotiate leases with Aboriginal landholders that will enable the Northern Territory government to manage housing in remote communities. The aim is to enable the Aboriginal landholders of town camps and community living areas to have the opportunity to make use of their land for a broader range of purposes, including economic development and private home ownership.</para>
<para>We are also taking steps, through the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill, to make improvements to the Australian government's measure on improving school enrolment and attendance through welfare reform. The social security bill will amend the income management legislation to allow referrals by recognised state or territory authorities to trigger income management. In the Northern Territory people could be referred for income management by the Northern Territory Alcohol and Other Drugs Tribunal. The social security law amendments will apply to all people on income support in the relevant areas on a non-discriminatory basis.</para>
<para>Income management is a key part of the government's commitment to ensuring that welfare payments are spent in the best interests of children. It provides a tool to stabilise people's circumstances, easing immediate financial stress while limiting expenditure of income support payments on excluded items, including alcohol, tobacco, pornography, and gambling goods and activities.</para>
<para>The social security bill also enables the introduction of targeted income management in five disadvantaged communities across Australia, including Playford in South Australia, Bankstown in my own state of New South Wales, Shepparton in Victoria, and Rockhampton and Logan in Queensland. In these communities from 1 July this year income management will apply to vulnerable families and individuals, including parents referred for income management by a state or territory child protection authority; people assessed by Centrelink social workers as being vulnerable to financial crisis—which could include people referred by housing authorities—who are at risk of homelessness due to rental arrears; or people who themselves volunteer for income management.</para>
<para>New support services will also be available to help families on income management get their lives back on track. These include money management skills training to help people better manage the family budget and new Communities for Children services, including in my own electorate in Throsby, which will support parents and their children through playgroups, parenting education classes, mentoring and support groups, and early learning programs. Each of these measures will take effect from 1 July this year.</para>
<para>In concluding I will say a few words about school attendance and school attendance patterns, as outlined in schedule 2 of the social security bill. The government's school enrolment and attendance measure, SEAM, supports parents in their responsibility to ensure that their children go to school. All the best teachers and all the best curriculums in the world are of no use unless children are actually attending their local school. So, under the measure, people may have their income support payments suspended if they fail to enrol their child at school or fail to make every effort to ensure that they attend regularly. Indications to date are that SEAM and the accompanying social work support provided by the government are having a positive impact on enrolment and attendance. This bill enables some local tailoring of these measures too so that the operation of SEAM can be integrated with the Northern Territory government's Every Child, Every Day initiative to support greater improvement in school attendance, and this package of measures will take effect from 1 July this year.</para>
<para>This is a comprehensive package of bills as part of the government's ongoing commitment to working together with communities in the remote parts of the Northern Territory as well as with other vulnerable communities throughout the country to ensure that we are doing our best to provide income support, life opportunities and quality education for each and every Australian child whether they are living in a remote community in the Northern Territory or in the community of Playford in South Australia or in one of the other areas targeted in this package of bills. Income support will be provided to families who are without jobs or who are relying on welfare support, but at the same time we will be delivering what we now call 'tough love'. That is to ensure that the adults in those families to whom the government is providing income support are doing everything within their power to ensure that their kids go to school and that their kids have every opportunity in life—opportunities that perhaps their parents did not have—to get a fine education and to ensure that they are able to participate in the workforce and in the wider community.</para>
<para>This is an important package of bills. I hope it enjoys bipartisan support. I know the report that was delivered by the Prime Minister in this chamber two weeks ago on the closing the gap statistics is something that would be welcomed not only by all right-thinking people in this place but by the community at large. Yes, progress has been made, but there is still much more to be done. I commend this legislation to the House. It is another step in the right direction in closing the gap.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to address the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 and associated bills. I find myself in the strange position of supporting a bill which subsumes individual responsibility and moves it to the public. It is something of which I would normally be extremely wary but, in this case, I find myself with little option but to support it. I would be the first to say I am not a supporter of the nanny state, where the state progressively removes an individual's responsibilities to make decisions in what the state presumes is their best interests. There are scores of examples where government imposes itself in this manner on the general public, in areas like compulsory superannuation, seatbelts, OH&S arrangements—which are very onerous on business and in some cases discourage them from employing workers—and smoking laws. That is not to say that any one of these laws in isolation is a bad thing; it is just an area where government has taken individual responsibility away.</para>
<para>Even the messages of incentives/penalties that government and bodies of government send people regarding personal health care—things like obesity, alcohol consumption and tobacco use—assume that it is not really the fault of the individual. In the case of obesity or alcohol abuse it is the fast food sellers or the alcohol advertisers who are at fault. We are not very honest with people when we fail to tell them if they are overweight, if they drink too much or if they smoke too much that it is in the individual's power to address the problem. Unfortunately, this comes through much of the legislation that we do in the public healthcare or the public benefit sector.</para>
<para>As I have said, this is not an area that I would normally be drawn to. One of my favourites, as an example of where we fall down in terms of the individual's responsibility, is breakfast programs in schools. I would be the last to say that if kids are coming to school hungry that we should not do something about it, but the downside of that is that as soon as we provide this assistance to the children we are absolving parents of their essential responsibility, which is to feed their children before they go to school. I know of a small middle-class country town where the local school had two or three children coming to school who were hungry, and the school felt it had to do something. It addressed the problem and put in a breakfast program but before long it had 20 or 30 children coming to school for the breakfast program. You have to try to strike a balance between the public good, the child's good and the individual's responsibility. That is not to say that any of these programs are necessarily good or bad, but we need to consider this when we make decisions—as we are with these bills—about absolving individuals of their responsibility and trying to put state pressure on them to achieve social outcomes. For me, the threshold is where the individual's actions impact on others, particularly children.</para>
<para>Today, we are debating that area where we are using the strength of government to manipulate people's welfare income to achieve outcomes for their children that they may not otherwise necessarily take. The Howard government's intervention in the Northern Territory has always had its detractors, and normally it is couched in terms of offending human rights. This has always been a poor criticism. The weakness of the intervention was that it further removed individual responsibilities and the ability of individuals to manage their own lives. So while we take this short-term action we must have a clear eye to the future about how we empower people to take back control of their lives.</para>
<para>The intervention's genesis lay in the appalling levels of abuse and neglect within the remote Indigenous communities revealed in the Little children are sacred report by Rex Wild and Patricia Anderson, released in June 2007, where it established that the inability of individuals, parents and communities to exercise their individual responsibilities was seriously impacting on innocent parties—that is, the children. While significant sectors of the Indigenous community and the community generally remain opposed to the intervention, on balance I believe it has been positive. It was essential to take some control of a situation that was out of control.</para>
<para>Until now, these programs have been aimed at Indigenous communities—firstly in the Northern Territory and then to trial sites in Western Australia. Parts of the program, namely, the income management procedures, are to be rolled out in five new communities in mainstream Australia. One of these is in South Australia in the Playford City Council area, within the federal electorate of Wakefield. It is about time. One of the chief criticisms of the intervention has been that it was essentially racist. There is no reason for it to be so. If the programs are good and the right thing to do then, surely, where the same triggers exist—I mean anywhere; not just in the Northern Territory and not just in the city of Playford—the same measure should be appropriate.</para>
<para>There are also provisions to extend and refine the Northern Territory programs and include the School Enrolment and Attendance Measure, or SEAM. I support these moves too. But my question to the government is: if now, after 4½ years of operation, the programs are to be extended and refined, if the assessment is that the programs are of net benefit to the communities and if the Northern Territory intervention has been a success, then why have the programs not been rolled out just over the border into the APY Lands of northern South Australia? For all intents and purposes, these communities are one and the same people who live in the southern sectors of the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>You are well aware, I know, Mr Deputy Speaker Scott, that the northern lands of South Australia are in my electorate. It is confronting, every time I go there, to see the disadvantage that these people operate within and how difficult it is to get kids into the schooling system. I accept that there has been another raft of public moneys going into improving housing. Certainly, the schools are at a very good level when you look at their amenities. Their health centres are also very good. And yet in so many ways we seem to be going backwards.</para>
<para>School attendance in these communities is one of the great concerns that we have. We have the difficulty of children not rolling up on time in the morning or not rolling up on a specific day but we also have another great problem in these communities: the influence and impact that cultural practices such as sorry days are having on communities. If a community was having a period of sorrow 100 years or 200 years ago, that period would only have been for a limited amount of time because the body would have had to be disposed with. Now we can have bodies stuck down in Adelaide for weeks at a time, with communities in sorry camps. We have children hundreds of kilometres away from their homes in sorry camps.</para>
<para>Traditionally, anything over 20 kilometres or 30 kilometres would have been out of that community's reach. With the way that they live their lives now, sorry days are having a much greater impact now than they would have had 100 years or 200 years ago. That is one of the reasons that school attendances are so bad throughout the lands. It is not necessarily that the kids are not rolling up on any specific day, although I know that we have issues with that as well. Some compulsion from the Commonwealth such that to get welfare payments your children should attend school is well overdue.</para>
<para>The acceptance of income management is varied. I know many are implacably opposed. I met with the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples a few weeks ago and they are opposed. However, as the member for Grey I regularly visit remote Indigenous communities and as part of that work have met in the past with representatives of the Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women's Council, which covers communities encompassing 350,000 square kilometres in Central Australia and straddling three states. I well remember the points that they made to me. Essentially, they said: 'We didn't want income management; we were totally opposed. But now we don't want you to take it away.' That is because it has empowered women to stand up for themselves and their families. One of the great strengths and weaknesses of Aboriginal society is their tradition of sharing whatever they have. However, as community structures have broken down in these remote communities, the tradition of sharing has become simply agreeing to demands from dysfunctional members of the communities to supply them with food and money for drugs and alcohol.</para>
<para>When I met with them, the women told me this: 'Now when people come to the door and demand food we can say, 'You cannot be hungry because you have the same food as me.' That is because part of their welfare cheques under income management cannot be spent on alcohol, drugs, cigarettes or other non-essential items. It must be spent on the essentials: food and shelter. While, as I said earlier, I am very reluctant to endorse laws that take away personal responsibility, unfortunately there is a tipping point at which it affects others in the community—namely, the children—and at that point you have to take a stand and be counted. My observations in the communities where this resistance is strongest is that the male population is much more strongly opposed to income management than the female population. I point out that these are still very much male dominated societies and the males with influence in the society have a fear of the unknown.</para>
<para>I endorse the government's moves in this area. I hope that they are going to make a difference. Of those of us who are in these communities and face these issues on a regular basis, none are foolish enough to say that this is the answer and that it will fix the problem. It is not that simple. If the problem was that easily fixed, it would have been fixed 40 or 50 years ago. We hope that this policy will make a difference. In the medium term and the longer term, if it does provide the circuit breaker, we also have to find mechanisms to re-empower people to take control of their own lives, get back on track and make the decisions for themselves to give them the lives that the rest of Australia basically take for granted. As I said, this is not just an Indigenous issue. I am pleased to see this roll out in another five communities within Australia. If those circumstances exist there, so should the solutions.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I speak in support of the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011 and the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011. At the beginning of this speech, I pay tribute to the Hon. Jenny Macklin. She is an extraordinary parliamentarian and a wonderful minister. I have had the privilege of working with her as chair of the caucus social policy committee for the past four years. She is the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Minister for Disability Reform. She has a wonderful heart and a tremendous work ethic. I pay tribute to her for the extensive consultation that she has undertaken in relation to this matter. This legislation comes as a result of the incredible hard work that she has put in to consult with men, women and communities across the length and breadth of this country.</para>
<para>I support this legislation because I believe that it will make a difference in the lives of people in Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory and in communities across the country. Indeed, one of the areas of income management happens to be in your electorate, Deputy Speaker Livermore, the federal seat of Capricornia. I will speak about that later.</para>
<para>The legislation lays out the approach that we are going to take in relation to the Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory. We are committed to closing the gap. We have a history of taking action and implementing reforms. I noticed the Prime Minister's recent speech on the annual report on where we are up to in terms of closing the gap. We have in place some very strong aspirations and we have backed that up with serious commitment and serious funding, and we are making a difference. We are delivering real and measureable outcomes in these Indigenous communities across the country, not just in the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>More than 90,000 additional jobs have been won by Indigenous Australians over recent years. Indigenous unemployment has fallen from 31 per cent to 16.6 per cent. Infant mortality rates in South Australia, Western Australia and the Northern Territory have fallen by 36 per cent. Indigenous workers across the country are taking action in Northern Territory and Queensland in the fight against chronic disease such as heart conditions, diabetes, foetal alcohol spectrum disorder and mental illness and against other problems in these communities. We have seen an improvement in retention rates for Indigenous young people completing year 12. It is too low at 47 per cent, but it has increased from the 30 per cent that it was in the early 1990s. It is not good enough yet, but steps are being taken. We are making a difference, we are making gains, but it is not easy after many years of disadvantage and difficulties. There is no doubt whatsoever that there is a long way to go, but legislation like this will make a difference. With the support of Labor and coalition governments across the length and breadth of the country, and with the goodwill of Indigenous and other communities, we can make a difference. We are looking to improve housing with about 4,700 new or refurbished homes across Indigenous communities across the country since 2009. We are looking at hundreds and hundreds of refurbished homes in the Northern Territory—about 1,400 by June 2013. This is the largest ever remote housing investment in the Northern Territory's history. We are making a difference because we believe in helping. On this side of politics we believe that helping our brothers and sisters is not an optional extra, it is not an aspiration, it is not a handout—it is a help up. We want to make sure that we can deliver real gains in that regard. We are determined to close the gap in relation to Indigenous disadvantage.</para>
<para>The object of the stronger futures legislation is to make sure we build safer communities in the Northern Territory. We want to make sure that children go to school. We want to make sure that housing is decent and affordable. We want to make sure that alcoholism is not a scourge on these communities in the future. Too often, men and women have continued to drink alcohol to excess. Women often drink during pregnancy, resulting in FASD difficulties for their children. There is too much domestic violence in these communities, too much criminality, too much conflict, too much dispute and too many marriage and relationship breakdowns. There is simply not enough goodwill evidenced in the past by governments of both persuasions—not enough commitment of funding, not enough determination to tackle these issues. The legislation before the House, particularly the stronger futures legislation, deals with real, practical measures to tackle alcohol abuse, with making sure that we have more nutritious food and better food security in these remote communities and with assisting economic development in the town camps and community-living areas in the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>In the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill we have five new sites announced, including Logan, which is adjacent to my home city of Ipswich, and Rockhampton in Queensland. We will see amendments made that involve income management. That can be triggered by referrals from state and Territory organisations. I can imagine these organisations are very keen to be helping people who are vulnerable, who are suffering from social and economic disadvantage and who are in need of a helping hand to manage their financial affairs. There are school attendance plans under the social security legislation. I was interested to note that the government's Improving School Enrolment and Attendance through Welfare Reform Measure, known as SEAM, which other speakers have referred to, was mentioned recently in a press release by the Hon. Jenny Macklin, the Federal Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, as well as by the Hon. Peter Garrett, the Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth. They mentioned the <inline font-style="italic">2010 </inline><inline font-style="italic">e</inline><inline font-style="italic">valuation of SEAM</inline> report and made the point that, under SEAM, parents who do not respond to attempts to ensure their children are enrolled in and attend school can have their income support payments suspended. This has been trialled in 14 communities in the Northern Territory and 30 schools in Queensland. It is important that children turn up to class. It is important that children are literate and numerate. It is important to their educational outcomes and to their future financial security that that is the case. Children who do not complete school end up regularly engaging in miscreant behaviour.</para>
<para>That is why the report <inline font-style="italic">Doing time—time for doing</inline>of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, of which I am the chair, noted so many Indigenous juveniles and young adults involved in the criminal justice systems around the country. The tragedy is that Indigenous juveniles are 28 times more likely to be in detention than non-Indigenous juveniles. Indigenous juveniles make up more than half of the detainee population on an average day. Indigenous young adults are 15 times more likely to be imprisoned than non-Indigenous young adults. If you are an Indigenous woman you are 35 times more likely to be hospitalised by partner abuse than a non-Indigenous women. There are real problems in these communities. This is not some esoteric, theoretical problem; these are real problems in families and in individual and community life in our country. It is in our backyard, it is in our neighbourhood, it is in our community—and we cannot ignore it. That is why in the report that the Hon. Peter Garrett and the Hon. Jenny Macklin mentioned the point is made that SEAM was successful in ensuring that all children of school age, who were involved in the trial, were enrolled in school and alternative education programs in 2010. There was an increase in participation: SEAM students increased their participation from 74.4 per cent to 79.9 per cent in the Northern Territory and from 84.7 per cent to 88.7 per cent in Queensland, my home state. There were other indications that the SEAM program is quite clearly working. The report also found that after social workers from Centrelink contacted families students were less likely to miss school—that is, less likely to be engaged in truancy.</para>
<para>We create good social norms and build safer communities by building up families. Family is the bedrock of our community, and that is important. That is why so many of these reforms are so critical to families. Alcoholism is a really bad thing. About one in 10 Australians suffer from alcohol abuse. Anyone who has experienced alcoholism in their family, as I have, has seen the impact on family life, on a person's capacity to complete school and on relationships. It results in ostracism for many people. It results in financial deprivation. It often results in abuse—psychological and emotional—in family life. It results in real disadvantage for young people. Alcoholism is a really bad problem and the Northern Territory, on all the evidence, is a problem area. I was interested to see in some reports that were coming out of the Northern Territory that in the Northern Territory alcohol consumption is far greater than elsewhere. The <inline font-style="italic">Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011—alcohol proposals regulation impact statement/post implementation review</inline> made it really clear that the problem of alcohol consumption in the Northern Territory has not gone away and in fact is very much there. According to that report, in 2007 it was estimated that 88.7 per cent of non-Indigenous adults in NT had consumed alcohol in the previous 12 months, compared to 84.6 per cent of the rest of Australians. But it was worse when it came to Indigenous people. It really is a problem. I commend everyone to have a look at that report, because you will be absolutely stunned at the impact of alcohol consumption on people's lives and upon the problems that are clearly there in the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>The World Health Organisation makes it plain that harmful use of alcohol is a global problem which impacts not just on individuals and families but on the social development of whole communities. The whole of the Northern Territory has been afflicted by these problems. The problem is the pattern of drinking and the volume of drinking. The volume of drinking in the Northern Territory amongst Indigenous people is very, very high. The problem is also the pattern, where a father gets hold of the money and then consumes alcohol, passes it on and gets the partner or wife involved, regardless of whether she is pregnant or otherwise. This can result, of course, in a child suffering from foetal alcohol spectrum disorder and other kinds of problems.</para>
<para>I am pleased that, arising out of the <inline font-style="italic">Doing time</inline> report, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs is looking into foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. I happen to be on that committee, and we have had a number of hearings, particularly in North Queensland. You can see the impact of foetal alcohol spectrum disorder on the lives of those people. There are a lot of things we can do in terms of prevention, assistance, income management, advice, counsel, education and mentoring. I mentioned education before, because education is really important for our young people and for people in the Northern Territory.</para>
<para>I am going this Friday to some seminars with an Indigenous lawyers association in Brisbane. I am very interested to see how they are going. Josh Creamer is a very well-known Indigenous barrister in Brisbane. I talk to Josh and I know him through a mutual friend, Sharon Murakami. They are having a meeting to talk about how they can provide friendship and fellowship to one another. There are very few Indigenous people—not enough—in professions around the country. I want to have a situation where an Indigenous young person from a remote community can have the opportunity, as Josh has had in his area, to work and practice as a barrister. Mentors like that can make a difference, but education is the key. Making sure that kids get to school is absolutely crucial.</para>
<para>I want to talk briefly about income management and why I think it is important. It has been successful elsewhere. We have seen this in Western Australia since late 2008, but we have also seen the importance of contact through Centrelink. Centrelink is a really important organisation throughout the country, as I saw after the floods in my electorate. In the future, in places like Rockhampton, Logan and, I hope, my area of Ipswich, we will see the referral of parents who just cannot cope, who are vulnerable to financial crisis, to Centrelink for income management. We want to make sure that the people who volunteer for income management, people who are struggling, can get the help they need. We want to make sure that children get every opportunity.</para>
<para>The legislation before this House deals with the Northern Territory. It deals with a lot of things. It deals with housing, food, land tenure, alcohol problems and education. This is a whole-of-government approach. I will finish where I started, by commending Jenny Macklin, the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. She is a great public servant to this community, and this legislation is testimony to her commitment to Indigenous people around the country.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TUDGE</name>
    <name.id>M2Y</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011 and the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011. This is important legislation because it concerns the most disadvantaged people in our society of Australia, and that is remote Indigenous Australians, particularly those in the Northern Territory. I have said before in this chamber that, if we come to this place with the aim of doing good work for the nation, we must keep the plight of Indigenous Australians high on the agenda. This legislation does that and it allows us to discuss not only the particular measures being put forward here but, more broadly, the issues which are confronting remote Indigenous Australians.</para>
<para>There are three particular measures contained within the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill. The first and the most important one is a provision, in essence, to strengthen the alcohol measures, particularly by giving the federal minister additional powers over alcohol abuse in the remote communities of the Northern Territory. Anybody who has visited the remote communities of Australia, be they in the Northern Territory or elsewhere, will know that alcohol is absolutely the poison that runs through these places. It is debilitating to these communities. It destroys families. It creates violence. It prevents children from going to school. It is completely and utterly destructive to these communities. Alcohol consumption is also the highest predictor of Aboriginal people going to prison.</para>
<para>The speaker before me mentioned some statistics, and I will mention some more. Within Cape York, a community which I know well—and I am sure the situation would be similar in the Northern Territory—between 50 and 80 per cent of people above the age of 16 drink at hazardous levels, according to the WHO definition of hazardous. It is a remarkable figure and it is a figure which the World Health Organisation has seen nowhere else on the planet. In fact, it is four times higher than the next highest figure, which is for South Africa. That is in the Cape York communities data taken from several years ago and documented in the justice study in Cape York. I am sure it is replicated in other wet communities across remote Indigenous Australia.</para>
<para>This is an absolutely important and essential issue which we must tackle directly as a problem. It is not good enough for people to say that this is just an indirect consequence of racism or an indirect consequence of dispossession. I do not believe that. I believe that people might start drinking in part due to that, but over time it has become an issue in itself. It is now such a vast issue in these places that we must tackle it directly, head-on— not as a symptom but as a problem in its own right. Noel Pearson has been talking about this and has raised this issue for many years, and he is a former boss of mine. He says there is a very definite correlation between access to grog and the level of harm, and the less access to grog, the less harm. There is an absolute correlation between the two, he says, and I have seen that for myself as well. You go to places where they have got on top of the grog, you go to the dry communities, and they are fundamentally different from those places where the alcohol still runs through the community like a river. So we must start looking at the supply, and the alcohol management plans are an important part of restricting supply of alcohol.</para>
<para>Before the human rights lobby jumps up and down and says, 'What about the right to drink?', I say, 'What about the rights of the children in those communities and what about the rights of the sober grandparents who are frequently holding the places together?' That is who we should be thinking about when we are thinking about this legislation before us and we are thinking about additional measures to strengthen these communities. We must cut the supply of alcohol, and this bill before us will assist in putting in place strong alcohol management plans to address it.</para>
<para>At the same time we must address the cash side of the equation. It is one thing if you have your own job, you are earning your own money and you want to go and spend it on booze. Go for your life. But frequently it is the broader Australian community, through our taxes, who are funding the alcohol habits occurring in these places, and that is something we need to be more persistent and more aggressive about. I do not think any Australian citizen expects their tax dollars to be going towards subsidising someone's alcohol problem and causing the social breakdown of communities. Some sensible measures have started to be put in place, measures such as income management, which is starting to be rolled out in many places. I think that is a good thing, and it can be rolled out further where there are significant problems such as alcohol and other abuses.</para>
<para>I move now to the second measure, having briefly addressed the issues in relation to alcohol abuse. The second measure in this bill concerns land reform. In essence, this allows for longer term leases so that people can have, hopefully, home ownership and it allows for longer term leases so that businesses can set up premises with the security of knowing that they will not be ejected from their premises at any time soon. Again, this particular measure is a good measure and it is in the right direction. But these measures have been painfully slow to come into being across remote Indigenous Australia. We have been talking about home ownership now for probably a decade—in this parliament through the parliamentarians who were here before I was elected and certainly through the leadership of people like Noel Pearson, Warren Mundine, Wesley Aird and others who have been strongly advocating for home ownership opportunities in the remote communities.</para>
<para>Home ownership is important not just because it would facilitate people achieving something which they want—to own their own property—but because it actually empowers individuals. It gives responsibility back to people so that they can take care of their own housing. That is something which is missing in the remote communities. In most remote communities people are disempowered and have very little opportunity to make their own choices in relation to housing. If they want to build a new room, they cannot just go and do that. They have to go to their local council and lobby and hopefully there will be some government funds to enable them to get a bigger house. This is fundamentally an issue about individual responsibility and about empowering individuals to take care of their own housing needs.</para>
<para>Better tenure is also vitally important for business development because, as most people in this chamber will know, you will not get business development and you will not get sustained economic growth anywhere in the world unless you have security of property and security of contract. They are two preconditions for sustainable economic growth. And in the remote communities presently across the Northern Territory and indeed across Australia there is very little security of tenure to allow businesses to start and to allow businesses to thrive. This measure will go some way towards addressing that and I hope that means we will soon be able to have good security of tenure so that businesses can thrive in these remote locations.</para>
<para>This takes me to the third provision, which relates to food security. In some respects this measure perplexes me and frustrates me—that we in this parliament have to be debating provisions about food security and about opening food stores in places far removed from where we are in the nation's capital, thousands of kilometres away from the remote communities. It relates to the land security issue. If there were land security and places where private enterprises could open up easily and meet the demand which exists, we would not have to be having this debate and this conversation over this particular measure. Then you would get a local entrepreneur who might say, 'I just might open up a small food store and service the local 1,000 members of this community.' That is how it should occur. We do not stand here debating the local community stores in downtown Canberra or in downtown Knox, where I am from. Nor should we be debating the community stores in downtown Wadeye or Aurukun. Unfortunately still, while land security issues are not fixed, we have to address this and, because of that, I reluctantly support the measure in front of me.</para>
<para>In the last few minutes remaining I will touch on some broader issues. Even with these measures in front of us I do not believe we are addressing the fundamental problem confronting remote Indigenous communities—that is, that we have a policy of subsidised disengagement. For 40 years we have had an implicit Indigenous policy in this nation of subsidised disengagement where, in essence, we pay people and support them to live in a place of their choice regardless of the economic viability of that location. We need to move away from that to a position firmly based on economic engagement in the real economy, where people are fully educated to be mobile and to exploit the opportunities which present themselves right across Australia. That is the main game, in my view, which we as a country still fail to be serious about. We need to be serious about tackling head-on welfare dependency and subsidised disengagement. No group of people on the planet will prosper in a welfare economy. It does not matter who you are, what your cultural background is, or what your skin colour is. No group of people anywhere on the planet has prospered in a welfare economy. Indigenous people are no exception, yet we still have policies which create incentives for people to remain in remote communities rather than to be mobile, accepting jobs located elsewhere across Australia.</para>
<para>This is not a foreign concept to many remote Indigenous Australians. Speak to the older Indigenous Australians and they will tell you that 30 or 40 years ago they worked in Rockhampton, Mount Isa, up in Cape York or over in the Northern Territory. They followed the jobs, but that is not happening any more in part because our welfare system has a 90-minute rule which says that people do not have to look for a job if it is more than 90 minutes from where they reside. That means people in remote communities do not have to look for a job. So you have fully able-bodied people graduating from high school who go straight onto welfare queues. After two or three years on welfare, they will be further weakened and debilitated. At the very least, the able-bodied people who graduate from school should have to leave their communities to get a job. We do not do a service to those individuals, to their families or to the Australian community by continuing with the policy of welfare dependence in remote locations.</para>
<para>I strongly support the alcohol measures in this bill and I support the measures targeted at providing greater security of tenure. But, most importantly, we still need to address welfare dependency, which is rife.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAASE</name>
    <name.id>84T</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It gives me a great deal of pleasure to speak to the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011. The first item I would like to address is the statement from my colleague the member for Aston. I agree with 99.9 per cent of everything he said, apart from the oft repeated phrase that no-one in any culture makes a future out of welfare. I can assure him that in the seat of Durack there are many environments where individuals make a great deal of money out of welfare. They are all responsible for taking money out of Indigenous pockets and putting it into white pockets. They rub their hands together with glee every time there is another welfare policy devised by federal government. We have ample evidence to suggest that only a minimal number of projects—out of the many which have been amply funded by the federal taxpayer—have made a substantial difference to the ongoing welfare and future direction of Indigenous people across Australia. That is the issue we need to address in our debate in this place.</para>
<para>Listeners and viewers would be well aware that in opposition we have very little control over the policies proposed by the government. This proposition alone simply gives further carriage and guarantee to propositions put together by the Howard government. Had many of those propositions not been watered down so severely in the early days, I suggest we may have been a little further down the road of progress, a little further down the road of giving back self-esteem to Indigenous people in engaging with Western society and moving forward removed from the necessity of the welfare paddock.</para>
<para>Jackie Dann from the West Kimberley in a paper years ago said, 'Release us from the welfare paddock. You are destroying our culture, you are destroying us as individuals.' So true were his statements, but so little has changed if we speak of the period since the late 60s. Yes, we have addressed infant mortality in a very powerful way. Yes, we have addressed life expectancy in a substantial way. But if you go to the readily found examples you will find no great improvement in housing, no great improvement in school accommodation, no great improvement on education attained when concluding formal education and no reduction in incarceration. We have too much knowledge of the failure of individual Indigenous people and their collective communities and to date we have too little evidence of high achievement, except in some outstanding cases for individuals. It is that collective that we in this place are responsible for assisting and directing.</para>
<para>Much has been said recently about closing the gap, but is there among departmental personnel who reside in Canberra a great wealth of knowledge about and commitment to that very decision to close the gap? I ask a very rational question: what motivation is there for a department exclusively responsible for the wellbeing of Indigenous people to solve all the problems associated with the welfare of Indigenous people? I believe that people with foresight, vision and a sound mind might look to a future where government departments all over this nation specifically responsible for Indigenous affairs and their advancement install a sunset clause on the very existence of their agencies with a guarantee that those employees would move to other departments, without being disadvantaged, at a particular point in time—a particularly point in time not measured by achievement but by a fixed date in the future. Everyone would be pressured to work to a conclusion that was satisfactory because they would know that the task was to be finished.</para>
<para>It is a rather severe point that I make but, until such time as there is a major shake-up of existing Indigenous policy in the areas of housing, welfare, education, health et cetera, what are we going to find that will act as a catalyst for change? Many interested in the subject will know the intervention across Northern Australia was such a catalyst. It was a very necessary change that was brought about by a shocking report that revealed abuse of the youngest and most vulnerable in Indigenous communities. That was in part a catalyst, but it is quite obviously not enough because not enough change has taken place. Is it the fault of those employees of departments who are responsible for making contact and are very concerned that they need to cement those relationships face to face with a friendly embrace? Is it the fault of the individuals at a higher level for delegating the employees to particular tasks? Is it the responsibility of yet higher authorities for developing these one-size-fits-all solutions? I suggest it is a combination of many of those aspects, but basically we have a condition that I call box ticking. Many people that are removed from the day-to-day shock and horror of Indigenous communities find it very easy to scurry into these communities, consult briefly, tick some boxes and go back to comfortable suburbia. It does Indigenous people no good. It does our reputation as legislators no good. It does nothing to improve the status and reputation of so many government agencies.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Durack, where approximately 14 per cent of the population are Indigenous, I see replication of agency visits on a day-to-day basis. A stream of white Falcons or Holdens make a beeline to communities. They all consult; they all tick the box; and they all leave again.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Laming</name>
    <name.id>E0H</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Seagulls.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAASE</name>
    <name.id>84T</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My colleague reminds me the ones that fly in on a regular basis are more aptly referred to as seagulls. Indigenous people are sick and tired of them. They are sick and tired of being told that the task is easy—nominate, volunteer, participate—and then, because that particular program fails, the individuals involved are criticised for being worthless. The tolerance of members of remote Indigenous communities wears thin. They have been tested, trained, put over the hurdles, cajoled and accused time and time again.</para>
<para>The last time that we saw a quantum leap in the advancement and wellbeing of Indigenous people after the arrival of the First Fleet was probably the arrival of the missionaries across remote Australia. At that point in time education was given. Guidance that was believed to be necessary for assimilation was given. The outcomes of course were much less than the expectations of those missionaries involved, but their intent was great and good and their commitment was great and good. The criticism that they have had heaped upon them since those day is in the main unjustified. I know that in my original patch of Kalgoorlie in the Eastern Goldfields all of the successfully employed and deployed Indigenous people had a solid grounding of education in mission schools—Mount Margaret, Warakurna, Warburton. Further north into the Kimberley there were remarkable institutions such as Balgo, Beagle Bay, Forrest River, Kalumburu. They were establishments that taught. They did not strive for an 18-month or two-year cultural experience to enjoy the romance of it all and then go back home and dine out on it for the next 20 years, which is so often the case today. They were actually committed to the task. They then were often pilloried for their involvement in conditions that were considered unacceptable to the delicate nature of urban dwellers. Today, we are faced with a debate on legislation that is once again going to regulate the behaviour of Indigenous communities. As I said, in the main it is regulation that was introduced by the Howard government as a matter of necessity. It was necessary then, it is necessary now and it should be embraced. Any opportunity to impose more rigour on that legislation should be taken, because as legislators we cannot afford to simply wish to avoid offence. There has been far too much of that on the part of legislators in the past.</para>
<para>My Indigenous friends across the Durack electorate understand discipline. They understand the necessity for rigour. They understand the necessity for their children and grandchildren to get an education. I am speaking in the main of those people who got their education at the hands of the missionaries and got jobs on pastoral stations. Those people absolutely deplore the current situation where sit-down money is paid. There is no rigour in expectations of the performance of Indigenous individuals or collective communities.</para>
<para>There is very little respect for the concept of mutual obligation. There is almost an epidemic condition where people say, 'We may be expected by departments on high to make a performance at such and such a level, but past experience tells us that we will never be expected to reach that level so why should it bother.' That condition and that experience do not teach discipline. It does not teach the individual that they will stand out in a group by putting their shoulder to the wheel and going the extra yard, and being rewarded for it. They will more likely remember the experience of sticking their head up and being noticed, and possibly having their head knocked off, figuratively speaking, because they took the initiative to do something.</para>
<para>All of our policies to date have been more about ticking boxes, presuming that those who are ignorant of the real conditions will accept our platitudes, our cheque-writing and our visitation as something that will seriously contribute to the betterment of Indigenous people. The reality is that it could not be further from the truth. What we need is a number of people who are truly committed to getting a job done, a number of people whose continued employment will depend on their performance rather than their processing of numbers. We need a group of people who understand rigour and the necessity for it to realise great outcomes for communities. We need a group of people who understand that without rigour Indigenous people will have no respect whatsoever for the agents of change that are visiting their communities.</para>
<para>Madam Deputy Speaker Livermore, I know that you know I speak from experience and I speak from the heart, but it is an ongoing and long-term project to educate all the members of this House as to what really should be done and what really is expected in remote Indigenous communities across Australia. The most important ingredient I believe is rigour. That rigour must be found in all dealings we have with those communities. The first step in the development of a human being is education. If we do not get that education right and if we do not make that process attractive for the families of Indigenous children, they will never be engaged in the process of insisting that their children attend school. This legislation will make some small contribution if applied with rigour to ensure that that is the outcome and individuals get their lives back.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAMING</name>
    <name.id>E0H</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In wrapping up this debate, I note that it has been disjointed because we are debating the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 and the cognate bills, Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011 and Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011, together. For those who are listening to this debate and find us hopping from income management in urban Australia to alcohol management in the Northern Territory, the best way I can summarise where we are at is that we have had both an apology and a commitment bilaterally from both sides of this chamber to closing the gap. But, today, this government has brought to this House a series of bills that do little more than duplicate or timidly expand what already exists in the area of alcohol and income management.</para>
<para>In Stronger Futures, the Commonwealth government is duplicating the abilities of the Northern Territory government to make certain determinations around alcohol management. All things considered, that is a fairly timid move into this greatly distressing area. Worldwide, right across humanity, we know that around five litres of pure alcohol per person aged over the age 15 is drunk, and in the Northern Territory it is three times that amount—50 per cent higher than it is for the rest of Australia, more than three standard drinks per person, whether they are drinkers or not, over the age of 15. These are greatly concerning figures that well-meaning groups like the People's Alcohol Action Coalition have emphasised must be addressed through supply reduction. You simply cannot wait for demand changes to take root in the context of complete dysfunction.</para>
<para>Having been warned of this and the important steps that were taken with the Northern Territory intervention, it is ironic that today we are debating transitional and consequential provisions that will end those five-year periods for the Northern Territory intervention and replace them with alcohol plans that, for the most part, are agreed by both sides of this chamber. My great concern is that, with these reforms that run for another 10 years with review at seven and then ultimately reporting at eight years, we will find little difference on the ground at the end of that period. That is why we need to be very frustrated about what is being debated here today.</para>
<para>What has been put before the chamber will make almost no difference to what happens in Alice Springs. It will allow the federal government, if it chooses, to ask an independent assessor to identify whether there are breaches of the Northern Territory act. It will allow the federal government to introduce regulations that will become an amendment to a piece of Northern Territory legislation, in the hope that the Northern Territory does not remove those amendments in their own parliament.</para>
<para>In the grand context of alcohol abuse and in the context of child abuse and foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, this legislation does not take us even a few millimetres closer to a solution. To use that metaphor of the duck gliding across the water but paddling underneath, on this side of the House we have the inverted duck: lots of flapping above the water but no propulsion under the water. No, because this is a government appealing to both sides of the street. We have many people in the House today; we have many of them down from the Northern Territory deeply aggrieved by the Northern Territory intervention and, still to this day, deeply wounded by the lack of consultation. This government has now had five years to do the consultation, but that has not occurred. Sure, there have been chartered flights up, with ministers dropping in to talk and sympathise about the intervention, but there has been little more than that.</para>
<para>On the same side of this debate, this is a government that wants to travel around the rest of Australia and flex its muscle to show how much it has done in welfare reform. So, if you are looking for those little clues, where you talk tough to the rest of Australia and are then very apologetic to those in the Centre who complain, then look no further than this social security amendment. The Northern Territory emergency intervention, flawed as it was in its lack of consultation, rolled out clear indications about reductions in trauma and improvements in school attendance. We have had, thanks to Noel Pearson, the interventions in Cape York that have shown distinct improvements in attendance at school and reduction in presentations to magistrates. We have seen in Cape York, after Family Responsibilities Commission hearings, 50 per cent of people having their income quarantined only to move through the quarantine and come out the other side adhering to the positive social norms that we desire to cultivate all around Australia. These are self-imposed, self-agreed social norms like sending your kids to school, not harming them, paying your rent and staying out of court. They are simple things that most parts of the world can agree on, but we have not gone beyond Cape York at this stage.</para>
<para>Under this government we had a two-year trial in two Western Australian locations: one in the Kimberley and one in Perth. That trial was evaluated by ORIMA, who found virtually no fault in the application of voluntary income management and income management under conditions where child-welfare is at stake. It is almost a no-brainer. As controversial it might have been 10 years ago, even the government's own assessment and evaluation says that it works.</para>
<para>So what does the pea-hearted mob on the other side of the chamber do? They design another two-year trial with exactly the same intervention; having just had the trial evaluated and found to be effective! They are rolling it out in five tiny communities around Australia—that is what we are debating today—which make up less than one per cent of the population. It will not include anyone in the Prime Minister's electorate, anyone in the health minister's electorate, anyone in the previous health minister's electorate or anyone in the Treasurer's electorate. No, this trial involves just five urban communities. Sure, these communities are vulnerable, but what are they going to do there? They are going to allow social workers to determine if someone is vulnerable and, if so, they will be offered the opportunity to have their income managed. We may be dealing with a couple of hundred people in those areas.</para>
<para>There is nothing left that is complicated or controversial about this anymore. We have had years to evaluate this. But this timid step, which is barely forward, just shows a government that is unable to really grasp the issue of welfare reform. In fact, they are being left behind by the community. If you ask them, most of the community would say, 'If you're abusing kids, probably the first thing you should do is quarantine some income, manage it with the assistance of a social worker, and make sure the child does not miss out.' How does this party over here, with its heritage of looking after low-income earners and highly vulnerable in Australia and our community, rest and reconcile that with this piece of legislation that just creeps along with another two years of pilot programs? What would anyone say to the other 99 per cent of Australia, where there is no income quarantined, about people who are either abusing or threatening their kids through poor use of income and government welfare? It is utterly appalling that this is not rolling out nationwide. It is appalling that the rest of Australia is denied that basic service of voluntary income management, particularly for those that have child welfare notifications that come from state governments.</para>
<para>This is beyond being even remotely interesting for researchers now. The proof is in. The government funded research, the government funded evaluations and the time of this chamber, on I admit a day of great distraction, is being consumed moving a bill to allow another two years of pilot programs. The time for pilot programs must surely be coming to an end. Five locations in five tiny suburbs, under these provisions, is nowhere near what is required in a context where it has been evaluated, re-evaluated and re-evaluated again.</para>
<para>I admit that the BasicsCard has had some teething problems in the Northern Territory. It is effectively a value-storing card that is PIN-protected and from which you can only use between 50 and 70 per cent of your income on essential services. But we have reached a point now where there is enough diversity and enough providers that in most parts of Northern Territory there is no problem with the BasicsCard or a need to continue evaluating it. We are moving to the point now where we need greater debate about whether all welfare recipients, in fact all people who are on DSP, on Newstart or on various forms of parenting payment, should be subjected to 50 to 70 per cent income management to ensure that they are spending that welfare wisely. After all, it is government money, and is therefore for the provision of services to family and their children. But, no, what we are debating today is another pilot program.</para>
<para>In the Northern Territory, there are some sensible changes, which will allow the minister to make exceptions where alcohol is being carried over waterways, particularly for commercial or tourism purposes, and that makes good sense. I know also that the Australian Hotels Association's Northern Territory branch have articulated their utterly reasonable concerns about which level of government they answer to. I concede that they would have a concern that the federal government might be acting blindly without understanding the conditions on the ground. But I think the amendments that have been proposed by the member for Menzies are common sense. They propose that the first intervention for the federal government would be writing to the Territory equivalent responsible for NT liquor licensing, indicating their desire to have that particular area independently assessed. That makes good sense. It reduces, to some extent, the duplication that we are so concerned about on this side.</para>
<para>In the Northern Territory at the moment they are simplifying what is going on. Woolworths and Coles have agreed to remove some of their cheapest versions of alcohol. That is right, the flavoured metho is no longer on the shelves in Alice Springs. That has to be a good thing. But, regrettably, there are still licensed premises that sell the cheapest forms of fortified and non-fortified cask wine. We are talking about alcohol priced in the vicinity of less than $1 per standard drink. Most recommendations have shown that if we can raise the minimum for a standard alcoholic unit to $1.20 we are some way towards reducing availability.</para>
<para>We also have the great difficulty that hotels in Alice Springs trade seven days a week—whereas at least we know that shopping centres often are not trading on a Sunday—which means seven-day availability. Centrelink payments can be on any day of the week and that means there is no 'thirsty Thursday' anymore of the kind we used to experience in Tennant Creek. The arrangement was that on the day welfare was provided they would close the licensed premises. It gave mums and primary caregivers a chance to buy food on that day and not have much of it humbugged away into alcohol purchase and consumption. The great concern we have at the moment is that absolutely there is the supply, possession and consumption of alcohol to the degree that will always need alcohol management plans and at times federal prescribing of areas to have alcohol restrictions.</para>
<para>There is no debate about that. The only concern is whether this federal government will work with and give notification to the Territory government. I do hope the minister who has entered the chamber now will consider that well-reasoned amendment, because it simply requires a letter to the NT minister to indicate that the federal government wishes to have an independent assessment, and for a vendor or a business to be given notice and a reasonable chance to respond. And of course there should be a chance for the Northern Territory government to respond if they think that there are financial or other reasons that make it difficult for them to comply or concur.</para>
<para>In conclusion, what we have here is a timid step forward in the great fight against alcohol consumption in Central Australia. We know how important it is, as the member for Aston articulately put it—and the member for Durack has said it is well, as did the members for Murray and Hasluck. Without being trite, there has been a series of speeches given on this side of the House that I thought were insightful. I thought they showed a clear understanding of how things work in Indigenous communities. But all that we have had from the government, from the great party looking after the vulnerable and the poor, were these fairly ordinary superficial responses that this is part of the government agenda to move things along.</para>
<para>Mark my words—with this legislation rolled out, I challenge the government to say whether there will be any change in five years. Is there any change in simply replicating the powers of the NT government in Canberra? Little. This government has failed to actually stand up to the forces that are making alcohol widely available in areas like Alice Springs. They have failed to set up the training arrangements that obligate young working-age Aboriginal Australians to undertake training, and to take jobs when they are suitable. They have failed to engage the people in town camps around Alice Springs, who remain wholly and solely, in many cases, utterly dysfunctional and dependent upon alcohol provision. It gives me the sense that it is a government that has just run out of ideas.</para>
<para>History shall record that this government, when given the chance, could think of nothing more than duplicating the powers of another jurisdiction. This is a government so timid in their moves towards welfare reform that we have had not one trial in the NT, two in Cape York and three in WA fully evaluated at government expense—yet they have announced another five trial sites. This is a government where the warm embrace of welfare reform is nothing more than cold and chilling. Welfare reform threatens the key constituencies of this government and that is why they will do everything they can to make it look like they are flapping wildly—but moving ahead they will not be. No, they will simply announce trial after trial and make glib announcements and give press conferences about the hard work they are doing. But I can assure those at every level in the government that years from now this slow progress will have done nothing for families who struggle with alcohol consumption, for families who struggle with the implications of that, and for the children who need our protection. This government could do far worse than take on some of our recommendations and move far faster than they have</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This bill is an admission of defeat. Clearly, it is an admission of defeat, and all the government can do is just try to suppress the symptoms. That is what is happening here. Unfortunately and sadly, I have had to preside over a town, my own home town of Mount Isa, where we have had 25 suicides—and I think that 21 or 22 of those were first Australians.</para>
<para>In the forum that we had—and we thank the Prime Minister very much for sending up the relevant minister—the locals said that whenever they have a person at risk all they have to talk to are some whitefellas who are entirely foreign to them in every way. They are not people the locals are going to open up to or feel comfortable with. They are not people from the local community. A huge amount of money is going to these people, money that really should be going to the local people. They are not trained, because I do not think that it is an area in which you can be trained. It is an area in which, if you have an ability to relate, it can be of some advantage.</para>
<para>I was quite staggered when I heard about the last two suicides as they were very much middle-class people. They were not people who had come in from the community areas, driven out by the liquor laws into the very bad rabbit warren areas in all of our towns and cities in North Queensland. I asked a person about the problem, a man whom I greatly respect—and I do not know whether I should mention his name, but I will—Chris Squelsh, who works in this area in North Queensland. Chris said, 'If you are a young mother and you get a knock on the door from the police sayingthat your son has been accused of throwing rocks through windows'—and Chris was not referring to any mother but just quoting numerous cases that he had had over the last two or three years—'or if you are a young mother and you have QBuild knocking on your door because you have not paid your rent and giving you one week before they throw you out into the street and your children are crying as they have no food because your husband took all the money and blew it on grog, gambling and everything else, or if you are a young mother and the children's services'—and this is very relevant to this bill—'turn up and say that they are taking the children off you because they are not being properly looked after, what would you do in that situation?' Chris said, 'What would you do when your husband is bringing all his drunken friends over for a party at the house with all the ills that follow on? Would you be out of your mind with terror?'</para>
<para>This bill gives power to further terrorise these poor people. Are we addressing the problems that exist there? If I had the power, I could fix this thing up in 10 seconds in that town. It is simply a matter of separating the 15 people living in a house with everyone getting on each other's nerves and a complete lack of anywhere to sleep even within the house of a night, no air-conditioning and absolutely unbearable heat because the house they built was enormously inappropriate.</para>
<para>All of the land around Mount Isa is pastoral lease land. The government can resume it at any time they feel like and divide it up into one-hectare blocks or smaller. There is no curbing and channelling or sewage required or anything. We are talking about maybe $20,000 at the outside. Then they can build their own houses with CDEP money. Sometimes I feel that I must be a very ineffective person because I have come in here and logically, again and again, put up simply what the people asked for. I was a minister in Queensland. I cannot claim any credit for this. Let me be very specific. Greg Wallace at Napranum said, 'We will get people to work for the dole.' Extraordinarily, he got people to voluntarily work for the dole. He got on <inline font-style="italic">60 minutes</inline><inline font-style="italic">, </inline>such was the reaction. It is the only time that <inline font-style="italic">60 minutes</inline> did two programs on the one issue within two weeks. Noel Pearson's brother Gerhardt—and I should not identify him that way because he is a person in his own right—as CEO of Hope Vale rang me up and said, 'Why can't we use CDEP money to build houses?' Gerry Hand said, 'That is a great idea.' I am not here to denigrate the minister, but I put this idea to the minister again and again. When I put it to Gerry Hand, within two weeks we had the CDEP money mobilised to build the houses. Gerry said, 'What a great idea,' and I cannot help but add that he said, 'That is a brilliant idea; it could not have come from you.' I said: 'No, it did not. It came from a bloke called Gerhardt Pearson, CEO at Hope Vale.'</para>
<para>But that was not the end of the story. I name with great pride my late and great friend Lester Rosendale, one of the most prominent people in Aboriginal affairs in Australia. One of my staff got a job with him because she also had very great respect for Lester Rosendale. Lester and Eric Law, who was effectively head of the department that I was responsible for, got an agreement that all houses would be built by exclusively local Indigenous labour. I was very angry because it was a fait accompli. I was not even consulted. These two senior public servants just took it in their own heads to go off and do it. One was a Hope Vale boy and another one a Cherbourg boy, but both were very senior-ranking public servants. I as the minister was very angry that I had not even been consulted. I said, 'What are you going to do: ask people who cannot even read or write to build their own houses?' They went ahead with it. They ignored me and boxed me into a corner and we built the houses.</para>
<para>That is still not the end of the story. Donnie Fraser, the Mayor of Doomadgee, rang me up and said,' Why can't we build our own blocks?' I had a terrible fight with him which he won. I said, 'All right, 'I will put one or two in as a pilot,' and they were tremendously successful. When we were up at TI a few days ago they said, 'Why can't we access the blocks from the block-making machine at Bamaga?' I said: 'I don't know if it is still going. I think I put it there and that was an awfully long time ago!' But then they produced their own blocks. We only had enough money to build 600 houses, but as a result we ended up building over 2,000 houses from not paying a king's ransom to white contractors. I am not denigrating white contractors—some of them are good mates of mine—but they have to pay people to come in, they have to pay their board and accommodation and, because they are away from home, the people have to be paid a fortune in travel costs. It is week on, week off in half these cases. They are going backwards and forwards all the time at enormous cost. If you do not work with local labour, you double the cost simply because you are flying people in to build the homes.</para>
<para>People will take great pride in their homes. Mossman Gorge is still one of the leading tourist attractions in North Queensland. When I went there every single home had graffiti and worse on the sides and the windows smashed. Some of them were fibrolite and you could look straight in because the fibrolite had been broken as well. The grass was waist high. When they started building their own homes there was not a single mark of graffiti, and they tell me there is still not a single mark of graffiti. All of the lawns are mown down to almost manicure status. They went out and got their own tourist operation. Again, I emphasise that I had nothing to do with it. I say to the minister for the 400th time and I tell the House for the 400th time that there are two simple things that you can do. The people of Australia gave you the power in 1966. And if there were any doubt the High Court gave it to you again in the case of Mabo, Passey and Rice and the Queensland government. They gave you the power to issue title deeds.</para>
<para>I went up there to do a bit of campaigning and, most of all, I desperately needed to know what the position on title deeds was in the Torres Strait. I did not speak—it is pretty rare for me not to get a word in—because people were jumping for the microphone to say they needed title deeds. We did not initiate the discussions; at the two public meetings they initiated the discussions. One meeting was called by the trade union, but they all came along and talked about title deeds. This is so simple. If you issued title deeds at Yarrabah they could borrow money and build their own homes. After all, it is the Yarrabah people's land. People say it is not as simple as that. I found it was as simple as that. I simply sat down. Lester Rosendale had already done it at Hope Vale, and I simply copied what Lester had done at Hope Vale. They said that the only title deeds there, the only privately owned land that is not owned by people of European descent, are because of title deeds issued in that brief period. Everyone thought I would be there forever and these laws would be there forever. Everyone was on island time and they did not do what they should have done, which was to get in and take up the title deeds when they were on offer. Some of them did and that is what they were talking about the other day.</para>
<para>Having returned from the Torres Strait, I cannot speak today without saying—and I have to choose my words very carefully—there is a race of people there that have diabetes in epidemic proportions. I have had discussions with Professor Wronski about this as he was the first person to tell me about it. I went there as minister until 1990 and every meal I had was locally produced: fruit, vegetables, dugong, turtle or fish, with fish being the predominant one. They have fish traps there et cetera. When I went there for closing the gap, I could not work out if the minister goes up there. People were screaming out in rage about closing the gap; the gap is widening into a gulf. We went there on a closing-the-gap delegation—what a joke. I felt so ashamed and embarrassed to return there. Not a single thing has been implemented or done to overcome the problem. Joey Masbi from York Island screamed out and his brother or cousin Thomas who runs the bus said: 'Joey is dead right. AQIS is starving us.' By AQIS he means the Fisheries Management Authority and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority which are enforcing things to please the Greens and get the support of the Greens. It would be nice if Minister Macklin would listen to what I am saying, but I do not suppose she listens to any of the first Australian people either.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>83S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Kennedy is reflecting upon the minister. I call him to account.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister is not interested in listening to these people who are dying of diabetes because they have no fresh fruit and vegetables. There is no employment there. You will not let them build their own houses. You will not give them the title deeds so they can do it for themselves. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MACKLIN</name>
    <name.id>PG6</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank all the contributors to this debate. We are looking at three bills: the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011, the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011 and the Social Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2011. The bills together form part of the government's next steps to tackle what are unacceptable levels of disadvantage still being experienced by far too many Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory. We are determined to take these steps with Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory and, of course, with the Northern Territory government.</para>
<para>It is all about making sure that we can build a stronger future for Aboriginal people and with Aboriginal people in the Territory. It is also very clearly about making sure that Aboriginal people can live more independent lives, lives in safer communities without violence and the terrible effects of alcohol abuse, where children are healthy and eat healthy food, where children go to school every day, where parents go to work and where families can live in decent housing.</para>
<para>I think all of us know that the gap is the widest in the Northern Territory. All of the data and all of the research tell us that. That is why this legislation is in front of the House today in the way that it is. We know that if we are to achieve real change for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory, it is going to take a long period of intensive work and significant investment. The situation does still remain critical. The measures in these bills tackle substantive problems and barriers. Some of the measures are very strong. The measures are designed to be fair. A lot of people have been consulted before decisions which will affect them have been made. It is very clear that if we are to work together in the way that we have outlined in the introduction of these bills, in the debate today and in the way in which we want to work together, none of us can walk away. All of us know that have to continue to work very hard to turn what are very difficult and critical situations around. I will shortly be moving some minor amendments to the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill to clarify the intention of the bill. These amendments will clarify that part 4 of the new act, relating to food security, has effect notwithstanding one existing Commonwealth law—the Competition and Consumer Act 2010—rather than despite Commonwealth laws generally.</para>
<para>I thank the opposition for their support today and indicate that we will be supporting the amendments that I understand they will be moving.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>83S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that this bill be now read a second time.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called and the bells having been rung—</inline></para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>83S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>As there are fewer than five members on the side for the noes in this division, I declare the question agreed to in accordance with standing order 127. The names of those members who are in the minority will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
<para>Question agreed to, Mr Katter, Mr Bandt and Mr Wilkie voting no.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
<para>Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>1816</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MACKLIN</name>
    <name.id>PG6</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011</title>
          <page.no>1816</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r4736">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Bill 2011</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1816</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>1816</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>HK5</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (5) as circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Clause 12, page 17 (after line 19), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: If the Minister proposes to make a determination under subsection (4), the procedure in section 13A must be followed first.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 12, page 17 (after line 24), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: If the Minister proposes to make a determination under subsection (5), the procedure in section 13A must be followed first.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Clause 13, page 18 (after line 14), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: If the Minister proposes to make a determination under subsection (3), the procedure in section 13A must be followed first.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Clause 13, page 18 (after line 19), add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: If the Minister proposes to make a determination under subsection (4), the procedure in section 13A must be followed first.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Page18, after line 27, at the end of Division 3, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">13A Procedure before making determination modifying NT liquor licence or permit</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Before making a determination under subsection 12(4), 12(5), 13(3) or 13(4) that modifies a NT liquor licence or NT liquor permit, the Minister must consult the NT Minister and the NT Licensing Commission about the proposed modification by giving them a written notice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The notice must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) set out information about the proposed modification; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) invite the NT Minister and the NT Licensing Commission to give written comments to the Minister about the proposed modification before the end of the consultation period in subsection (3).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The consultation period is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) the period specified in the notice, which must be at least 14 days after the day the notice is given; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) if the Minister agrees in writing to a longer period—that longer period.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) When making a determination under subsection 12(4), 12(5), 13(3) or 13(4), the Minister must have regard to any written comments of the NT Minister and the NT Licensing Commission that are given to the Minister during the consultation period in subsection (3).</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MACKLIN</name>
    <name.id>PG6</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill and I ask leave of the House to move government amendments (1) and (2), as circulated, together.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MACKLIN</name>
    <name.id>PG6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move government amendments (1) and (2):</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Heading to clause 109, page 91 (line 22), omit the heading, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> 109 Interaction with the <inline font-style="italic">Competition and Consumer Act 2010</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Clause 109, page 91 (line 23), omit "any other law of the Commonwealth", substitute "the <inline font-style="italic">Competition and Consumer Act 2010</inline>".</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill, as amended, agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>1817</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MACKLIN</name>
    <name.id>PG6</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011</title>
          <page.no>1817</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r4737">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1817</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>1817</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MACKLIN</name>
    <name.id>PG6</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011</title>
          <page.no>1817</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r4727">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1817</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
    <electorate>Charlton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>This bill will introduce a number of measures that will strengthen and streamline the Higher Education Support Act 2003 resulting in more effective and efficient administration of the Australian government's student income-contingent loan programs in the higher education and vocational education and training sectors, namely, FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP.</para>
<para>The bill provides for the use and disclosure of information by Commonwealth officers gained through the administration of FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP for certain purposes including to the newly established national regulators in the higher education and vocational education and training sectors, namely the Australian Skills Quality Authority and the Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency operating under the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Act 2011and the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 respectively. This will support consistent decision making across Commonwealth regulatory frameworks.</para>
<para>The bill will also improve the Commonwealth's ability to manage risk to the administration of public moneys and better protect students in the vocational education and training sector by strengthening the compliance provisions for approved VET providers. As provider approvals are issued in perpetuity, the bill makes it explicit that an approved VET provider must notify the minister of events that affect its ability to comply with the requirements to continue to maintain its approved provider status.</para>
<para>Further, the bill includes a transparent provision to make it clear that the secretary may vary or revoke a determination that an advance payment is to be made to a VET provider if the secretary is aware that the provider may not comply with the requirements under the act or may not be financially viable. In deciding to vary or revoke, matters which the secretary may take into consideration have been provided for, such as the nature of noncompliance, the provider's history of compliance and the impact of the provider's noncompliance on its ability to deliver quality education and training.</para>
<para>The bill will also improve the administrative arrangements for application times for higher education providers and VET providers. This amendment will clarify that the minister's authority to decide an application for approval exists beyond the time periods specified under the act.</para>
<para>And, finally, the bill provides for clearer, simpler and improved administrative arrangements for the assessment of an individual's higher education loan program debt. In doing so, the bill enables improved congruity between the Higher Education Support Act 2003 and taxation legislation.</para>
<para>I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011.</para>
<para>The coalition is committed to ensuring that Australian education is world class. Be it our university sector or our vocational education sector, we are determined that we shall be recognised globally as a standard bearer. We need a system defined by its academic quality, flexibility and ability to promote productivity. The coalition supported both the establishment of TEQSA, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, and also a national VET regulator to provide for a more systematic process of registration and auditing for vocational education and training, commonly known as VET.</para>
<para>It was the creation of these two agencies that in part led to one of the key aims of this bill. Part 3 of the bill outlines the use and disclosure of information collected from providers during their application process. This will enable the sharing of this information with the national regulatory agencies. Without doubt, the vocational sector had been plagued by a number of serious regulatory problems, resulting in the need for a real overhaul. We acknowledge that the system required a more stringent, consistent model of regulation and we supported the implementation of this model, albeit highlighting that the national VET regulator does not offer a truly national system of regulation as it currently stands because Western Australia and Victoria have chosen to remain outside the system. This bill specifically provides for greater compliance provisions for VET providers. Higher education does not just provide us with a home-grown workforce, it is also a vital export. Therefore it is critical that we ensure the end product is of as high a standard as possible. We want to be considered as a world leader and in order for this to occur we need a sound framework. That being said, we need a transparent, accountable system of regulation. But the coalition will not condone a system that is plagued by red tape. We need to audit smarter, not harder.</para>
<para>The former coalition government introduced income contingent loans to the VET sector in 2007. This helped extend education opportunities to those who had never previously believed a higher education was within their grasp. VET FEE-HELP enables all Australians to benefit from training, giving people a better employment future. Schedule 2 of the bill clarifies that the Higher Education Support Act is to this extent a tax law, for the purposes of the Taxation Administration Act, ensuring that the responsibility for the collection of the debt incurred via VET FEE-HELP or FEE-HELP rests with the taxation commissioner.</para>
<para>This bill seeks to amend the provisions concerning the permissible time frame the minister has in order to approve a request to become a higher education or VET provider. Currently, the minister has 90 days in which to approve the application from the receipt of the application. This bill will ensure that even if this time frame is not met, the minister may still approve the provider. The coalition does, however, caution the minister that a blow-out in time for approvals will not be acceptable.</para>
<para>Part 4 ensures that the secretary can revoke or alter a determination that an advance can be made to a provider. Again, the circumstances under which this may occur are outlined and provide that serious cases of misconduct can result in action from the Commonwealth.</para>
<para>Part 2 of the bill introduces subclauses 25 (2) and (3), outlining the circumstances in which a provider must provide written information to the minister when they believe they are in breach of their contractual requirements. Certainly, to some this may appear to be bit of a nanny state clause; however, on the understanding that in the first instance the department will work with the provider to rectify any problems, the coalition, whilst having some concerns, recognises that this mirrors a clause in the National VET Regulator Bill and we will not be opposing this measure.</para>
<para>As a country we need to ensure that we are positioning ourselves in the best possible space to deliver high-quality, industry-driven training. Vocational training has such a critical role to play here in helping us meet the future workforce challenges in both existing industries such as mining and in new economies yet to be explored.</para>
<para>Whilst these are good measures, regrettably we do find ourselves facing some significant challenges in the VET sphere. The national partnership agreement as re-announced by the Prime Minister earlier this year has been the subject of much speculation. Ultimately, this was little more than a re-announcement of a plan for a new national partnership agreement. The 'national entitlement for a training place' is indeed nothing new. Labor committed to this in the 2010-11 budget, and I draw the responsible minister's attention to the Skills for Sustainable Growth fact sheet, <inline font-style="italic">What is the national entitlement to a quality training </inline><inline font-style="italic">place</inline>? The word 'quality' appears to have vanished, but there is little else of difference nearly two years on.</para>
<para>Given this government's significant botching of the Productivity Places Program, it could be time that they conceded they do not have the skills or the know-how to implement VET programs. They got so desperate with the Productivity Places Program that they were forced to handball them off to the states, then surreptitiously siphon off the money to other programs that they hoped to brand more favourably. This could well be why, as I understand it, states are a little reluctant to sign on the dotted line this time around.</para>
<para>However, despite the numerous problems that have been the making of the federal government in this space, we do have thousands of committed providers who are endeavouring to do their best to provide a quality education both for local and international students. The coalition is committed to assisting these providers to operate within a framework that ensures a quality education within sensible business parameters for these training businesses.</para>
<para>We clearly have a way to go to in order to ensure that Australia is a preferred choice for international students seeking the best quality education, and for Australian students wanting a globally competitive advantage. But we in the coalition are committed to this goal and we do trust that this bill, properly administered in a policy sense, will help to realise this ambition.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs D'ATH</name>
    <name.id>HVN</name.id>
    <electorate>Petrie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak in support of the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011. Ensuring that our workforce has the necessary skills and education in the contemporary Australian job market is vital to the health of Australia's economy and competitiveness in the global community. The Gillard government is reforming our vocational education and training system to give Australians skills for life—skills to get a new start, a better job and a higher pay packet.</para>
<para>Since coming into office, Labor has made a record investment in training to build a highly skilled workforce, to boost productivity and to increase participation. We want Australians to have access to the high-skill, high-paid jobs of tomorrow. In the current economic environment, we have an urgent need to lift skill levels and workforce participation in Australia to allow industry and individual Australians the capacity to respond flexibly to current economic developments. We live in a global world and we need to be competitive. That means we need people with more skills and higher level skills. By 2015 Australia will need an additional 2.4 million workers with qualifications at a Certificate III level and higher to meet the needs of the economy.</para>
<para>Labor recognises that now is the time for VET reform. We have committed $1.75 billion over five years for a new skills reform national partnership agreement with the states. This is in addition to the $1.4 billion the Commonwealth provides annually to states and territories to fund their VET system. These reforms are aimed at making training more accessible, of a higher quality and more transparent to consumers.</para>
<para>This bill will introduce measures that will strengthen and streamline the government's student income contingent loan programs in the higher education and vocational education and training sectors—namely, FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP. Through these schemes the government will provide a loan for all or part of a student's tuition fees and pay these fees directly to the approved education provider. Students in diploma and advanced diploma courses will no longer have to pay their course fees upfront. They will have access to an income contingent loan, similar to the HELP system in higher education. This will boost participation rates in higher level VET courses and provide the highly skilled workers that industry needs.</para>
<para>Importantly, this bill will improve the Commonwealth's ability to manage risks to the administration of public moneys and better protect students in the vocational education and training sector by strengthening the compliance provisions for approved VET providers. Further, the bill includes a transparent provision to make it clear that the secretary may vary or revoke a determination that an advance payment is to be made to a VET provider if the secretary is aware that the provider may not comply with the requirements under the act or may not be financially viable. Matters that the secretary may take into consideration on the decision on whether or not to revoke may include the nature of noncompliance, the provider's history of compliance and the impact of noncompliance on delivering quality education and training.</para>
<para>When it comes to better quality training, the government is also pursuing reforms to ensure that students are receiving high-quality training that meets the needs of industry. We need to ensure that employers can trust in the quality of our VET system. These reforms will build on the new regulatory requirements that this government has already put in place for the establishment of the National VET Regulator, which is now operating in five jurisdictions.</para>
<para>TAFEs are also an integral part of the reforms. TAFEs play an important role in serving the training needs of industry. Labor recognises their importance to local communities in their delivery of high-level training and workforce development for industries and improved skill and job opportunities for disadvantaged learners and communities. In recognition of their role, this government has invested heavily in the infrastructure of our TAFEs as part of the $4.5 billion commitment in tertiary infrastructure from the Education Investment Fund. That investment has seen many facilities updated for the first time in 40 or more years, including automotive workshops and building trades centres.</para>
<para>Further, the government is providing greater responsiveness to industry needs. To lift national productivity, Commonwealth and state and territory governments need to work closely with industry and employers to ensure the VET sector can respond quickly and efficiently to deliver the right skills, at the right time, to meet industry needs.</para>
<para>This bill provides for clearer, simpler and improved administrative arrangements for the assessment of an individual's Higher Education Loan Program debt. In doing so, the bill enables better consistency between the Higher Education Support Act 2003 and tax legislation.</para>
<para>In the electorate of Petrie, our VET providers are committed to providing support and opportunities to their students and, with the introduction of this bill, I am confident that Labor have demonstrated once again that we are the party of jobs, skills and workforce participation by expanding opportunities for individuals to access further education.</para>
<para>On top of the many significant reforms and investments into higher education and skills that I have already mentioned, the Gillard government have a strong history of achieving in this area. Labor have made skills and training the centrepiece of this year's budget. We announced a $3 billion investment in skills and training to address the skills shortages being experienced by industry. We have put more young people into training. Apprenticeship and traineeship numbers have soared over recent years—up from 410,000 in September 2006 to around 459,000 in March 2011, the highest level ever recorded. We made a record government investment of more than $11.1 billion in total skills funding between 2008 and 2011—an increase of almost 55 per cent compared to the $7.2 billion under the former government between 2005 and 2008.</para>
<para>We have boosted the number of VET students to more than ever before. Students undertaking vocational education and training studies with public support rose by eight per cent, up from 1.67 million in 2007 to 1.8 million in 2010. We have ensured a record number of apprenticeships and traineeships. In June 2011 there were more than 462,000 people undertaking apprenticeships and traineeships, up 14 per cent from 404,600 in December 2007. Labor has given more people the opportunity to gain qualifications than ever before. Nearly 400,000 people gained VET qualifications in 2009, up 23 per cent from 319,200 in 2007. Nearly 290,000 people gained higher level qualifications in 2009, up from 228,500 in 2007, a rise of 27 per cent. In 2010, almost 140,000 students who already had degree-level qualifications studied VET, up 38 per cent from 101,400 in 2007. We have made training more accessible. In 2010, there were more than 26,000 VET FEE-HELP assisted students. This is an increase of nearly 400 per cent, or almost 5,300 students, compared to 2009. We have given better access to education for diverse groups. In 2010, there were 83,000 VET students who identified as being Indigenous, an increase of 17 per cent from 2007; 110,000 who identified as having a disability, an increase of eight per cent; and 271,000 from non-English-speaking backgrounds, a 17.6 per cent increase. Finally, we have ensured 150,000 regional and remote students in 2009 completed VET qualifications, a 23 per cent increase from 2007.</para>
<para>The Gillard Labor government is committed to education. Whether it is early childhood education, primary and secondary schooling, VET qualifications or higher education, this government is committed to delivering on education and skills for the future. Today we are debating another piece of legislation that sees Labor delivering on its commitment to developing skills to lift the nation's productivity. I know the people in my electorate are committed to skills improvement and want to see this government invest in apprenticeships and traineeships into the future. That is why it is my pleasure to commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr EWEN JONES</name>
    <name.id>96430</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011. This bill aims to provide administrative efficiencies in relation to the FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP assistance schemes for vocational students. These include requiring VET providers to notify the minister if they will not be able to meet quality and accountability requirements, allowing for certain information to be used and disclosed if authorised, and allowing for the secretary to revoke a determination made to pay an advance to a VET provider. The bill also allows the minister responsible for deciding whether an institution can become a higher education provider to make that decision after the time frame of 90 days within which the decision is currently required. The coalition agrees with many of the intended outcomes of this bill that relate to strengthening the compliance framework for VET providers. We have seen rorters take advantage of this sector. This bill aims to ensure that these things cannot happen again and that the sector can instead maintain consistently high standards of education. But there are also severe penalties for overreacting and burdening institutions with red tape.</para>
<para>With a strong construction industry in Townsville and my electorate's position on the edge of the North-West Queensland Minerals Province, vocational education is extremely important to my constituents. Bob McAulay has just stepped in as Director of the Barrier Reef Institute of TAFE in Townsville, temporarily replacing current Director, Robyn Dyer. As Bob has said to me, 74 per cent of jobs in the Far North region are jobs that have benefited from vocational education and training. There can be no question of the importance of these institutions to economic growth in our region. In mentioning the VET FEE-HELP loan opportunity, Bob recognised the importance of it, not for the institutions but for the students. The cost of any education is not cheap, and without a system like this in place students would have to either go without or try and find the money to pay upfront. I agree with Bob that the extension of the HECS-HELP mechanism to the VET sector is fair for vocational students. Bob also spoke to me of the extensive and burdensome regulation that they are faced with at TAFE. He said it is so excessive that he cannot imagine any organisation being able to get away with providing a substandard education. While we all appreciate the need to ensure that a high-quality education is provided by all institutions, overburdening them with more and more requirements will serve only to hamper service delivery in this sector. That is what we are talking about here: the delivery of a quality, affordable, directed vocational education and training service.</para>
<para>My concern in this area is also with the bureaucracy that comes from the constant imposition of new regulations by this government. Every bit of new red tape takes more people away from what they are supposed to do, what they want to do and what they are good at doing—in this case teaching—in order to sign forms, tick boxes, and write letters. It must also be paid for by the taxpayer or the recipient of the service. This government has never seen a new set of regulations upon which it could not expand—such behaviour comes at a cost. To provide a good education to trades students requires someone who can not just do the job well, but teach it well. That is a specific combination of skill sets. If you introduce these new requirements you take these people away from jobs we need them doing.</para>
<para>Given the importance of trades, not just to Townsville but to the North Queensland region, I am a big supporter of vocational education. I believe that governments at all levels should help out VET institutions and students wherever possible. We are suffering a skills shortage at present across the country. We are certainly feeling the pain of this in Townsville. Townsville businesses are employing apprentices, only to have them poached by mining and processing companies for a far higher wage than a small business can adequately compete with. There are serious skills shortages, and that is something this government needs to address. VET exists not just to supply staff to the mining sector but also to ensure there are enough trades specialists for all the other businesses upon which we rely. Vocational education is the vehicle for this. We need to encourage high school students to go into this area, we need to make it more affordable, we need to ensure that there are plenty of places available and we need to work with institutions to make sure the best vocational education possible is provided to as many students as we can. Instead, we have this bill, which gives no assurance that VET institutions not meeting the requirements will be given help to improve rather than immediately being stripped of their credentials and left to try and sort themselves out. The Howard government had the vision to introduce income contingent loans to the VET sector. I support this government's furthering of this measure, but it is disappointing to see it in this legislation allowing the minister to approve applications to become a higher education provider after the 90-day time frame. We can't tick off on these training opportunities fast enough and yet the government is going to allow excuses to blow out the time frames for approvals. There is a cost in getting to the necessary standard, and you still have to get through a 90-day trial period. We either commit to it or we do not. We also need to look at exact areas of skills shortage and consider ways to encourage students into these vocations. We need more people in certain trades, so we should be rewarding the students that are choosing to go into these areas.</para>
<para>I do not oppose this bill. Vocational training is needed more than ever to allow Townsville and North Queensland to continue to grow and prosper, and I want to see that happen while ensuring that the standard of education is not put at risk. But I caution this government on the risk of overburdening the sector with regulation that will see the VET sector hampered and sent backwards.</para>
<para>If I could just touch on Tec-NQ—the Australian technical college Townsville campus, which the Howard government started. It was one of the most successful technical colleges in the country. It brought high school students in and, by the time they graduated with a high school certificate, they were two years into their trade. It delivered education and produced tradesmen. After the 2007 election, the Rudd government made them spend $50,000 of their own money to change their name to Tec-NQ and then withdrew their funding. As I said in speaking on a previous bill, we set these things up and we ask people to commit and then, at the very last moment—perhaps with a change of government—we change everything and withdraw support. Tec-NQ is still in existence but it has had to move away from its original core duty of providing high school education and a trade base for high school students, to becoming an RTO—a registered training organisation. That to me is a waste of funds. We have seen the government duplicate what Tec-NQ has in its trades training centre, producing a different outcome for a different set of people, and it is in the middle of nowhere, where no high school student can get to it.</para>
<para>Those are the sorts of things this government and all governments must look at. It is too easy to sit there and ask people to change their name and then to withdraw funding and support and expect everyone to pick up from there. I was on Palm Island last week and I saw it there. People are asked to commit wholly and solely to programs, 100 per cent, and then three months in we run out of funding. It is not just this government's fault or any government's fault, but we ask people to keep on turning up and to keep on committing and sooner or later they stop and then we call them lazy. That is wrong, and that is what is wrong with all these programs that are coming out.</para>
<para>I do not oppose this bill. I support people having to pay for education. I think it is worth while.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CRAIG THOMSON</name>
    <name.id>HVZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Dobell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill. This bill will introduce measures that will strengthen and streamline the administration of the Australian government's student income-contingent loan program in the higher education and vocational education and training sectors, namely FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP. FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP are available through approved higher education and vocational education and training providers respectively to assist eligible students with their tuition fees. Through these schemes the government provides a loan for all or part of a student's tuition fees and pays these tuition fees directly to the approved education provider. This assistance helps students to take up higher education and higher level VET qualifications by reducing the upfront financial barriers associated with study. The bill will support the new Commonwealth regulatory frameworks for the higher education and VET sectors.</para>
<para>Provisions in the bill will allow for the transfer of information to the newly established national regulators in the higher education and vocational education and training sectors: the Australian Skills Quality Authority and the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, operating under the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Act 2011 and the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 respectively. The bill will improve the Commonwealth's ability to manage risk to public moneys and better protects the interests of students in the vocational education and training sector.</para>
<para>The bill makes it explicit that an approved VET provider must comply with the notice of events requirements that affect its ability to comply with the requirements to continue to maintain its approved provider status. The bill includes the capacity to withhold payment to a provider where there is concern over its compliance with requirements under the act. The bill will also result in improvements to administrative arrangements which help the application process times under FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP.</para>
<para>Higher education, be it in the university sector or the VET sector, is very important to this government and it has run through the four years of programs that this government has put before parliament. It is part of the Labor ethos that we believe that providing opportunities and access to education, at all levels, is fundamentally about making sure that everyone in our society gets a fair go, and it is the way in which we can make sure that people get appropriate training that will enable them to access jobs and opportunities.</para>
<para>This is particularly so in an electorate like mine, where we have a very low number of people with higher education qualifications and traditionally a lot of people who have not completed school. We also have some of the highest unemployment rates in New South Wales, usually being three or four per cent higher than the state average. Opportunities to give kids and older Australians access to study are vitally important. It is something that the Labor Party has always stood for, and it has always brought forth programs in this area. This bill is part of the whole suite of reforms that are so important to making sure people get access to the right sort of education to match the jobs that are out there at the moment.</para>
<para>One of the things that is often said to me by local employers is that, while there is high unemployment in our area, we cannot always get kids with the right sorts of skills needed to fill the jobs. Bizarrely for an area in which 30 per cent of the workforce commute to Sydney, we see a lot of the good jobs filled by people who commute from Sydney up to the Central Coast, because we are not providing local people with the skills necessary for the new jobs in the new economy. It is really important that the measures in this bill, which underlie this government's approach to education, are carried through to implementation. With the introduction of the National Broadband Network, we in the Central Coast are on the cusp of a whole series of opportunities that, for the first time, the Central Coast will have. We need to be making sure that we skill our workforce appropriately so that they are able to fill the jobs that are going to develop from the new technology, the speed of the technologies and the opportunity for business to suddenly be in areas where there is cheaper land, though not necessarily as close to the capital cities as before. That is a very important issue.</para>
<para>I had the pleasure last week of visiting the Central Coast campus of the University of Newcastle. This is a terrific campus in that it is a multifaceted campus. It has TAFE, university and community colleges all on the one campus, all integrated and providing a whole range of educational options for kids from the Central Coast. Over 90 per cent of the people who go to the Central Coast campus of the University of Newcastle are from the Central Coast. Traditionally, what used to happen was that our young people would have to travel to Sydney or to Newcastle to get the sort of training they can now get at this university campus. Invariably, that saw people drop out of education because it was too hard to commute and so forth. Now we have this campus there, and this government is fully supporting and resourcing this important campus to make sure that it provides a vital role for the Central Coast. I have done it before in this place and it is again worth placing on record the thanks that the people of the Central Coast have for my Labor predecessor, Mr Michael Lee, who was the member for Dobell for 17 years. Without him we would not even have this campus at the Central Coast. There was none there before, and he was able to secure the campus there, which is now, I am told, one of the most successful campuses of the University of Newcastle. It has over 4,000 students and is growing all the time, which fits given that we are a growing area.</para>
<para>Last week I was able to be at the university to officially open the $3.2 million redevelopment of the university's library—a state-of-the-art library, but one that is open to the whole university. It operates 24 hours a day. It has a coffee bar so that people can come and stay there. It is a far cry from when I went to university where you scurried into a library, grabbed some books and got out of there as quickly as possible. The sorts of libraries we are building in institutions now are open, welcoming and designed so that people will stay there, study there and socialise there. This library that we opened last week was a fantastic addition to the university, and I was very pleased, in my role as local member, to be able to open it.</para>
<para>But we have spent more than that on this university, and that is only right given the importance of the university to the Central Coast. In the last two years we have spent $20 million on facilities there. We redeveloped the science buildings and the exercise sports and science areas so that they are state of the art. We rebuilt and built some new buildings for education and nursing. These were the most significant expansions of the university since it first came into being when Michael Lee was the member there.</para>
<para>It is also worth noting that my neighbour the member for Robertson, before she came to this place, was a lecturer at this university and lectured in education. We both have a great affinity for this fantastic facility that is in Dobell. It is one that is increasingly providing at all levels a way for people on the Central Coast to get an education. It has a fantastic link program for kids who do not have the marks to get into university, where they are able to go to this university, study for a year and then get credits for a degree. In areas where there is not a culture of learning and where there is not a culture of going to university, these types of programs are absolutely essential. They fill a niche and make sure that people who would simply not have the opportunity to go and study are now doing that and therefore getting qualifications that mean they are able to get the high-paying jobs—the good jobs—that are being developed in the new economy rather than, as has traditionally happened, compete for the ever-shrinking area of unskilled work that is there.</para>
<para>Mr Deputy Speaker Symon, I know that you are very familiar with trade training in schools as well. We have some wonderful examples of that on the Central Coast, with schools cooperating and having multicampus trade training centres that provide this sort of trade training at schools. During the previous member's contribution he spoke about the Australian Technical College. The money that was going to go to the Australian Technical College in my electorate has been very well spent by being divided up and shared by three campuses of high schools on the Central Coast. That money has been put to great use. It has been part of an integrated approach to education, to making sure that kids in my area in particular get those opportunities.</para>
<para>Lastly, the bill itself provides for clearer, simpler and improved administrative arrangements for the assessment of an individual's Higher Education Loan Program debt. In doing so, the bill enables better consistency between the Higher Education Support Act 2003 and the taxation legislation. It is part of a suite of bills that we have put to this parliament continually over the four years about our commitment to education at all levels, making sure that it is at the forefront of Labor's agenda for reform. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011. Since my election as the member for McPherson, I have spoken on numerous higher education bills in relation to both tertiary education and vocational education and training. Over this time, I have continually reaffirmed that I see the higher education industry as a key component of the economy of my electorate of McPherson, of the wider Gold Coast and of Australia. Therefore, I welcome the opportunity to speak on this bill today and on the higher education sector.</para>
<para>This bill aims to strengthen the compliance regime for the VET sector through a number of changes, thereby reinforcing amendments to the Higher Education Support Act 2003 that were made by the parliament last year. Firstly, under the current act a VET provider must notify the relevant minister of events that may significantly that provider's capacity to meet the quality and accountability requirements. This bill will change the act so that providers will also be obliged to notify the relevant minister in any event where there may be grounds to repeal that VET provider's approval. In reference to these changes, I hope—like my colleagues on this side of the House—that the department will work cooperatively with providers to address any issues of non-compliance rather than take a heavy-handed approach with those who report any discrepancies.</para>
<para>Secondly, the act as it currently stands requires the minister to make a determination on applications to become a higher education or VET provider within 30 days of the receipt of that application, although under the amendments the minister will still be able to determine an application even if the timeframe for such a decision is not complied with. This ability to decide outside the legislative time frame is also set to apply to the 60-day period from when further information is requested by the minister.</para>
<para>My concern is that such changes have the potential to see approval times for applications blow out. The changes that I have just discussed will mean that the 90-day or 60-day time frame that the minister is currently required to adhere to will become obsolete as the minister's power to determine an application will not be affected if the time frame passes. I hope that the 90-day and 60-day time frames will be strictly adhered to and that the new provisions will only be used in extenuating and special circumstances. Ideally, it should not be necessary to extend the time frames at all.</para>
<para>Thirdly, the bill introduces a number of changes, including that Commonwealth officers will have the ability to use information that has been collected as part of a provider's application for approval during the course of their employment and that such information can be provided to regulatory agencies so that they can perform their respective functions.</para>
<para>The VET sector is ever expanding and I and the coalition understand that government regulation needs to keep up with what is occurring in the sector. However, we need to maintain a fine balance between protecting the integrity of the VET sector and not burdening institutions with overregulation. There is sufficient evidence to support the view that overregulation stifles flexibility in business and creates a web of bureaucracy that many individuals and businesses find difficult to navigate.</para>
<para>This bill is another in a large list of other legislative changes to the higher education sector, especially in the vocational education and training sector. At the end of 2011, the House passed the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment Bill 2011, which amended the regulatory framework for the new National Vocational Education and Training Regulator that was created earlier last year. One of the main purposes of this framework was to introduce a national system for VET regulation to protect students undertaking courses and to protect the reputation of the sector. But the national system is not yet national at all, as the Queensland parliament has still not passed the necessary legislation and neither has the South Australian parliament.</para>
<para>Education is the fourth largest export product in Australia and consequentially an important part of the national economy, with the sector making a contribution of $5.9 billion in 2009-10. The Gold Coast Institute of TAFE alone created an economic turnover of $188 million and $109 million in gross domestic product for the Gold Coast. If this is the contribution of one VET institution, one can only imagine the contribution that each organisation makes to their local area. The VET sector also provides many Australians with jobs, from the educators passing on the necessary skills and training to students to those running the institutions and ensuring their success.</para>
<para>The coalition recognises the importance that the VET sector plays in maintaining the health and productivity of many of our industries. That is why in 2007 the Howard government introduced income contingent loans for the VET sector, reflecting the importance and value the coalition places on valuing a VET qualification as a tertiary qualification. The introduction of income contingent loans such as VET FEE-HELP ensured that students who wanted to undertake vocational education or training could do so knowing that they had the financial assistance to get them through.</para>
<para>I would like to remind the House that on the Gold Coast alone there are over 160 registered training organisations. According to the most recent available census data, from 2006, there were over 2,200 people undertaking vocational education or training in my electorate of McPherson alone, with the number of students being evenly spread between males and females, which is very positive. In 2010, the total number of VET students for the Gold Coast as a whole was over 28,100, up from the 2006 total of 24,030 students. These numbers show that our local VET sector is strong and expanding, with more and more students viewing vocational education and training as a stepping stone to a long and successful career.</para>
<para>On the Gold Coast, the usually dominant tourism and construction industries are partly dependent on the health of the VET sector, as is the manufacturing industry. However, the Labor government is setting VET students up to fail once they complete their training, with falling job prospects on the Gold Coast and in Queensland in both the construction and tourism industries. The Gold Coast construction industry has been hit hard in recent years. In the November 2011 quarter there were over 37,000 people employed in the construction industry on the Gold Coast, constituting 12 per cent of the total number of employed persons. This is down 8.3 per cent from the 2010 total of 41,100 people. The Urban Development Institute of Australia has recently claimed that revenues for the construction industry have fallen 33 per cent or about $1.2 billion. The highest point of employment in the construction industry over the last five years came in 2007, when the Howard government left office. Since late 2007, when Labor formed government, employment in the construction industry on the Gold Coast has failed to rise back to that point.</para>
<para>The construction industry was the second-largest contributor to Queensland gross state product in 2008. Now it is the fourth-largest contributor, with its economic value having fallen by 13 per cent. You need only look around the southern Gold Coast to see that the construction industry is moving at a snail's pace. So what prospects do new, freshly trained VET graduates have in an industry which is faltering?</para>
<para>Although these facts would indicate that something needs to be done to spur the industry on, the government has instead set out to abolish one of the main contributors to the stability of the industry. I have spoken recently in this place against the government's plans to remove the independent Office of the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner. Today, I reiterate my disappointment that an organisation which is responsible for a 10 per cent increase in productivity, an economic welfare gain of $5.5 billion per year, reduced inflation of about 1.2 per cent and a 1.5 per cent increase in gross domestic product is being abolished at a time when the construction industry is doing it tough.</para>
<para>The VET sector also contributes to the success of the tourism and hospitality industry on the Gold Coast. Tourism on the Gold Coast and in Queensland has traditionally been strong. However in recent years, with the global financial crisis and the high Australian dollar, the tourism trade has entered a lull period. Looking at data released by Tourism Queensland for December last year, there has been a five per cent annual decrease in the number of overseas tourists arriving in Queensland, whilst the national average has neither increased nor decreased. But the bad news does not stop there. The Gold Coast saw a three per cent reduction in visitors for the year ending in September 2011, as well as a five per cent reduction in the number of nights stayed. These trends have dramatic consequences for local tourism operators. When you add the additional costs that are set to be imposed by the carbon tax, we will then have a situation where costs will eventually overtake the revenue being collected, leading to employees being let go, business closures and a lack of opportunities for VET graduates in the industry.</para>
<para>Ultimately what is happening in the Gold Coast construction and tourism industries will have an effect on local VET graduates looking for employment after they complete their studies. If the industry is unable to provide jobs for future VET graduates, we are setting those graduates up for unemployment or, more worryingly, underemployment. This is not acceptable. Although the long-term unemployment rate for the southern Gold Coast currently stands at 5.4 per cent, the monthly average for January this year is 6.2 per cent, up 1.9 per cent from December last year and up 0.1 per cent from the same time last year.</para>
<para>Vocational education and training can provide many people with an avenue to get out of unemployment or underemployment by offering them the opportunity to learn new skills, develop new techniques and acquire new knowledge. Although we can provide the opportunity for people to study by offering programs such as VET FEE-HELP, we also need to make sure that we do not inhibit growth in key industries that are reliant on VET graduates.</para>
<para>The Gold Coast is growing as a destination for both tertiary and vocational education. We have four universities and 160 registered training organisations, all offering a large variety of courses and avenues of study to domestic and overseas students. We have the infrastructure to accommodate a large student population, with accommodation, hospitals and shopping centres, and public transport available to these locations. The higher education industry on the Gold Coast helps businesses in these sectors to stay in business through students moving to the Gold Coast and spending money on transport, food and recreation.</para>
<para>By maintaining the stability and health of the VET sector, we can ensure that there is a ready and able workforce for the key industries that keep this country going. It is important that the reputation and competitiveness of the VET sector and of the wider higher education industry are maintained at a domestic level as well as internationally. It is not merely the economy that benefits from a healthy higher education industry but also local businesses and local communities. The coalition supports measures that aim to maintain the high quality of education that we export to the world and that students expect. We cannot allow the quality and the reputation of our higher education system to slip, otherwise we risk losing the business of international students as well as the workforce this country will need in the years ahead.</para>
<para>I will continue to work with the local VET providers to ensure that their students have the best possible chance of competing in the workforce and to ensure that the Gold Coast can continue to grow a healthy and prosperous higher education industry.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LIVERMORE</name>
    <name.id>83A</name.id>
    <electorate>Capricornia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to join my colleagues in speaking on the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011. Like all members in the debate so far, I support the propositions put forward by the government in this bill. Each and every week in here, Mr Deputy Speaker Symon—and I know that you support all these measures and speak on them very regularly—the government continue to build on our reforms in higher education and our existing investments in the vocational education and training and university sectors. There is a long list of very significant reforms. There is increased investment in youth allowance, allowing thousands of additional low-income students to receive support for the first time, a change that has already seen larger numbers of rural and regional students, particularly, going to university than ever before. This helps the government to meet the very bold targets that it has set for this nation in terms of increasing the rate of participation in higher education.</para>
<para>Another incredibly significant reform which we debated in this House, and which has taken effect for the first time this year, was the move to demand-driven funding of universities. That involved removing the cap on student numbers to ensure that our universities can grow and diversify according to student demand for courses. There will be a Commonwealth government funded place for every Australian student who is offered a position at one of our universities—truly a defining reform in our higher education system.</para>
<para>The other reform worth singling out is the delivery of a framework for better support and services for university students right across the country, reversing the damage that had been done to universities, particularly regional universities like Central Queensland University in my electorate, where students rely so strongly on the services and support provided by the university. Thankfully we have been able to overcome the ideological obsession of the opposition about voluntary student unionism to return those services and activities to university campuses across the country.</para>
<para>Our reform commitment also goes to the vocational education sector, where training is provided to fill the skills shortages in industry today as well as to equip people to move into the growth industries of the future. While we debate this bill, work is progressing on building trades training centres in schools right around Australia, a very important part of introducing young people to the trades and careers that they might want to pursue and getting them started on acquiring nationally recognised competencies and qualifications.</para>
<para>So far in my electorate, a number of schools have already completed their trades training centres. I am thinking particularly of Rockhampton High School, which was first off the blocks and was successful in the very first round of the trades training centre funding program, a testament to the commitment that that school has and the priority that it gives to vocational education and training. It now boasts a world-class engineering facility preparing young people at Rockhampton High School to fill the many positions in the resources and energy and agriculture sectors in our region. St Brendan's and St Ursula's down at Yeppoon combined to establish trades training centres for the automotive trades and hospitality. Schools in the Central Highlands, in the western part of my electorate, and in Mackay, in the northern part of my electorate, have chosen to come together and pool their funding as a cluster of schools and are well on the way to making their trades training centres a reality and providing opportunities for students in their region, who are well and truly guaranteed places in industry if they are able to secure the appropriate qualifications. The Cathedral College in Rockhampton has already indicated to me that it also intends to apply in the future. That is a sign of the importance that schools attach to trades training centres, which allow their students to have access to a range of pathways and give them the opportunity to secure their future in the trades and in so many other occupations that now require recognised qualifications.</para>
<para>Our commitment is very real. There are millions and millions of dollars represented just in that list from my electorate. Our commitment is real and it is backed up by funding. It is already making a difference to people who want to skill themselves for job opportunities and for industries wanting to develop a highly skilled and productive workforce. We know that our ability to supply a skilled workforce and build productivity depends on a high-performing VET sector and one with a reputation for quality and integrity. VET providers have an obligation to meet high standards for their students and to be accountable to the government. For those reasons, this bill strengthens the government's oversight of the sector.</para>
<para>The bill seeks to amend various aspects of the Higher Education Support Act 2003, particularly as it relates to the government's Higher Education Loan Program, or HELP. Specifically the measures in the bill seek to strengthen and streamline the administration of the FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP loans schemes. Those HELP loans are loans from the government that eligible students can access to help them pay upfront tuition fees for their chosen course of study. It is important to note that the money unlocked through the loans scheme is actually directed to providers of VET qualifications, so the integrity and viability of those providers is essential. This bill is about safeguarding and strengthening the integrity of the VET sector.</para>
<para>One measure in the bill will allow Commonwealth officers to use and disclose information gained through the administration of FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP for certain purposes. Importantly, that includes sharing this information with the newly established national regulators—namely, the Australian Skills Quality Authority and the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. The bill also improves the Commonwealth's ability to manage risk to public moneys. As I said, the loans we are talking about here are Commonwealth money paid to providers in order to assist the access of students to VET courses. It will also better protect the interests of students in the vocational education and training sector. To do that, we will strengthen the compliance provisions for approved VET providers. The bill makes it explicit that an approved VET provider must comply with the notice of events requirements that affect its ability to comply with the requirements to continue to maintain its approved provider status. The bill also includes a capacity to withhold payments to a provider where there is concern over its compliance with requirements under the act. The bill will result in improvements to administrative arrangements which will improve application process times under FEE-HELP and VET FEE-HELP—something that will be welcomed by providers.</para>
<para>It is pretty clear from this list that these are commonsense amendments designed to strengthen accountability in the sector and to ensure that students, and industry that relies on the flow of students coming out of the VET sector with appropriate qualifications, can have confidence in what the sector is producing in terms of graduates from those VET providers.</para>
<para>At the outset I gave very concrete examples of the government's commitment to vocational education and training, recognising as we do that it is essential for the future productivity of our economy, and of course for the quality of life for people in Australia, to be able to reach their full potential and to participate fully in our growing economy. The priority that we give to vocational education and training was underlined further by the Prime Minister when she delivered a major speech on 1 February, this month. In that speech she signalled that the government is preparing to go even further in terms of reform in the VET sector. The points that she raised in that speech included the extension of HECS-style income contingent loans to vocational education and training courses, those of a higher level, things like diplomas or advanced diploma level. That would abolish upfront fees. It would mean that people wanting to take advantage of building skills in those courses would no longer face upfront fees.</para>
<para>The other very important reform that she flagged in that speech was that for other courses students would have a fee subsidy paid by the government of up to $7,800. That would be help for those in entry-level courses across the spectrum, health and hospitality, business and communication, right across the spectrum where we want people to be upskilling and really starting on the path of obtaining skills and looking to where they can continue to develop those skills, gain those qualifications and play an ever -growing role in building our economy and filling the shortages that are there in highly skilled positions.</para>
<para>The policy that is being developed, and which will be released in greater detail fairly shortly, will also extend demand-driven funding for VET courses. So it is really following through on the agenda that was foreshadowed in the Bradley review of having a much more seamless integration of the treatment of the university sector and the VET sector and bringing the financial assistance for students and the way that VET providers are able to offer Commonwealth funded places to however many students are seeking and they deem eligible for their courses. It really brings the VET sector into line with the reforms in the higher education sector and I think is a very important step forward.</para>
<para>One of the other things the government has identified as vital as we continue on this agenda of upskilling Australians and giving them the opportunity to reach their full potential and participate fully in our economy, is the question of articulation of courses and having seamless pathways from vocational education and training qualifications right through to degree and higher degree courses at universities. The Standing Council on Tertiary Education Skills and Employment has made removing barriers to those articulation pathways a priority. Their priority is to look at ways we can remove barriers to those articulation pathways between qualifications in the VET sector and the higher ed sector.</para>
<para>I am pleased to say that in my local region our university, Central Queensland University, is getting ahead of the game in that respect. They are already well underway in exploring the possibility of a merger between Central Queensland University and the Central Queensland Institute of TAFE to become Queensland's first dual-sector University. I am very proud and pleased to say that the federal government is supporting that initiative 100 per cent. We have committed $73.8 million of funding to allow that initiative to become a reality. I will have a bit more to say about that later on in the House tonight because we are seeking the support of the various parties contesting the Queensland state election at the moment for a similar commitment. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GAMBARO</name>
    <name.id>9K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise this evening to speak on the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011. The bill amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to do two things. Firstly, it strengthens the compliance regime for approved VET providers and, secondly, it increases the availability of HECS income contingent loans to VET students. Focusing on the first aspect of this bill, there have been recent developments within the VET and higher education sphere which have prompted this update in the legislation. This bill seeks to strengthen the compliance regime for approved VET providers. This is part of an ongoing push to ensure the highest possible standards are maintained in the industry. These measures will ensure positive outcomes for many providers in the electorate of Brisbane.</para>
<para>I want to talk about some of the wonderful VET providers—there are many hundreds I could name—particularly TAFE facilities in my electorate. I especially acknowledge the Gateway TAFE and the Ithaca TAFE who do an absolutely sterling job educating students in skills they will require for their futures. The greater the skills a nation has and the greater the capacity of human capital, the greater the productivity.</para>
<para>The electorate of Brisbane covers many suburbs, including the CBD, which has some of the high-quality five-star hotels, including the Sofitel, the Stamford, the Hilton, the Marriott, and many high-quality restaurants, coffee shops and cafes. Also many mining industries are headquartered in the Brisbane CBD and the construction industry is a very important and vital industry.</para>
<para>There are a number of private providers. I acknowledge the wonderful work of the Australian Council for Private Education and Training, a thoroughly professional body. They are to be commended for the great work they do with 1,000 private organisations which deliver a huge range of higher education, vocational education, training and English language courses. I have had the great privilege of visiting a number of them in the electorate of Brisbane.</para>
<para>I put on the record the great work being done by Kay Ganley, and Michael Hall who has succeeded her, and all of the team at ACPET. They do great work representing VET providers who form part of their membership. In particular I acknowledge the great international work that Kay and other agencies do in the electorate of Brisbane, not only in providing this wonderful service to domestic consumers of the VET sector, but also in raising the standard and increasing the export of our wonderful service industries. Education is a huge part of our service export industry.</para>
<para>The substantial aspect of this bill is the extension of the HECS FEE-HELP income contingent loan for VET students. VET is an important part of Australia's higher education system. It is fair to say that predominantly in Australia we have placed more emphasis on our university based degrees and qualifications. The previous speaker, the member for Capricornia, talked about a seamless transition. Certainly there has been a transition from the VET sector into the university sector and there has been a transition where people with university degrees want to fine-tune particular skills by going back into the VET sector. It is a two-way movement. We need to have a much more flexible system than we have had in the past. I have had the wonderful opportunity and great privilege of a teaching role at the Queensland University of Technology. I fully appreciate the role our higher education institutions play in the future direction of our society. The VET sector certainly is an important part of that sector.</para>
<para>With our mining industries screaming out for skilled workers, the role of vocational education has become really important in recent years. The VET sector has predominantly offered the training required for the trades that are needed in our regional economies. The proposal contained in the bill put forward by the Prime Minister requires a sign-on from the states. The Commonwealth wants these changes in place by July 2012—at the commencement of the next five-year Commonwealth-state funding agreement.</para>
<para>The proposal would see the states emulate the system currently in place in Victoria where income contingent loans are offered on a widespread basis to VET students. More than 22,000 Victorian students have taken up these loans. The loan scheme will be an extension of VET FEE-HELP, administered by the Commonwealth, and it may have similar settings, possibly including a 20 per cent loan fee, quite unlike the HECS system. The policy would also see the abolition of upfront fees for many students, which is very welcome. In addition, students would be guaranteed a place in a training course.</para>
<para>The federal government would also guarantee foundation and entry-level courses for technical and service sector careers in areas such as health, business, hospitality, communications, construction, transport and other areas through a government-subsidised training place worth up to $7,800. Eligibility for these places has not yet been determined and there has been criticism levelled at the Victorian prototype model where students' eligibility is based on them not having completed a higher level qualification in the past.</para>
<para>These measures appear not to have been specifically costed. However, they are part of the $1.75 billion committed to VET in the 2011-12 budget. VET FEE-HELP is currently available to assist eligible students studying for higher level vocational education and training qualifications to pay their tuition fees. Higher level VET qualifications are at the diploma level and above, as VET FEE-HELP is not available for certificate level courses. These proposals will ultimately increase the take-up of VET courses, add much needed skills to the economy and encourage many young Australians in particular to add to their skills and knowledge. The other great thing about encouraging investment in vocational education is that it allows people who might want to go in a different direction, who want to change their current circumstances or who aspire to get ahead and earn more income for their families to enrol in our VET system and make that career change. It is good to invest in training. It is good for productivity. It is good for the country. It is good to encourage people to take up these paths of education. However, you must provide incentives for doing that and a good economy and full employment is part of ensuring success for the vocational training sector.</para>
<para>In conclusion, this bill will encourage the take-up of VET education through the extension of VET FEE-HELP. The coalition supports these outcomes. Given this government's form, we have our concerns regarding the implementation and some administrative aspects of what is being proposed, but in general we are supportive and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
    <electorate>Charlton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I think a number of very constructive contributions have been made in relation to the Higher Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Other Measures) Bill 2011 and I do not think any substantive matters have arisen to which I should respond. I simply conclude the second reading debate by commending the bill to the House, particularly for its purpose of improving the quality framework of the government's income contingent loans program.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>1836</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr COMBET</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
    <electorate>Charlton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 2) 2011</title>
          <page.no>1836</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r4723">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 2) 2011</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1836</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs MIRABELLA</name>
    <name.id>00AMU</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No.2) 2011. I would like to begin by indicating that the opposition will be giving its support to the government on this legislation. For the record I would like to quickly restate some of what I said in my second reading speech from August 2011 on a forerunner version of this bill. The coalition is pleased to see the government accepting the need for change to Australia's antidumping system, for which key stakeholders have been calling for some time. It is good that something is finally being done about such problems. We are glad that the government has eventually responded to combined pressure from the coalition, Senator Xenophon, industry groups, individual businesses and trade unions to make changes such as those in this bill, including the introduction of a new appeals process to replace the existing appeals mechanism, establishment of the International Trade Remedies Forum and the creation of new guidelines for extensions to be allowed in certain circumstances. In principle these are all sensible and practical changes.</para>
<para>That said, I am unsure of exactly how long the process of delivering all of the government's 20-odd mooted changes is going to take, especially given that in the course of more than six months this is now the second tranche of legislation containing a combined total of seven of the changes. As a side note and in perfectly good faith I would like to ask those opposite if they could indicate in one of their contributions in this debate exactly how many further tranches they expect there to be regarding the foreshadowed changes to the antidumping regime and also by what date they expect the last of the various bills into which they have codified the changes of June last year to come before the parliament. It is not just the opposition that needs to know these matters; industry needs to know the time frame as well. At this point in time the answers to those questions are unclear and I assume they are unclear to everyone following this debate. At the very least, those of us on this side of the House would be grateful for clarification of whether the government still envisages that all of its measures will be implemented before the end of the financial year.</para>
<para>As for the specific changes that are being legislated through this bill, we support the establishment of the International Trade Remedies Forum. Indeed, the coalition has said for a long time that industry must be given a much greater voice in articulating improvements to the system and, more to the point, that its voice should be far more clearly heard. I am going to reserve my full judgment on the success of the practical operation of the forum until we are bit further down the track. If we take the government at face value on this and accept that its genuine intention is to bring together representatives from local industries, importers and unions and give them a better say in identifying problems and suggesting future improvements to our national antidumping system, then it is certainly a step in the right direction. However, I would like to add that it is not exactly ideal that the government convened the opening meetings of the forum, got the administrative niceties out of the way and began the discussions only to then uproot the process with a ministerial reshuffle that transferred the relevant frontbenchers to a different part of the ministry and effectively forced everyone to start the process all over again. As I understand from a few quarters, that is what seems to have happened, not to mention that the Labor Party has obviously been plagued by even more intense internecine warfare since then, one of the results of which will be that everyone now has to endure yet another ministerial reshuffle. As well, we approve the amendments being made to the rules and the guidelines surrounding extensions to investigation time lines. I want to add, though, that it is vital that the government devotes great care to how and how frequently these extensions are granted. Many parties in antidumping cases over the years have been intensely frustrated at the sheer amount of time it takes to resolve some cases, all the while incurring substantial financial costs—which is to say nothing of the damage in that relevant market. If the extensions allow for better and more accurate decision making then that is obviously a good thing. But if a large number and a wider range of extensions are in and of themselves potentially going to lead to unnecessary blow-outs in the time frames of investigations and/or be used as a cover to avoid expediting decisions where they should be made more quickly then that would represent seriously undesirable development.</para>
<para>I also want to stress much the same point in relation to the changes being introduced through this bill to the appeals process. In a general sense, we are supportive of the changes the government have outlined. I recognise and appreciate that one of the things that the government are trying to do here is raise the threshold for appeals to be instigated in the first place. In expanding the scope of the appeal hearings and increasing the number of people responsible for overseeing them, I want to sound a cautionary note again that the government will need to maintain a close watching brief to ensure this does not have the opposite effect to the one intended.</para>
<para>There is wide recognition that there are a number of flaws in Australia's current antidumping regime and that, unlike the systems in force in many other countries, it often works to the disadvantage of local industries and business. On the basis that the intent of this bill is to make some sensible administrative changes and on the assumption that the government will implement them effectively—a big assumption considering governance in the last couple of years—then the coalition is happy to support its passage.</para>
<para>But—and this is a significant 'but'—I really cannot let this occasion pass without expressing my disdain at the actions of the government in relentlessly using the issue of antidumping as the pretext for another unsavoury and desperate set of attacks on the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition generally during recent months, especially after the public release of our antidumping policy in November last year. Like everyone else, I recognise why the government think launching crazed attacks on the opposition might be its best form of defence at the moment, because the last thing they want is to be reminded of their own atrocious failings and dysfunction.</para>
<para>In the area of industry policy more specifically, they are desperate to make their absolutely miserable record and appalling disregard for Australian manufacturing vanish from view as swiftly as possible. It is obvious that there is significant internal division within the government on the subject of manufacturing. It is no surprise in the circumstances to see backbenchers in manufacturing seats like Wakefield and Corangamite backing the member for Griffith as a better choice of leader than the member for Lalor. It is also no surprise in the circumstances to see policymaking increasingly more about shrill statements than sensible manufacturing policy. It is why we have seen the ludicrous political rhetoric lately from the Labor Party on the subject of the car industry and the serial hypocrisy and arrogance of people like the Prime Minister, Senator Carr and the member for Corangamite, Mr Cheeseman, who prey on the fears and anxieties of car workers in Geelong before elections by spreading all manner of misinformation about the coalition's policies and then break billions of dollars worth of promises after those elections. That hypocrisy is breathtaking.</para>
<para>I still have a couple of copies of the edition of the <inline font-style="italic">Geelong Advertiser </inline>from mid-2010 that had Senator Carr and the member for Corangamite shamefully telling the community there how the coalition was supposedly going to cripple Ford and cripple Geelong with the proposed cut to the Green Car Innovation Fund. What happened? Overall, the Labor Party cut more than three times the amount of the saving that we suggested. Our suggest cut was $217 million. Labor ended up cutting the scheme by $885 million. There has still been no apology, no contrition and no fessing up to the squalid deception and dirty tricks.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Dreyfus</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Indi should address her remarks to something that is remotely relevant to the bill before the House.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>UK6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The parliamentary secretary has a point. I invite the member for Indi to return her remarks to the Customs Amendment (Anti-Dumping Improvements) Bill.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs MIRABELLA</name>
    <name.id>00AMU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Antidumping is critical to the manufacturing sector that is facing all sorts of challenges, including that of sovereign risk due to broken promises. In that environment, it is important to canvass the issue of broken promises and how that impacts on the future viability of the manufacturing sector, and what role antidumping can play. We have seen 130,000 workers in Australian manufacturing lose their jobs since mid-2008. There are other industries in manufacturing—many SMEs in food processing, steel, glass, plastics and chemicals—who are already surviving on wafer-thin margins even before the government clubs them with ridiculous measures like the carbon tax. They are very concerned about antidumping. We have had extensive discussions with them and they are very keen to see the government's policy rolled out before they pass final judgment. The government have an obligation to explain their policies and explain how and why, if policies are so good for manufacturing, they have presided over such a sustained burning of jobs in the manufacturing sector. In the area of antidumping specifically, I have not yet seen the latest iteration of Labor's talking points, but no doubt the member for Fraser will help us out and fulfil his trademark role in his party by parroting them dutifully, word for word, a bit later in this debate. The latest lot included things along the lines that, apparently, the coalition's position was in 'fundamental breach of WTO obligations'. I think we were probably responsible for all manner of other things.</para>
<para>Insofar as I can make any sense of this ranting and raving, most of Labor's criticism has been directed at us because what we said in our policy was that we were determined, where possible, to make better use of preliminary affirmative determinations—and, where appropriate, we would be active in applying them from the 60-day stage of investigations. This was enough for Ministers O'Connor and Emerson to foam at the mouth about how allegedly irresponsible we were and how none of this was allowed under the WTO. In reality, what they were angry about was not that anything we were suggesting was not compliant with WTO rules; what bothered them, what really got under their skin, was that the changes we had proposed would go a long way towards creating a fundamental shift in thinking and emphasis in the way that Australia administers its national antidumping arrangements—real reform, not tinkering around the edges. I am afraid that the government have been humiliated by their own words because, as it turns out, in their own policy document, printed in June 2011, they said the following:</para>
<quote><para class="block">By day 60 (the earliest WTO consistent date a PAD can be considered) the Branch will usually have verified the domestic industry’s data, and will have received data from the exporters.</para></quote>
<para>It goes on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If the data submitted by the exporters shows evidence of dumping or subsidisation, this may be sufficient evidence on which to base a PAD prior to verification.</para></quote>
<para>Ironically enough, that material has also been subsequently reprinted in the explanatory memorandum for this bill. So, at the same time the Labor Party is admitting to the parliament that preliminary affirmative determinations are expressly allowed at the 60-day stage and beyond, it is trying to hoodwink the public about the coalition's policy and pretending otherwise.</para>
<para>Of course, these kinds of double standards have been witnessed over and over again from this government—and it will no doubt continue to happen over and over again, particularly now that the member for Lalor has survived today as the leader of the Labor Party. I am hopeful that, with a new Minister for Home Affairs, we will see a far more constructive and reasonable approach, in the area of antidumping at the very least. I do not have high expectations—I am just choosing this one area of policy to see whether perhaps we could get some greater consistency and honesty in the area of policymaking. But, for goodness sake, the rest of the members on the other side are meant to be part of a government—and it is long past time the Labor Party stopped making up nonsense, breaking promises, breaking faith with the Australian people and trying to blame the opposition for its own internal dysfunctional and disgraceful failings.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ADAMS</name>
    <name.id>BV5</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The previous speaker got a lot of things wrong, including issues relating to the car industry. I do not think she has a clue about the industry policy of this country, let alone what antidumping means and what the Customs Amendment (Anti-Dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 2) 2011 is trying to achieve.</para>
<para>I want to deal with dumping: where a company exports its goods to Australia at a price below that which it charges in its own market or which is below the cost of producing them. That is what we are talking about. We have to deal with that and we have to protect the standards in our own country, and that is what antidumping is about—it is not about stopping competition. This great country of Australia is a great trading nation, and we always have to protect trade as a major factor in our economy, but we do not have to accept our industries being dumped on by people who produce things and export them to our country below the price they cost to make.</para>
<para>Where dumping materially injures an Australian business producing similar goods, additional Customs duties can be applied as a remedy to that problem. Australia's economy is strong, but some industries are very vulnerable to dumping and we always have to be aware of that, and this bill is endeavouring to find ways to help those industries.</para>
<para>The World Trade Organisation recognises the damage that unfair trading practices can cause and has established a system in which countries can respond to and remedy such practices. Australian manufacturers and primary producers, especially small businesses, are finding that the expense and complexities of taking antidumping action can be prohibitive. I have spoken to many over the time I have been in this House, and they say that getting a law firm to do the work is expensive—I am not saying our law firms overcharge, but there is a lot of work involved in building the arguments. You can also get a consultant to do it, and they can charge a fair bit as well, but building the case, building the evidence to be able to stimulate a case, is a most prohibitive process for our small businesses.</para>
<para>This suite of improvements will help keep our economy strong and provide greater certainty for manufacturers and primary producers, and of course their workers and families and the communities in which they live and work. This bill also provides a legislative basis for the International Trade Remedies Forum, which I think will meet for the first time in August this year. So that is an international forum that has been established. Better support can be provided to our industries and workforce with a modern, rigorous and better resourced anti-dumping regime. I think there are many areas of Australia calling for this. We have had a number of examples in the past where dumping has occurred in Australia to the detriment of our industries. If there is a more rigorous appeals process, it will mean that we can make the playing field a little more even for some of those industries which are under pressure.</para>
<para>Australia has had an anti-dumping system in one form or another, I understand, for over 100 years. So we have certainly been aware of the problem and we have had systems to try to counter it. The anti-dumping system in its current form is governed by two key World Trade Organisation agreements: the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, also known as the anti-dumping agreement; and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, also known as the countervailing measures agreement. The WTO agreements do not prohibit dumping or all forms of subsidies. Instead, the agreements govern the use of trade remedies where dumped and/or subsidised goods cause or threaten to cause injury to domestic producers—and fair enough.</para>
<para>The objective of the anti-dumping and countervailing system is to address the negative impact of unfair trading and activities by overseas companies on Australian industries. However, there is a tension between preventing unfair trade on the one hand and encouraging the benefits of effective competition on the other, as there always is. This is about endeavouring to get that process right. Of course, as this bill is trying to meet, there are always changing circumstances, especially when you are dealing with world trade circumstances. Australian manufacturers and producers operate in a global economy and benefit from international supply chains and access to foreign markets. Where would we as a nation be if we did not trade? We would be one-fifth of the size we are today. The benefits of such competition may be felt by consumers and purchasers of inputs, which benefit from cheaper prices and greater choice. That can translate into improved profits and profitability. We must always remember that we are a trading nation.</para>
<para>However, Australians can also be negatively impacted by international competition. In some cases this will be the result of fair competition from a more effective producer, somebody who has an advantage over us and the way we produce. It will be up to marketing and processes how you deal with that as an Australian company. But at other times it will come from unfair competition resulting from dumping or subsidisation. Sometimes this unfair competition can have a material impact on the industry's performance and may threaten its long-term viability. Resulting problems include reduced competition in the market and reduced choice for consumers and purchasers. So there are a lot of things around dumping and anti-dumping that always needs to be looked at and watched.</para>
<para>On a domestic level, this behaviour is addressed through competition regulation, including the misuse of market power provisions in the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. Such provisions aim to address the misuse of market power by looking for evidence of abuse of market power and the intent to eliminate, damage, prevent or deter competitors. The formulation applied in the current anti-dumping law looks at damage caused to the complainant. While the test does not explicitly take into account the wider economic impacts of measures, the minister has the discretion to take these impacts into account. The main challenge for anti-dumping regulation is the distinction between unfair trade and normal competitive activity. That is always the test in making sure we get the balance right.</para>
<para>In its recent review of the current system, the Productivity Commission concluded that Australia should retain an anti-dumping and countervailing system. However, it considered greater checks and balances needed to be included in the form of a bounded public interest test to ensure that competitive conduct was not captured by the system. In the administrative processes in this country people seem to be well aware of what we have to try to do with anti-dumping. The commission also suggested a number of administrative changes to balance cost, administrative ease, timing and transparency. For example, it noted that, under current arrangements, reviews have the same time frames as investigations when they could be completed within a shorter time frame. They also observed that reviews are undertaken infrequently. The commission also noted that the current duty collection scheme could be considered all over the place, inefficient and potentially inflexible, as duties are collected even if goods are exported above the floor price. Finally, the commission was concerned that duty assessments did not reset the level of measures applying to future imports.</para>
<para>TEMCO in Tasmania are having some difficulties with the price of the Australian dollar. They are a major manufacturer in Tasmania on the mouth of the Tamar River, and a considerable proportion of their workforce live within the electorate of Lyons. With its cement and ferroalloys, that comes to my mind as a company that could be impacted by dumping because global conditions such as the high dollar and cheaper labour elsewhere allows industries to consider shifting to other parts of the world where they sometimes have less stringent environmental conditions and fewer safety standards to comply with. We should always discourage these things. They do not necessarily lead to dumping, but we have noticed that they do not allow our industries to compete equally. We should be wary of this possibility with companies that go offshore and we should always have a look at what they want to put back into our country. This legislation is important for our industries and for the manufacturing base of Australia. I commend the bill to the House</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (Anti-dumping Improvements) Bill (No. 2) 2011. This bill introduces three sets of changes to Australia's anti-dumping system and attempts to address some of the numerous concerns among stakeholders with regard to the current generally unworkable anti-dumping arrangements.</para>
<para>Essentially, the purpose of an anti-dumping system is to allow countries to take action against foreign businesses that seek to export their product into a market at a price lower than that charged in their home market or lower than the price of production. Dumping is little more than a clinical and calculated attempt to exploit Australia's commitment to free trade by artificially distorting the domestic market. It is therefore only right and proper that we have in place measures to stamp it out. However, there are a number of technical impediments to assessing Australia's anti-dumping system, as well as difficulties with the administration of the system. In recent times there has been a great deal of frustration about the tardiness of investigations and the significant cost imposed on businesses who wish to raise cases for consideration. Bizarrely, the current system frequently imposes a greater burden of proof on local industries than on foreign competitors. As it currently stands, the system is too expensive, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses, too slow and too lopsided. Some anti-dumping cases can drag on for years, at the end of which time the damage may already have been done. When rulings are made they frequently occur too late to reverse the harm that has been caused, not only to the firms that have been directly affected, but also to the wider parts of their supply chain.</para>
<para>The legislation under discussion today contains provisions for several things: a new appeals process, the establishment of a trades remedy forum comprising government, local industry, importers and unions, and new guidelines to allow investigations to be extended under certain circumstances. By and large, we believe that these changes will help address some of the faults in the system. However, given that one of the main problems with the current arrangements relates to the time lines of investigations, care will need to be taken to ensure that new provisions for extensions do not result in unnecessary delays in decision making.</para>
<para>The coalition is also concerned about Labor's reluctance to provide more resources to Customs. Initially, the government said it would increase staff in the relevant sections of Customs, from 31 to 45. However, we have subsequently discovered that these additional staff are not based on new investment—quite the opposite. Once again, we see the government saying one thing and then doing another. The Achilles heel of the government at the moment is: 'there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead'. These additional staff will be moved, through a redeployment of resources, from other areas of Customs. This is an extraordinary decision that will no doubt put additional pressure on the Customs service, which already has plenty on its plate due to the government's ongoing ineptitude in the area of border protection.</para>
<para>We have seen similar situations in ASIO, with staff being dragged away from their core duties to conduct background checks on the never-ending parade of illegal arrivals. Some of you blokes opposite need to remember that you can only cut the pie into a certain number of pieces before it turns into crumbs. The coalition's preference, and indeed our policy, is for a genuine increase in the branch's resources. We believe that it would allow for stronger interpretations of evidence and prosecutions of anti-dumping cases. It would also bring our system into line with those operating in the USA and a number of EU states.</para>
<para>The government speaks about the protection of jobs in manufacturing. I suggest that this bill goes to protecting some of those Australian jobs from anti-dumping. The coalition's anti-dumping policy, released in November last year, is based on increasing the quality of investigations, lowering the cost to participants and providing more scope for penalties to apply to parties who refuse to cooperate with the authorities.</para>
<para>I mentioned earlier the perverse situation we have where the burden of proof rests more heavily on local businesses than on foreign competitors. The coalition's policy would address this by providing the authorities with the opportunity to make use of the preliminary affirmative determinations. For two months into an investigation preliminary affirmative determinations create a shift in the burden of proof, requiring the foreign producer rather than the Australian company that believes it is being damaged by dumping to prove its conduct has not hurt the Australian industry.</para>
<para>One industry that comes to mind with regard to anti-dumping is the steel industry. A good colleague of mine, who is one of Australia's largest privately owned steel merchants, got caught up with 18 million tonnes of steel being dropped on the docks from a Chinese manufacturer. Thank heavens that the provisions were in place whereby BlueScope was able to put an interim action on that dumping action. It stopped the stock getting to the marketplace and destroying the steel industry overnight. Interims are provisions in the act that provide for product on the dock to be quarantined and an evaluation to be made of the difference between the price it has landed for and the so-called production price. Where an Australian company believes that there is a case for anti-dumping in its sector, that money can be quarantined until a determination can be made by the relevant authorities.</para>
<para>Under the coalition's plan, greater financial resources and specialist anti-dumping investigators would ensure decisions are made in a timely fashion, providing greater certainty to all involved. Not surprisingly, Labor jumped on our proposal and accused us of being in breach of WTO agreements. It should come as no surprise that these allegations were completely false. Not only were the preliminary affirmative decisions consistent with the WTO's provisions, they are consistent with what Labor was actually advocating just a few months before. I imagine that must have been quite embarrassing.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>1843</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Orange Juice Concentrate Imports</title>
          <page.no>1843</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SECKER</name>
    <name.id>848</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia currently permits the import of orange juice concentrate from Brazil;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the United States has moved to ban imports of Brazilian orange juice concentrate due to traces of the fungicide Carbendazim being found in some juice concentrates from Brazil;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) in January 2010, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) suspended some agricultural production uses of Carbendazim, including use on all citrus fruits;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) in 2011 the APVMA completed its preliminary review finding of Carbendazim which has proposed removing many uses of this chemical; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the APVMA has proposed a change to remove the Maximum Residue Limits in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code that permits Carbendazim residues in some foods, including citrus products; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to instruct the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service to increase the testing on imported juice concentrate to ensure Carbendazim is not present at levels which risk public health.</para></quote>
<para>This issue came to light after Coca-Cola, that well-known firm that owns the juice manufacturer Minute Maid in the United States, alerted the US Food and Drug Administration that it had detected low levels of Carbendazim in its own orange juice. The US Food and Drug Administration was told by the manufacturer that some Brazilian growers had sprayed trees with the chemical.</para>
<para>Carbendazim is a fungicide registered in Australia for the control of a wide range of fungal diseases such as mould, black spot, mildew, scorch, rot and blight in a variety of crops. As a farmer myself, I understand these issues. Carbendazim is currently permitted for use on roses—which we do not normally eat—bananas, strawberries, ginger seed pieces, sugarcane setts pre-planting, pasture, red clover and subterranean clover, chickpeas, faba beans, lentils, vetch and macadamias, and in timber preservation. Under individual permit, Carbendazim may also be used on onion bulbs post harvest for seed production only, on pyrethrum—non-food crop—on mung beans, and on mushrooms, once only per crop when preparing casing material from peat. Although Carbendazim is permitted for these purposes, its actual use is believed to be quite limited.</para>
<para>The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, the APVMA, commenced a review in 2007—five years ago—following advice from the Office of Chemical Safety and Environmental Health that exposure to Carbendazim and its parent compounds could cause developmental abnormalities in experimental animals and hence might pose a potential public and occupational health and safety risk to people. That is what the motion before the House is all about. The APVMA addressed potential human health concerns by suspending the label approvals of Carbendazim products and issuing new instructions for use. It is obvious that there were some very serious concerns about this chemical. These new instructions provided revised safety directions for use of the product and a birth defects warning statement, to be attached to the container.</para>
<para>In Australia as of 25 January 2010, over two years ago, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority restricted the horticultural and turf uses of Carbendazim, based on data indicating that maximum residue limits for some food crops, and potential public exposure to treated turf, may not meet new health standards. New label instructions removed all uses, including post-harvest dipping, of Carbendazim on grapes; cucurbits, including melons; citrus fruit; custard apples; mango, pome fruit; stone fruit, including cherries; and turf. The APVMA also extended health warnings on Carbendazim product labels to include birth defects and male infertility in laboratory animals.</para>
<para>In the US the US Food and Drug Administration has temporarily banned Brazilian orange imports due to health concerns. Carbendazim is already a banned substance in the US. Carbendazim is legal in Brazil, where it has been used for more than two decades to fight blossom blight and black spot, a type of mould that grows on orange trees. Christian Lohbauer, spokesman for CitrusBR, the association that represents Brazil's four main orange juice producers, said Brazilian orange juice is routinely tested for this fungicide but has never been stopped by US customs over this issue. Mr Lohbauer says that any shipment of orange juice will test positive and he does not know what they will decide is the maximum level. That is just not acceptable to Australia. Their interest now is that juice keeps entering the United States, and of course Australia. The US Food and Drug Administration released a statement saying that it is sampling all import shipments of orange juice and will deny entry to shipments that test positive for Carbendazim. Up to 35 parts per billion were found in juice arriving in the US where it is banned. Carbendazim is currently only approved in the United States as a fungicide to treat non-food items such paints, textiles and ornamental trees. But another legal fungicide, thiophanate-methyl, can break down into Carbendazim after it is applied.</para>
<para>It is important to note that Australia imports 32,000 tonnes of frozen concentrate orange juice annually, two-thirds of which comes from Brazil. It is my understanding that juice labelled 'made in Australia' could be a product that is more than 70 per cent Brazilian concentrate. According to Food Standards Australia New Zealand, the acceptable level for Carbendazim residue in Australian juices is 10 parts per million—above the amounts discovered in the U.S.</para>
<para>As outlined in the motion, APVMA has proposed a change to remove the maximum residue limits in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code that permits Carbendazim residues in some foods, including citrus products. During a Senate estimates hearing last week, the Food Standards Australia and New Zealand Chief Executive Officer, Steve McCutcheon, said that the APVMA had decided last November to amend the maximum residue limit for Carbendazim to zero. However, the recommendation was then watered down to halve the limit to five parts per million.</para>
<para>This issue is very relevant within my electorate. The Riverland is one of the four major citrus growing areas in Australia. The South Australian Citrus Board has called on the government to impose an interim ban on imports of orange juice concentrate from Brazil because of the contamination concerns. The Citrus Board Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Green, believes imports should be halted until imports are properly checked. Mr Green said to ABC<inline font-style="italic"> Riverland</inline> on 19 January, 'I understand that AQIS does the testing here in Australia and it's at a five per cent type level, so something in addition to that would be important.' That comes back to the second part of my motion which calls for a greater testing. The Chairman of the Citrus Growers of South Australia, Mark Chown, also told ABC <inline font-style="italic">Riverland</inline> that juice already on sale needs to be tested.</para>
<para>Consumers need certainty, as do the growers. The Riverland region has experienced ongoing drought and many growers have had to re-invent themselves to survive. I wrote to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, the Hon. Joe Ludwig, about this issue but I am yet to receive a response. In my letter I expressed the concerns of growers and the industry, and I expressed the need for increased testing by the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service. I ask the minister to listen to the concerns of the citrus industry, and I call on the government to support my motion. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>UK6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FORREST</name>
    <name.id>NV5</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEPHEN JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
    <electorate>Throsby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am pleased to speak tonight on the motion that the member for Barker brings to the chamber. The motion calls on the government to instruct the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service to increase the testing on imported orange juice concentrate to ensure that the fungicide Carbendazim is not present at levels which would risk public health. I understand the member's concerns, representing as he does the Riverland area of South Australia in his electorate of Barker. I also understand that Australian citrus producers, including those in the Riverland, provide a quality product and that the importation of orange juice concentrate is seen by some as a threat to the local industry. I see many parallels with the fate faced by many manufacturers in my own electorate of Throsby where we do not grow too many oranges. We do consume a fair bit of orange juice but we do not grow too many oranges. I understand that the Australian citrus producers, including those of the Riverland, produce a quality product and that the importation of orange juice, particularly orange juice which is infected or contaminated by the fungicide which is identified in this motion, not only threatens the product but it threatens the quality and the confidence of the entire market for orange juice.</para>
<para>The Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicines Authority, APVMA, is responsible for the regulation of chemicals that are used on food crops and animals, and the Food Standards Australia New Zealand, FSANZ, is responsible for ensuring safety in the food supply. These organisations are responsible for determining a safe residue level of Carbendazim in foods that Australians will consume. I have been advised that FSANZ is not currently aware of any test results in which Carbendazim levels in orange juice have been above this safe level, with the highest to date being 0.8 parts per million—well below the current limit.</para>
<para>While it is true that the United States has moved to ban imports of Brazilian orange juice concentrates due to traces of Carbendazim, we also understand that the United States is a net exporter of citrus juice with the states of Florida and California producing more than 11 million tonnes of orange juice each year. Australia is clearly not in the same position.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Adams</name>
    <name.id>BV5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Orange County.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEPHEN JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Orange County indeed. Our domestic market is only able to support around 45 per cent of the needs of the orange juice industry, with a national orange fruit juice production at approximately 438,000 tonnes annually. That is a market that I am advised is actually increasing, not decreasing. I can definitely say that this government, and I in particular as the member for Throsby, strongly support local manufacturing, including food manufacturing. Indeed, tomorrow I will be hosting a group of workers at a function in the House who represent workers in the food manufacturing industry and who are concerned about this issue, their ongoing competitiveness and the future of food manufacturing in this country.</para>
<para>We know that food and beverage production is a major industry sector for the Australian economy in terms of both its financial contribution and the jobs associated with it. Food and beverage processing is Australia's largest manufacturing industry—and this is not well known—with sales exceeding A$70 billion each and every year, accounting for around 18 per cent of manufacturing employment. When people think of the manufacturing industry, they think of the automotive industry and the steel and other heavy manufacturing industries but they do not think of food. They do not think of the tins of food that they may put on their pantry shelves or the things that they buy at the grocery store each and every week. But it is the largest employer, accounting for over 18 per cent of manufacturing employment.</para>
<para>The Gillard government has a strong commitment to food safety and a commitment to ensuring consumers have the best possible information about the food that they eat. This is why the government commissioned and supported the Blewett review into food labelling and why it has supported the implementation of the majority of its recommendations. Also, in January 2010, the government acted on the advice of an APVMA review into the use of the fungicide and suspended pre- and post-harvest uses of Carbendazim by Australian primary producers on a range of products including citrus fruits, oranges among them. This review is still an ongoing process, as is the APVMA's consultation with FSANZ on this matter. These processes are of upmost importance to the government.</para>
<para>FSANZ's current advice is that a 70-kilogram adult—somebody about my size—would need to drink 140 litres of orange juice per day to consume an unsafe amount of the fungicide Carbendazim. As fond as I am of orange juice, I can tell this House without any fear of misleading it that never have I consumed 140 litres of orange juice per day, so I am fairly confident that I have not tripped the magic level—the dangerous level—of consumption of orange juice such to consume so much of the fungicide Carbendazim to have reached the national maximum residue limit. The best science that is available at the moment says I and those who consume a moderate amount—far less than 140 litres a day—are not in the danger zone.</para>
<para>That is not to say that we should not as a government be providing all the resources that are necessary to the regulatory authorities to ensure that we have the best science available to us. If as is suggested by the member for Barker in his motion the current science, which says that 140 litres of orange juice per day is the unsafe level, is not correct then we should be reviewing that. I support the sentiment reflected in the motion by the member for Barker for us to ensure that those levels are reviewed. Let the policy follow the science. If the science tells us that we have it wrong then I will be first to stand in this place to ensure that we get this right in the interests of consumer safety but also in the interests of local food manufacturers and not allowing an unfair advantage to accrue to Brazilian producers or, for that matter, to producers from any other country anywhere else in the world. We do not want unsafe products to be put on the shelves of our supermarkets, putting the health and safety of Australian consumers at risk. I once again thank the member for Barker for bringing this important matter before the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FORREST</name>
    <name.id>NV5</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of this resolution, not just because I am the representative of an extensive citrus region in Sunraysia and the whole of the Murray valley all the way down to Koondrook but because for some time now I have been very concerned that Biosecurity Australia and its policing agency, the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service, seem to be preoccupied with controlling the quality of our exports. That is a noble objective and one which I support. Australia has a really excellent reputation around the world for producing clean and lean and green. My citrus growers are very proud of that record. The member for Throsby made some good points. But I wonder if he has confidence in them. That is what this resolution is about. I quote point 2 of the resolution:</para>
<quote><para class="block">…calls on the Government to instruct the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service to increase the testing on imported juice concentrate to ensure Carbendazim is not present at levels which risk public health.</para></quote>
<para>That is the point that the member for Barker and I are making. We do not have confidence.</para>
<para>The Americans, who have a much more extensive testing program of orange juice concentrate than we have in Australia, have reacted. Given the risk that Carbendazim poses to human health, I would have thought that the government would have made this a priority and instructed AQIS to increase the percentage of imported orange juice concentrate that they test. It is not good enough, given the risk to public health. There have been extensive health warnings made about this product. We are talking about birth defects, genetic defects and male infertility—this last has been proven in laboratory animals. We need to be absolutely confident. We have seen some tragedies in human history in recent time, such as with thalidomide. We should not take a risk. This resolution strongly urges the government to instruct AQIS to do their job with the products that are coming into Australia. It is just not good enough to assume that the level of risk is not high. It is extremely high. I urge the member for Throsby to use his influence, in addition to the contribution he has made to this debate, to ensure that point (2) of this resolution is observed and adhered to.</para>
<para>In January 2010 the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority restricted the horticultural and turf uses of Carbendazim—there is a risk in the use of turf, which is not consumed by humans—based on new data indicating that maximum residue limits for some food crops and potential public exposure to treated turf might not meet new health standards. Turf is not consumed by humans, but it is just that someone might lie on it or touch it or be involved in laying it in a new garden. Surely alarm bells should be ringing. This is a fungicide to be very wary of if it is sufficient to cause that reaction. As a result, we are now seeing new label instructions removing all uses including post-harvest dipping of Carbendazim for grapes, melons, citrus fruit, custard apples, mangoes, stone fruit, cherries and turf—which is not even consumed by humans. Many of these products, except for the tropical ones, are produced in my electorate—melons, citrus fruit and stone fruit definitely are.</para>
<para>All these things have not been done for nothing. There is tremendous suspicion about this fungicide. Point (2) of this resolution should be supported by government members so that we can be confident and sure. I ask government members to give it their support.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ADAMS</name>
    <name.id>BV5</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am pleased to be here to speak to this motion to increase the testing on imported orange juice concentrate. Carbendazim is a fungicide used in many countries to control diseases in some crops, including fruit trees. The honourable member who just spoke, the member for Mallee, raised a lot of concerns. Presently, two groups in Australia are currently in collaboration on this topic—the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, which is responsible for the regulation of chemicals used on food crops in Australia, and Food Standards Australia New Zealand, which is responsible for ensuring the safety of our food supplies and deciding safe residue levels of Carbendazim in foods that Australians consume. The food industry is a big manufacturing sector in Australia, and we export food as well. Many chemicals are used to get these products to the consumer.</para>
<para>As we get greener and cleaner there is an increasing awareness of fresh fruit and vegetables, and this includes orange juice. At present, Australians are consuming much more juice than we are producing—I think we are producing only something like 45 per cent of the orange juice consumed by Australian consumers. I take it on board that the United States has banned the use of this product, but their exports are in competition with Brazil's. That is not an unusual process.</para>
<para>I agree with the motion, with certain conditions. My principle is that we have Australian standards, which our farmers and manufacturers are bound by, and imported goods should meet those standards. We should set those rules. Australia currently has in place a maximum residue limit which allows the presence of 10 parts per million of Carbendazim in citrus products. That is the science that is being used in Australia. If that changes then I would be the first to say, 'Make sure we do it; make sure that we are on top of it,' but we must make these decisions in relation to science. It has already been stated in the House that an adult weighing 70 kilos would need to drink 140 litres of orange juice in one day to consume 10 parts per million of Carbendazim and a child would need to drink 40 litres of orange juice a day to receive the same 10 parts per million. Despite the information showing it is relatively safe from a health perspective one would always endeavour to err on the side of caution. I understand that there is an ongoing review process and consultation between the FSANZ and the APVMA, and they will continue to consult on this. They have now asked to extend the consultation for another 12 months. In that time they will continue to monitor the situation and will then report.</para>
<para>We are very strong on food safety, and so we should be. I know the member for Barker is very strong in representing his area in putting this motion forward. I congratulate him on doing it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MARINO</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australian farmers produce some of the highest quality and safest food in the world. Agricultural production in this country drives $155 billion a year in economic production, over 12 per cent of GDP, generating around 1.6 million Australian jobs and $32 billion a year in farm exports. Around the world, Australian-produced food is regarded as safe—clean and green—and it is essential that we maintain that reputation. However, this reputation is put at risk by Labor's incompetent neglect of our national biosecurity.</para>
<para>There is no doubt that the clean, disease-free status of Australian food produce is paramount. Australia was once a biosecurity island fortress, but in recent years our biosecurity and quarantine programs have been cut back and undermined by this government. The government's commitment to biosecurity is a national disgrace. Labor's 2009 federal budget slashed $35.8 million from the quarantine and biosecurity budgets, leading to the loss of 125 jobs, and reduced inspections of arriving passengers and cargo. The sum of $58 million was also slashed from the Customs budget, leading to 4.7 million fewer air cargo consignments being inspected each year and 2,150 fewer vessels being boarded on arrival.</para>
<para>This neglect set the trend that Labor has continued into the current budget. In 2011, another $32.8 million was cut from the operational budget of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, reducing the capacity of the department to deliver services to Australian agriculture. The Beale quarantine and biosecurity review that was commissioned by Labor called for hundreds of millions to be spent on AQIS and quarantine annually to provide proper, real protection to our nation's borders. Instead of heeding this report, the government has failed to act, except to spend 2½ years since its release running AQIS down and stripping out its assets.</para>
<para>Many countries around the world provide advantages for their industries that include low input and labour costs and low levels of necessary compliance with government regulations. This government is complicit in providing this advantage to overseas producers by refusing to enforce adequate border biosecurity.</para>
<para>Carbendazim is a fungicide registered in Australia for the control of a wide range of fungal diseases such as mould, black spot, mildew, scorch, rot and blight in a variety of crops. It has been known to cause birth defects and irreversible male infertility in laboratory animals. New research has found exposure to high levels of the chemical causes infertility in some male mice, prompting the APVMA to both restrict its use and extend the health warnings on labels. In January 2010 Carbendazim was banned from pre- and post-harvest uses on grapes, cucurbits, citrus fruit including oranges, custard apples, mangoes, all pome fruit, stone fruit and all uses on turf.</para>
<para>This chemical has become an issue in Australia after reports from the United States that authorities had suspended some imports after trace amounts of Carbendazim had been found in orange juice imported from Brazil. Whilst the levels detected were low in comparison to international standards, there remains the fact that other countries can still use a product banned for a similar use in Australia. It is also a fact that the Labor government's neglect of biosecurity means that there is an increased chance that the product is entering Australia in imported fruit products. This not only creates an unlevel playing field; it also raises questions about the safety of some imported agricultural products.</para>
<para>The motion by the member for Barker requires the House to note that:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia currently permits the import of orange juice concentrate from Brazil;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the United States has moved to ban imports of Brazilian orange juice concentrate due to traces of the fungicide Carbendazim being found in some juice concentrates from Brazil;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) in January 2010, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) suspended some agricultural production uses of Carbendazim, including use on all citrus fruits;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) in 2011 the APVMA completed its preliminary review finding of Carbendazim which has proposed removing many uses of this chemical; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) the APVMA has proposed a change to remove the Maximum Residue Limits in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code that permits …</para></quote>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GRIERSON</name>
    <name.id>00AMP</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the member for Barker's private member's motion on the importation of orange juice concentrate and the use of Carbendazim. It is clear that all the speakers are genuinely concerned about any potential risk to Australians from the pesticides used on imported consumables. We have very high standards in this country and we need to look at how we deal with any such risk in Australia.</para>
<para>In January this year it was reported that the US Food and Drug Administration had temporarily banned Brazilian orange imports due to the discovery of low levels of the pesticide Carbendazim. The United States Environmental Protection Agency are yet to establish an acceptable standard for that pesticide within their imported goods.</para>
<para>Back here in Australia, in 2007, the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority received advice from the Department of Health and Ageing's Office of Chemical Safety and Environmental Health division that exposure to the pesticide may have associated health risks. Some of the speakers have outlined those. In January 2010 the authority suspended the pesticide's use within our domestic citrus industry. Unlike the US, however, Australia currently has in place a maximum residue limit that allows for the presence of Carbendazim within imported citrus products at 10 parts per million. The levels found within our imported orange juice are well below this level at around 0.1 parts per million. Food Standards Australia New Zealand is yet to raise any concern regarding the presence of the pesticide in the orange juice that Australians consume. It has in fact indicated that an adult would have to drink 140 litres of orange juice in a single day in order to exceed the safety limit. We love our orange juice in Newcastle and around Australia, but it is a fair bet that nobody will be drinking 140 litres of orange juice in one day anytime soon. The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority are in consultation with Food Standards Australia New Zealand in order to develop advice regarding a suitable limit for Carbendazim within our food that allows for trade to continue. Some may ask why we import orange juice at all. The fact remains, according to Fruit Juice Australia, a division of the Australian Beverages Council, that Australia's orange crop is approximately 200,000 tonnes short of what would be required to meet the market demand and produce 100 per cent home-grown orange juice. This is due to a range of factors, including seasonal variability. Australia's juice-manufacturing industry is therefore highly dependent upon importing frozen orange juice concentrate from countries such as Brazil. Australia currently imports 32,000 tonnes of frozen concentrate, two-thirds of which comes from Brazil. As a net exporter of citrus juice, the US is in a position to take measures such as banning the import of Brazilian orange juice concentrate; on the other hand, being able to domestically supply only 45 per cent of the orange juice industry's needs, Australia cannot.</para>
<para>In August 2004, one of the world's eight bulk juice terminals, located in my electorate of Newcastle, received its first cargo shipment of frozen orange juice concentrate. At that time it was anticipated to handle approximately one-third of our nation's orange juice imports. In its first year of operation, 9,572 kilolitres of frozen orange juice concentrate were imported from Brazil to be stored in Newcastle's Carrington facility—the equivalent of almost four Olympic sized swimming pools. Every three to four months, a shipment of frozen orange juice concentrate from Brazil arrives by ship into Newcastle port and the concentrate is stored in tanks at Carrington. Newcastle port operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week, managing almost 4,000 ship movements each year, employing almost 2,000 people. Along with Newcastle's unrivalled coal-exporting facilities, the import of frozen orange juice concentrate is one of the diverse port activities that employs locals in my electorate of Newcastle.</para>
<para>The member's motion highlights the importance of having adequate testing in place to ensure public health and safety, and I am confident that the appropriate measures are currently in place and that Food Standards Australia New Zealand are putting the interests of the public's health at the forefront of their decisions. It is also worthy of mention that countries like Brazil are making great strides in bringing their standards higher. We encourage that and support that, and at this time we do not want to compromise on that important trade between the two nations. It is good to speak on the motion. It is good to make sure that people are not alarmed unnecessarily and it is good to know that the Australian government are dealing with this issue.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There is much validity in calling on the Labor government to instruct the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service to increase the testing of imported juice concentrate to ensure Carbendazim is not present at levels which place public health at risk. It is expected that the chemical may be banned for use in oranges in Australia—it is currently suspended—but still available for other crops such as almonds. Labor is not putting due process in place in regard to inspections and must become more diligent about testing. In the 2009-10 budget, Labor slashed cargo-screening resources at ports and airports by $58.1 million. This led to 4.7 million fewer air cargo consignments being inspected each year and 2,150 fewer vessels being boarded on arrival.</para>
<para>Food Standards Australia New Zealand has backflipped on its decision to ban the import of Carbendazim laced Brazilian orange juice concentrate. This organisation must gets its act together and send a clear message to the public. Carbendazim is a fungicide used in many countries to control fungal diseases in some crops, including fruit trees. Food Standards Australia New Zealand originally announced it would ban the import of juice concentrate where trace elements of Carbendazim were present. However, it has since reversed that decision, understandably angering Riverina Citrus in my electorate. What sort of message does this send to the average shopper looking to buy fruit juice? Riverina Citrus had previously called on Australian authorities to act to protect consumers following the discovery of the fungicide in Brazilian juice products imported into the United States, and it publicly stated support when FSANZ put the ban in place.</para>
<para>Concerns have been raised in Australia after reports from the United States that authorities had suspended some imports after trace amounts of Carbendazim had been found in orange juice imported from Brazil. The levels detected in the US are well below the internationally accepted level for Carbendazim permitted in oranges and significantly below the US human health and safety level. Even though the levels detected to date are very low and considered safe, the US is testing for Carbendazim because the chemical is not allowed to be used on orange crops in the US.</para>
<para>A strong biosecurity and quarantine system is critical to Australia's rural and regional industries, jobs and consumers and our natural heritage. The 2008 $1.7 million Beale review into Australia's quarantine and biosecurity systems found that our border defences are significantly under-resourced, putting Australia's economy, people and environment at significant risk. Consumers are unsure what they are buying, and this should be paramount. We should be mindful of what consumers are buying and mindful of the fact that they need to be safe and secure in the knowledge that what they are buying does not contain this trace element. According to the<inline font-style="italic"> Land</inline> newspaper, people who are buying Australian juice labelled as 'Australian Made' could be drinking a product consisting of 70 to 80 per cent Brazilian concentrate. Studies have found that Carbendazim could cause infertility and testicular damage. Carbendazim was withdrawn from use in the Australian industry more than two years ago.</para>
<para>It is important that Australian law protects Australia from pests and diseases carried by overseas animals, plants and products and ensures that imported product meets stringent health standards. The Labor government's under-resourcing is putting this at risk. In July last year the ban on imported apples was lifted, and the Australian apple industry has been left in jeopardy through the flooding of local markets with products from overseas that potentially do not adequately address the health risk. Foreign apples should only be allowed if they are free from pests and diseases, especially fire blight. That decision has the potential to cripple areas such as Batlow and Tumut, in my electorate of Riverina, the economies of which rely heavily on apples. This decision with the juice concentrate of oranges is just the same as that example. It is neither right nor fair from a government that says it has regional Australia's interests at heart.</para>
<para>But it is not just apples where Labor has weakened the biosecurity and quarantine measures. The Asian bee has threatened the industry over the past 20 years and now threatens to affect everyone in the honey industry and everyone in Australia. Frank Battistel, the Riverina Citrus chairman, summed it up when he said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We wonder when someone is actually going to stand up for the Australian people—growers and consumers—and how it is that the big money of the processing industry can again win out over what is fair, what is right and what the public are demanding.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PARKE</name>
    <name.id>HWR</name.id>
    <electorate>Fremantle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am pleased to speak to this motion, brought by the member for Barker. As the daughter, granddaughter and great-granddaughter of fruit growers, I understand very well both the importance of strong and effective regulation when it comes to the importation of fruit and fruit products and the importance of quarantine and food standard regulations which err on the side of proper protection—the importation of apples from fire blight affected countries springs to mind—while nevertheless not unreasonably impeding free and fair trade between countries.</para>
<para>Australia is a very substantial net exporter of food and so of course we rely on the fair and reasonable assessment and regulation of our food products in other countries in order to maintain and expand our food markets. I know that Australian producers happily accept the legitimate scrutiny of our agricultural products. They do so with little fear because the quality and standards of our food production are generally exceptional, but, where unreasonable barriers are put on the export of Australian food, there are very serious and damaging consequences. It makes sense that we set our import restrictions with this in mind.</para>
<para>The existing maximum residue limit, MRL, of Carbendazim, the active ingredient in a fungicide used to treat citrus trees, is 10 parts per million, and the highest recorded presence of Carbendazim is only 0.1 part per million. That is the case even though we import more than 50 per cent of the Australian orange juice industry's requirement for concentrate.</para>
<para>Australia's MRL is the same that applies in Canada and it is set at a level where a 70-kilogram adult would need to drink 140 litres of affected orange juice before there would be any health effect. That of course does not mean that the current MRL is sacrosanct or beyond review, and indeed I understand that the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, APVMA, following a review that commenced in 2007, did signal at the end of last year its intention to remove the MRL for Carbendazim residue in citrus fruits. But members and the wider public need to understand that the APVMA position is triggered by its consideration of the occupational health and safety aspects of the use of Carbendazim in the Australian domestic production process and not by any consideration of the health effects of consuming tiny amounts of that chemical. It is precisely because the APVMA determination has not been triggered by reference to the health effect of Carbendazim in food that Food Standards Australia New Zealand has asked that this proposed change to the MRL be subject to a further 12-month consultation period.</para>
<para>All this indicates that the regulation of Carbendazim as a potential contaminant is well in hand under Australia's framework of food standards and pesticide regulation. The involvement of AQIS in this task will continue to be shaped by appropriate advice and will occur in addition to the inspection and testing processes already in place through state and territory governments and industry monitoring. It is salient, I think, to also note for the benefit of the member for Barker that the reconsideration of how we limit the presence of Carbendazim is occurring under this government and that the MRL was not considered or reviewed at any stage while the coalition was in government.</para>
<para>I will finish by saying that I welcome the findings and analysis of the recent Blewett Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy and that I look forward to seeing the implementation of the majority of its recommendations. This is an area in which there is room for much greater transparency, with all the benefits this will deliver for Australian consumers, families and even food producers.</para>
<para>I have spoken previously about the fact that stronger requirements when it comes to the health and animal welfare claims of food labels will mean that consumers can buy food with greater confidence and greater discretion and that producers who choose the highest standards of animal welfare in their production of food like eggs and pork will then have the higher product value of that choice protected by labelling laws that prevent the cynical misuse of labels like 'free range'.</para>
<para>In any case, I thank the member for Barker for bringing the motion we have discussed tonight. I do not believe there is any significant issue with the safe and rigorous regulation of Carbendazim in Australia. I am confident that our regulatory authorities are giving proper consideration to this issue.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Thich, Most Venerable Phuoc Hue, OAM</title>
          <page.no>1854</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RUDDOCK</name>
    <name.id>0J4</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) express its deep regret at the death on 28 January 2012 of the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue OAM, the Spiritual Leader of the Phuoc Hue Buddhist Monastery and leader of the Vietnamese Buddhist community in Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) places on record its appreciation of his long and meritorious public service; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) tenders its profound sympathy to the Vietnamese Buddhist community in its bereavement.</para></quote>
<para>I have had the privilege of knowing the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue for much of the time he has had here in Australia—that is, for some 25 years. I was privileged to represent the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, at the memorial ceremony held on Wednesday, 8 February 2012. I also was at the Phuoc Hue Temple on the occasion of the Tet celebrations—that is, the Vietnamese new year. At midnight on the evening of 22 January I was with my colleague the member for Fowler, who also happened to be present. It was where I learnt that the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was in hospital, and I was saddened to hear it.</para>
<para>Thich Phuoc Hue was born in 1921—I am told by Quang Luu, who has written about him for the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney Morning Herald</inline><inline font-style="italic">—</inline>near Saigon in Vietnam, although his birthday is formally recorded as 1922. He began studying at the age of 13 and was ordained as a novice at 16. He was later ordained as a Buddhist monk at the age of 20. During his early career he was in charge of the Buddhist secondary school in An Giang province and the Director of Studies at the Buddhist Studies Institute in Saigon.</para>
<para>This is recorded on his CV because he was seen as a very senior leader in the southern Vietnamese community and had played a significant role in the Vietnamese sangha, which resulted in the formation of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam. He held many positions of responsibility on the central executive, including Commissioner for Sangha Affairs. After the fall of Saigon, when his church was banned in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, he moved to Hong Kong. He left in 1979 and arrived in Australia, having been sponsored by Australian Vietnamese in 1980. There were some 5,000 or so Vietnamese at that time, but by 1981 41,000 Vietnamese residents in Australia sponsored him as the first Buddhist monk here in Australia. He led Buddhist ceremonies at the Thai temple in Stanmore and aspired to build Vietnamese Buddhism. He established a temple in Fairfield in 1980, and the Phuoc Hue Temple was completed in 1991 at a cost of $3 million. That occurred over a three-year period. He was involved in fundraising and community leadership in this period and he played a similar role in the construction of the Quang Minh Temple in Sunshine in Victoria. In April 1981 he was elected as the first President of the Vietnamese Buddhist Federation at the inaugural conference in that year and was re-elected subsequently. He was the longest serving president of the Unified Vietnamese Buddhist Congregation.</para>
<para>He was awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia in 1995 in recognition of his contributions to Buddhism in this country. He was involved in the setting up of the Yellow Lotus printing house for the publication of Buddhist books. The Prince of Wales, Prince Charles, visited the Phuoc Hue Temple in 1994 to meet Christian, Muslim, Jewish and Hindu leaders along with Buddhists.</para>
<para>He had a very significant international profile. He was a high-ranking member of the World Buddhist Sangha Council and the World Fellowship of Buddhists. He led the organising committee for the First Executive Conference of the Seventh World Buddhist Sangha Council Congress. He delivered a message of peaceful cooperation at the first International Dialogue on Interfaith Cooperation in Yogyakarta, sponsored by Alexander Downer when he Australia's foreign minister. He visited refugee camps. He assisted poor Vietnamese inside Vietnam with both gifts and support for cataract operations. He supported temple building and the establishment of Buddhist organisations in the United States, New Zealand and New Caledonia.</para>
<para>His outstanding achievements were gained through his devotion, his intellectual energy and his wisdom. These were exceptional qualities and it made me proud to be a friend of his. I was not alone in this admiration. The fact that so many of my colleagues will support this resolution tonight is evidence of that. I note there was a message of condolence on the passing of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue by Cardinal George Pell. He penned these few lines to convey his most sincere condolences:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney joins with the senior Venerable Thich Phuoc Tan, OAM and other senior monks, nuns and lay practitioners who mourn deeply the passing of this exemplary spiritual leader and scholar. On occasions of significant ecumenical and inter-religious activities, the strong support of The Late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue, OAM and his community was keenly felt and much appreciated.</para></quote>
<para>He went on to write:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue, OAM will remain an inspiration not only the Australian Vietnamese Buddhist Community but to many other Australians as well, recalling his contribution to the life our country with gratitude.</para></quote>
<para>You may suspect that I have known the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue over many years. I greatly admired his leadership and the contribution he made to this nation. I think he was exemplary in terms of all of those values that we think are so important in our multicultural society. The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue advocated harmony amongst nations as well as amongst people. A few years ago ill health forced him to step down from the presidency of the United Vietnamese Buddhist Congregation. He was succeeded by the Venerable Thich Phuoc Tan, who came to Australia as a Vietnamese refugee in the early 1980s and is now the abbot of the Quang Minh Temple in Melbourne.</para>
<para>The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue has achieved a great deal in his efforts to rebuild Vietnamese Buddhism as part of the fabric of and as a contributor to multicultural Australia. In writing about him, his good friend Tuong Quang Luu had this to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">There remained, however, one piece of unfinished business. His aspiration to set up a Vietnamese Buddhist Studies Institute in Australia was unfulfilled at the time of his death.</para></quote>
<para>I hope that others may see in that a significant challenge for the future. I hope it can be recognised in the context of the outstanding leadership that the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue has displayed over the 90 years of his life.</para>
<para>I think Australia is an exemplar to the rest of the world through what it has been able to achieve in its tolerance of people who come and settle and are proud to make Australia their home. When you have somebody like the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue, who has achieved so much in his lifetime, you cannot help but admire what we are able to achieve in Australia and give credit to those who have come from across the seas to make Australia their home and have contributed so significantly. I was proud to number the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue amongst my friends and I am proud of what he has been able to do for Vietnamese Buddhism in Australia. I am certainly proud to be able to move this resolution and I think it is a credit that we in the Australian parliament can acknowledge the contribution of such a significant Australian.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Craig Kelly</name>
    <name.id>99931</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAYES</name>
    <name.id>ECV</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Berowra for bringing this matter before the House and I acknowledge his genuine and longstanding commitment to the Buddhist community. The 28th of January this year was a very sad day for Australians but most particularly for the Australian Buddhist community. It marked the passing of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue OAM, who was more than just a religious leader; he was an inspiration to the community and a major contributor to the development of a multicultural society, particularly in south-west Sydney, an area I am particularly proud of.</para>
<para>I have had the opportunity of attending a number of events at the Phuoc Hue Temple since I became the member for Fowler. The Phuoc Hue Temple in Wetherill Park is one of the leading temples in Australia, largely due to the work of the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue and his drive and persistence, and it stands very proudly in Wetherill Park. As the member for Berowra indicated, he and I attended the temple on 22 January to celebrate Vietnamese new year, and that is where I learnt that the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was ill.</para>
<para>As the first Vietnamese resident monk in Australia, the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue's guidance, kindness and leadership shone like a beacon to many Vietnamese families who were trying to cope with the loss and grief inflicted by the Vietnam War. Although I did not have many opportunities to talk with the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue, I did meet him last year and I hold him in great admiration and respect. I acknowledge his legacy of good work.</para>
<para>I would like to reflect on the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue's life. As one of the most influential Buddhist leaders in Vietnam, where he was born and educated, and in Australia—his adopted country—I am sure you would agree that his accomplishments are nothing short of extraordinary. The late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue learnt about Buddhism in a local temple just outside Saigon. He renounced life at 13. At 16, he became a novice priest and by 20 he was ordained. In Vietnam, the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was also credited with the establishment of several pagodas in the Mekong Delta and in some provinces around Saigon.</para>
<para>The late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue arrived in Australia in 1980. He was sponsored from Hong Kong and became the first Vietnamese resident monk in this country. He aspired to rebuild Vietnamese Buddhism not only to serve the religious needs of Vietnamese Australians—mostly refugees—but also to make a genuine contribution to multiculturalism in Australia. On 1 November 1980, he opened the Vietnamese Buddhist hall of prayer in Fairfield. With the support of the Vietnamese-Australian community and the New South Wales government, the hall of prayer grew to become the Phuoc Hue Temple, which stands proudly in Wetherill Park. In April 1981, he was elected the first president of the Vietnamese Buddhist Federation at the inaugural Buddhist conference in Sydney. In 1987, he was re-elected president of the newly restructured national organisation known as the United Vietnamese Buddhist Congregation in Australia and New Zealand. He was the congregation's longest serving president until he resigned in 2008 because of ill health. The late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was also one of the longest serving presidents of the Buddhist Federation of Australia. In 2009, he stepped down from the federation's presidency for the same health reasons.</para>
<para>Internationally, he was a high ranking member and elder of the World Buddhist Sangha Council and the World Fellowship of Buddhists. In 1984, the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue hosted an Australian religious elders meeting at the Phuoc Hue monastery, which was chaired by His Royal Highness Prince Charles, representing Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. In his capacity as a senior executive of the World Buddhist Sangha Council, in 2001 the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue and the United Vietnamese Buddhist Congregation met in Sydney and organised the first executive conference of the seventh World Buddhist Sangha Council Congress and the third world general conference of the World Buddhist Sangha Council Youth Committee—essentially for people of all backgrounds to learn about Buddhism. This was a genuine attempt to promote tolerance and understanding by reaching out to the Australian community at large. The late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue also advocated harmony among nations, which he expressed as the president of the Buddhist Federation of Australia at its first International Dialogue on Interfaith Cooperation in Yogyakarta in 2004.</para>
<para>In recent years, the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue worked with institutions such as the Art Gallery of NSW, the University of Western Sydney, Victoria University, the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, the World Conference on Religions for Peace and the New South Wales and Victorian governments with the specific aim of promoting peace, harmony, mutual tolerance, multiculturalism and interfaith cooperation to the wider community.</para>
<para>The late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was also the most senior Buddhist leader in Australia committed to working not only for the Buddhist community in Australia but also for the development of peace, harmony and wellbeing of all people regardless of faith and ethnic backgrounds. His contribution and hard work were duly recognised and in 1995 he was awarded the medal of the Order of Australia for his services to the community. The Phuoc Hue temple is more than just a sacred place, particularly for Buddhist people; it is also a place of compassion and a place of giving. It is also an iconic feature in the fabric of multiculturalism as it stands in Western Sydney. It shows what can occur when there is commitment and goodwill. Over the years, the Phuoc Hue temple, under the guidance of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue, actively fundraised for both Australian and international charities. Money has been raised for Westmead Children's Hospital and the Queensland flood relief, just to name two.</para>
<para>The late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue achieved amazing thing is in his lifetime. Although his passing is a sad loss to the community, his legacy remains in the hearts and minds of so many and his achievements of a lifetime of good and noble work will not go unremarked. His teaching, guidance and leadership brought direction and comfort to the Vietnamese community, giving them strength to make the most of their opportunities and lives in Australia. His work has also created genuine appreciation for the good work and contributions the Vietnamese community as a whole has made to the Australian way of life in their very short history since coming here following the fall of Saigon. The passing of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue is not only a sad loss to the Vietnamese Buddhist community, but it is also a heartfelt loss to Australian society, particularly to those of us who genuinely believe in the tenets of multiculturalism.</para>
<para>The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was a great man and a holy man. I offer my most sincere condolences to all the followers of the Vietnamese Buddhist faith. I say to Thich Phuoc Hue's successor, Thich Phuoc Tan, that I will certainly be there at the temple whenever my assistance is needed, as is known by Thich Phuoc Dat, the manager of the Phuoc Hue temple. No speech can properly sum up the contributions that the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue has made. He will no doubt be remembered as an extraordinary man who has left an extraordinary legacy to his community and to the wider Australian community. In closing, I particularly thank Tanya Huynh and her family for all their efforts in the last 12 months to bring me into broader contact with the Vietnamese Buddhist community of south-west Sydney.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CRAIG KELLY</name>
    <name.id>99931</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise tonight to support the motion moved by the member for Berowra, that this House expresses its deep regret at the death on 28 January 2012 of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue OAM, the spiritual leader of the Thich Phuoc Hue Buddhist monastery and the leader of the Vietnamese Buddhist community in Australia. This House should also place on record its appreciation of his long and meritorious public service and tender its profound sympathy to the Vietnamese Buddhist community in their bereavement.</para>
<para>The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue's is an inspiring story of his challenges and achievements in war-torn Vietnam and then in peacetime Australia. Born Tran Van Canh in 1922 in the small farming village of My Thuy in Gia Dinh province near Saigon in what was then French Indochina, he would become one of the most influential Buddhist leaders, not just in Australia but internationally. The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue learnt about Buddhism at a local temple and at the age of 13 he began his education and training. By 16 he had become a novice priest and by 20 he was ordained. His talents were spotted in the early 1960s and he was taken to Saigon to join a leadership group of the national Buddhist clergy. He became a commissioner on the executive committee of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam. However, following the fall of Saigon, when the South Vietnamese army surrendered on 30 April 1975, the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam was threatened and later banned by the communist authorities. In 1979 he decided to leave his homeland due to religious oppression by the communists and ended up as a refugee in a Hong Kong camp.</para>
<para>We take religious freedom for granted in Australia and we should note that the Socialist Republic of Vietnam remains a one-party state, where religious leaders who protest at the regime's control of religions are arrested and imprisoned. The current head of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam has been jailed several times over the last 25 years; and today remains under house arrest.</para>
<para>Back in Australia, the Most Venerable arrived in 1980 from Hong Kong and became the first Vietnamese resident monk in Australia. He aspired to rebuild Vietnamese Buddhism in Australia, not only to serve the religious needs of the Vietnamese Australian believers, but also to contribute to our multicultural society. This was a consistent theme in the life of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue. He had an innate ability to draw together people from different backgrounds and cultures, promoting harmony and social cohesiveness. Undoubtedly this is why he found his second home in Australia. In April 1981 he was elected the first president of the Vietnamese Buddhist Federation at the inaugural Buddhist conference in Sydney. In 1987 he was re-elected president of the newly restructured national organisation known as the United Vietnamese Buddhist Congregation in Australia and New Zealand. He was the congregation's longest serving president until his resignation in 2008 because of ill health.</para>
<para>Internationally he was a high-ranking member and elder of the World Sangha Council and the World Fellowship of Buddhists. Through his drive and persistence, he built, or was instrumental in the building of, Vietnamese temples in Sydney, Melbourne, other capital cities of Australia, and in New Zealand. He was the founding abbot of the Phuoc Hue monastery in Sydney, which has become the central focal point for the Vietnamese Buddhist community in Australia and is a place for reflection, worship and contemplation. The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was awarded a medal of the Order of Australia on Australia Day 1995. He passed away peacefully on Saturday, 28 January 2012 in Sydney. The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was a strong advocate for peace, social harmony and inclusiveness. His achievements are evidenced by the success of the Vietnamese community in Australia, despite their difficult and challenging beginnings. The late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue OAM will be remembered for his many years of dedicated service to the local community and his outstanding achievements, which were gained through his devotion, intellectual energy and wisdom. He has left an outstanding example of selflessness which was admired by both the Buddhist community and the general community at large and he has provided an invaluable example for people of all religions to learn from. I extend my deepest sympathies to the Australian Vietnamese Buddhist community at his passing.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DANBY</name>
    <name.id>WF6</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne Ports</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>First of all, I would like to pay tribute to the moving speeches by the members for Berowra and Fowler, amongst others, for the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue, probably the most influential Buddhist leader this country has seen. He came originally from Vietnam and had a tremendous influence on his new country of resettlement, Australia. Unlike other people who have contributed to this debate, I have almost no Vietnamese Australians in my electorate, but I have had an interest since university in the Indochinese refugee movement, as it was known then, and I supported Indochinese migrants and refugees coming to Australia in the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s.</para>
<para>Tran Van Canh, as he was then known, was born in a farming village in the My Thuy province, near Saigon, in 1921. He was ordained as a Buddhist priest at the age of 20, became a teacher of novices and laypeople and, in his early 40s, he was taken to Saigon to join the leadership of the national Buddhist clergy. That is an indication of the potential his religion saw in him.</para>
<para>The 1960s and 1970s, as we all know from the footage of those times, were troubling for Vietnam. Buddhism was under attack by the communist authorities. Thich Phuoc Hue had to leave his home, firstly as a refugee in Hong Kong and then as a sponsored migrant to Australia in 1980. He became the first resident monk of Vietnamese background in Australia. There was certainly a great need for him because, in the five years between 1976 and 1981, the Vietnamese population in Australia grew from 2,500 to more than 41,000. It is now 158,000. In 1980, he opened his first Buddhist prayer hall in Fairfield. This grew into what has been described as the Phuoc Hue Temple in Wetherill Park. He did a whole number of things to educate his community about Buddhism in Australia, which I will go through in more detail.</para>
<para>I wanted to particularly focus on something I find absolutely fascinating about what has happened in Vietnam since the fall of Saigon in contrast to here in Australia amongst Vietnamese people. The 2006 census in Australia indicated that 59 per cent of Australian residents born in Vietnam were Buddhist and 26 per cent were Christian. This compares with only nine per cent of people living in Vietnam identifying as Buddhist. What that indicates to me is that the life mission of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was very successful and that the Vietnamese people in Australia had access to their own religion and because of his great intellectual and religious contribution they were able to express their own religion, which, as we know, including great leaders of Buddhism, is suppressed in Vietnam.</para>
<para>The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was an internationally respected dharma master and one of the few Australians to be mentioned in <inline font-style="italic">The Seeker's Glossary of </inline><inline font-style="italic">Buddhism</inline>. His obituary in the <inline font-style="italic">Sydney Morning Herald</inline> was fittingly titled 'Leader advocated social harmony'. His memory lives through the multicultural and interfaith connections he sought so assiduously and which have been spoken about so knowledgeably by the previous speakers.</para>
<para>The Buddhist temple has many functions—a shelter for society, a meeting place for people of goodwill and a spiritual refuge. In Vietnam and in so many other Asian countries—and now here in many places in Australia—the temple stresses the faith not only as the path to enlightenment but as the core of the Buddhist people's spiritual and cultural life. Vietnamese Australians have contributed so much to Australia, and the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was essential in shaping those contributions. He reminds me very much of the legendary rabbi of the postwar generation Rabbi Chaim Gutnik, who revived belief in the Jewish refugees who came to Australia in their own background and faith. I think that Australia was a better place for him and his activities—religious, cultural and interfaith. We thank him and we will miss him.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MATHESON</name>
    <name.id>M2V</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is with great sadness that I rise to speak tonight to support the father of the House, the member for Berowra, the Hon. Philip Ruddock, in his motion to celebrate the life of the late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue OAM, who passed away on 28 January 2012. His passing represents a great loss not just to the Vietnamese Buddhist community but to the Australian nation as a whole. The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue's legacy will live on through his many achievements. He will be warmly remembered by the Vietnamese community as one of the pioneers of Vietnamese Buddhism in Australia.</para>
<para>The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue had a long and distinguished career as an educator and spiritual leader both here in Australia and in his homeland, Vietnam. In Vietnam, he was a highly respected Buddhist leader, holding many important positions, including Director of Studies at the Buddhist Studies Institute and Secretary of the Southern Vietnam Delegation to the National Conference of the Vietnamese Sangha. The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue also held influential positions within the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam, including Commissioner for Sangha Affairs. The UBCV was later banned by the Vietnamese communist government.</para>
<para>After leaving communist rule in Vietnam, the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue spent many years in a refugee camp in Hong Kong. He did not let his surroundings hinder his passion for education and his faith. By 1980, his migration to Australia was sponsored by a group of Vietnamese-Australian Buddhists. He became the first resident Vietnamese Buddhist monk in Australia. Our nation owes a debt of gratitude to this group. Few would have imagined the great work that the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue would achieve in his lifetime. In Australia, the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue transformed the Vietnamese Buddhist community, uniting them with a common vision of rebuilding Vietnamese Buddhism in Australia and promoting peace and social harmony.</para>
<para>Before his prestigious career in Australia as one of the nation's most influential Buddhist leaders, the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue faced many trials and tribulations, meeting each one with a keen and determined mind and a positive heart. It is a lesson that our communities benefit from and a lesson that I hope we will never forget. We should all follow the example set by the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue and see each challenge before us as an opportunity to learn, to develop our spirit and mind and to reach out to those around us. The late Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue had a profound impact on the Buddhist communities in Western Sydney and across Australia. He was a strong advocate for peace, social harmony and inclusiveness and was the spiritual leader of the Phuoc Hue Buddhist Temple in Wetherill Park, which bears his name. He was the driving force behind this beautiful temple, which was completed in 1991. He had a strong vision to rebuild Vietnamese Buddhism in Australia, not just for the benefit of the Vietnamese community but to contribute to multiculturalism in Australia. The spread of Buddhism has also touched my electorate of Macarthur with the much visited Da Bao Monastery in Wedderburn, just south of Campbelltown. This monastery provides the Buddhist community in Macarthur with a beautiful place of worship and meditation and hosts a number of festivities and celebrations throughout the year.</para>
<para>The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue's vision of rebuilding was not limited to the many beautiful temples and monasteries we see across our electorates today. He was also firmly committed to rebuilding the lives of the many Vietnamese refugees who came to Australia seeking refuge from the war that ravaged their homeland. He helped them make a new life for themselves and helped to build the Vietnamese community into what it is today—a respected, peaceful, productive, and vibrant part of the Australian social fabric. As the first president of the United Vietnamese Buddhist Congregation in Australia and New Zealand, the UVBC, he had a long and enviable list of accomplishments, both in Australia and internationally. Some of these include the selection by His Royal Highness Prince Charles of Phuoc Hue Temple as a neutral place to hold discussions with Australia's religious leaders from the Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu and Buddhist faiths in 1994. In 1995, the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia in recognition of his contributions to the Vietnamese Buddhist community.</para>
<para>On an international scale, the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was a high-ranking member and elder of the World Buddhist Sangha Council. In 2001, he led the organising committee for the First Executive Conference of the Seventh World Buddhist Sangha Council and Congress as well as for the Third World General Conference of the World Buddhist Sangha Council Youth Committee in Sydney. He was also a strong advocate for international peace and cooperation. In his capacity as President of the Buddhist Federation of Australia, he addressed the first international Dialogue on Interfaith Cooperation in 2004 with a strong message of peace and cooperation between nations and people of different faiths.</para>
<para>The Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was a humble and honourable man. He achieved many great works in his lifetime and touched hundreds and thousands of lives. Although he is no longer with us, his memory and his legacy will burn brightly for generations to come. It is an honour and a privilege to be here today with the father of the House to celebrate the life of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue OAM.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAURIE FERGUSON</name>
    <name.id>8T4</name.id>
    <electorate>Werriwa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the opportunity to speak in support of this motion by the member for Berowra concerning the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue OAM. I associate myself not only with the former words of profound sympathy to the community and deep regret at his passing but also with the theme that went through the contribution of the member for Berowra. Here in the national parliament of Australia we are celebrating the life of a person who was born in 1921 in a village near Saigon, who fled his country, who was a refugee in Hong Kong in 1979 and who was then sponsored into this country to become the first resident monk of Vietnamese background in Australia. We are celebrating his contribution to this country, what he accomplished and the fact that this can happen in Australia.</para>
<para>At the age of 13 he renounced the life of other people, becoming ordained as priest seven years later. Along the road he built up an organisation, a series of institutions that were so important to the community. It is interesting to note that, when he referred to comparisons between Vietnam and Australia, I thought the member for Melbourne Ports was going to go on a different theme. In the 1980s in New South Wales a large amount of excess land was owned by the Department of Main Roads, the Water Board, the railway department et cetera. In that day and age state governments actually contributed this land to pioneering ethnic communities that did not have property or institutions and did not have a way to obtain such properties. That land, like other land in that region, was donated to the Buddhist faith, just as around the corner, also on donated land, is an mosque owned by the Turkish community. It is a reality of this country that we can celebrate the long and distinguished life of a person who not only came from another country and was able to help meet the spiritual needs of his fellows in this country but, with government assistance, could form institutions that were so crucial to them.</para>
<para>It has been remarked upon and it is worth noting that, from 2,400 people in 1976, the number of Vietnamese speakers in this country has grown to 174,000. Back then, of course, it was crucial that they had a monk who could give them counselling and leadership. As others have noted, he played a wider role. It is no accident that Prince Charles went to the Phuoc Hue Temple and rang the bell on a visit that encompassed not only the Buddhist community but other religions. That was typical of the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue's contribution in this country. It is also not surprising that the Dalai Lama visited the temple twice. It is also worth noting that his efforts went not only to the temple at Wetherill Park but to premises in Sunshine and that he played an instrumental role in establishing a variety of organisations in this country, including the Vietnam Buddhist Association of Australia and New Zealand and the Buddhist Church of Vietnam Reunification Australia-New Zealand, and a range of school and religious buildings in Vietnam.</para>
<para>Last Friday, the member for Berowra and I were present at a hearing of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade into the question of human rights. It is no accident that the Unified Buddhist Congregation, of which the Most Venerable Thich Phuoc Hue was a member, was there giving evidence about religious freedom in Vietnam. Quang Luu, who was mentioned by the member for Berowra, was there in another capacity.</para>
<para>We are celebrating not only the individual and the leadership he provided the community but the fact that in this country people with this kind of integrity and ability are there providing evidence before committees in this country and making sure that we as a country learn more about other societies and are aware of what is happening. I take great pleasure in being part of this motion by the member for Berowra.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>1864</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>DonateLife Week 2012</title>
          <page.no>1864</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VASTA</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise tonight to speak on the important matter of organ and tissue donation in Australia. Last week Australians celebrated DonateLife Week 2012. The awareness campaign's sole purpose is to raise the profile of organ and tissue donation in the community, and that is why I rise tonight—to do my part in promoting this very worthy cause.</para>
<para>Sadly, Australia's donation rates still lag behind the majority of developed countries, ranked only 24th globally in 2010 by the Council of Europe. While any increase in the rate of organ donation in Australia is welcome news, the fact remains that Australia's donation rate is still less than half that of leading countries, like Spain. There are only 14.9 organ donors each year for every million people living in Australia. Compare this with Spain, where the rate is 35 per million. We can and must do better—lives literally depend on it. That is why today organ and tissue donation is a vital conversation that Australians need to have with their loved ones and friends.</para>
<para>The fact is that in Australia organ and tissue donation cannot not occur without the direct consent of family members. This is still the case when the individual in question has registered with the Australian Organ Donor Registry. Many of those on organ transplant waiting lists face the prospect of dying unless they are able to receive a donated organ in time. As at 4 January 2012, there were 1,628 people on organ transplant lists in Australia. It is a sad but nonetheless true fact that the number of organ donations in Australia cannot currently meet the demand for organs. Tragically, more than one Australian dies every week waiting for an organ transplant. The fact is that these lives can be saved—each person who becomes a donor can significantly improve the quality of life or indeed save the life of up to 10 people. The theme of DonateLife Week is very appropriately 'discover, decide and discuss', and it is imperative for Australians to embrace these ideas as we work together to increase donation rates.</para>
<para>In my first term I was very pleased to be a part of the Howard government, which commissioned the National Clinical Taskforce on Organ and Tissue Donation in order to seek evidence based advice on ways to improve the rate of organ, eye and tissue donation for transplantation in Australia. In its final report, the task force attributed Australia's inability to increase organ donation to a number of factors, chief of which was the fragmented nature of the organ donation and transplantation sector. As such, the task force recommended the establishment of a national coordination and transplantation authority. When these recommendations were finally acted on, the Australian Organ and Tissue Donation and Transplantation Authority was set up in 2009 under the Rudd government's $151 million reform—a world's best practice approach to organ and tissue donation for transplantation—but it has had somewhat of a lethargic start at meeting its self-imposed targets, with donation regrettably failing to rise significantly. One of the suggested reasons for our lower than expected organ donation rates is a family's lack of awareness of their loved ones' wishes. Our shadow parliamentary secretary for primary health care, Dr Andrew Southcott, has agreed with me that the most common reason cited by families when declining to donate a relative's organs is that they did not know what their wishes were. I would encourage all Australians to have the organ donation discussion with their family and loved ones.</para>
<para>The coalition has always been in favour of improving Australia's organ donation rates, but we need to ensure that this is done in the most efficient and effective way possible. Some people might have conditions that prevent them from becoming an organ donor, but almost everyone can be a tissue donor and it is never too late to sign up. With Australians 10 times more likely to require an organ or tissue transplant than to become a donor, it is in all of our interests to sign up and to sign up now.</para>
<para>In conclusion, I leave you with something I once read on a bumper sticker while waiting in traffic: 'Don't take your organs with you when you go—heaven knows we need them here.'</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Colvin, Ms Marie</title>
          <page.no>1865</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr LEIGH</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week renowned war correspondent Marie Colvin was killed in the Syrian city of Homs. She was killed covering the attacks of the Assad regime on its own people. Throughout her career, Marie Colvin had covered conflicts in the Balkans, Chechnya and Zimbabwe. She had covered the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya. In 2001, covering the conflict between government forces and the rebel Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, Marie Colvin was struck by shrapnel and lost her left eye. She wore a black eye patch, which became her trademark. After the loss of her eye she wrote about why she covered wars, putting herself in danger. She said that it is important to tell people what is really happening and about humanity in extremes, pushed to the unendurable. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">My job is to bear witness. I have never been interested in knowing what make of plane had just bombed a village or whether the artillery that fired at it was 120 mm or 155 mm.</para></quote>
<para>In November 2010 she said at a service for war journalists:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Covering a war means going to places torn by chaos, destruction, and death, and trying to bear witness. It means trying to find the truth in a sandstorm of propaganda when armies, tribes or terrorists clash. And yes, it means taking risks, not just for yourself but often for the people who work closely with you.</para></quote>
<para>…   …   …</para>
<quote><para class="block">… We always have to ask ourselves whether the level of risk is worth the story. What is bravery, and what is bravado?</para></quote>
<para>In 1999 in East Timor Marie Colvin was credited with saving the lives of hundreds of women and children when she stayed in a UN compound in Dili besieged by Indonesian backed forces. Refusing to leave, reporting their plight almost hourly to the world, she managed to secure the safety of the East Timorese and was publicly rewarded when they were evacuated safely four days later. Colleague and <inline font-style="italic">Guardian</inline> journalist Roy Greenslade said, 'She was the bravest woman I have ever known.' Anthony Loyd of the <inline font-style="italic">T</inline><inline font-style="italic">imes, </inline>reflecting on the kind of person Marie Colvin was, wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Driven? Certainly. Eccentric? Very. But conceited? Never. Her humility made her a rare bird in an aviary renowned for its preening.</para></quote>
<para>He wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">On her death, she was the undisputed standard-bearer of our values, a woman whose courage and endeavour singularly advanced the capability of others by providing the benchmark for what we should aspire to.</para></quote>
<para>Her humour survived intact. Before leaving for Sri Lanka two years ago she said to him:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If you see a bit of eye lying in the jungle, pick it up. It could be mine!</para></quote>
<para>In response to an erroneous comment on a website congratulating her for returning from Homs safely she wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I think reports of my survival may be exaggerated.</para></quote>
<para>One of Marie Colvin's last correspondent reports was this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In Baba Amr. Sickening, cannot understand how the world can stand by … Watched a baby die today. Shrapnel, doctors could do nothing. His little tummy just heaved and heaved until he stopped. Feeling helpless … Will keep trying to get out the information</para></quote>
<para>I spoke in the adjournment debate last June on the issue of Syria. The member for North Sydney spoke in the same debate. I do not think either of us expected we would be here this year still speaking about the bloodshed in Syria. More than 5,000 people have now lost their lives. About 18,000 are estimated to be still held in arbitrary detention. Despite the fact that the UN General Assembly has overwhelmingly supported a resolution on the situation in Syria, such a resolution has been blocked in the Security Council. Those states who oppose the resolution—Russia and China—now have a responsibility to make plain what their alternative plans are for ending the bloodshed in Homs, Hama, Damascus and across Syria.</para>
<para>Mr Assad has lost all legitimacy. It is critical that we support the Arab League plan, that we galvanise and coordinate international support for the people of Syria and that we strengthen the voice of the international community for an end to the bloodshed. Australia strongly supports the efforts of the Arab League. We have imposed financial sanctions designed to hold those who have engaged in human rights abuses accountable. We now urge the UN Security Council to support the people of Syria. This cannot go on. We must have a global effort to get rid of the Assad regime, which lost all legitimacy when it began deploying arms against its own people and which now must go.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Dairy Industry</title>
          <page.no>1866</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MARINO</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It appears that the market is failing Western Australian dairy farmers. Last week, 150,000 litres of milk was trucked into the state from South Australia. As a dairy farmer, I know that WA dairy farmers are certainly not being offered South Australian prices plus the cost of cartage for their milk. And now WA consumers face the very real prospect of running out of fresh milk as a result of the supermarket price wars and the pressure their market share places on milk manufacturers and producers. In fact, extreme market pressure is being applied to manufacturers and producers through a combination of low prices and house brand labels. Coles and Woolworths are laughing all the way to the bank as they increase their control and absolute dominance over total food sales in Australia!</para>
<para>I am also told that to meet supermarket contracts in South Australia, milk is being trucked—you want to call it leapfrogged—from Victoria. I have got no doubt that processors are taking money out of their margins to pay the cartage to meet their supermarket contracts at a direct cost to the ultimate price takers, the dairy farmers who produce fresh milk, perhaps the most perishable product in the agricultural sector—a supply chain vulnerability totally overlooked by the ACCC and this Labor government. There has been no response to the Economics References Committee <inline font-style="italic">Milking for all it is worth</inline> report that looked at matters in the dairy industry. I wonder whether Coles and Woolworths will pay more for milk refrigeration and the increased cost of diesel—trucking the milk from state to state—when the carbon tax hits. I wonder if there will be extra in those contracts. This is an email I received from dairy industry service provider Dean Maughan:</para>
<quote><para class="block">WA consumers will be running out of fresh milk. Hard working and highly efficient farmers can't pay their bills and are as disheartened as I have seen them.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The export of WA heifers is an all time high as farmers sell heifers to pay basic bills. The solution to our future milk supply is being sold to China.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Please do not believe that the importation of milk in WA is a short term, one off thing. If it is happening now, it will be much worse next year and for a longer period of time. This is because the livestock have been and continue to be sold to pay basic bills. Without more livestock, there will not be more milk</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Farmers are not feeding their cows correctly now because of a lack of money. Keep in mind that the demand for fresh milk in WA is growing due to population increase at this time of declining supply.</para></quote>
<para>The actual supply of milk is down by 16 million litres in seven months in WA. Do not forget that milk is an essential food, particularly for babies and children. As Australians, we need a geographically diverse dairy industry in this country—a country of climatic extremes with the seven-plus years of drought in Victoria, followed by severe floods. A geographically diverse dairy industry manages these risks to fresh milk production.</para>
<para>Approximately 96 per cent of the Western Australian dairy industry is located in the south-west region of WA—the majority are in my electorate. Our farmers, I am proud to say, are amongst the world's most efficient producers of high quality milk. However, many Australian dairy farmers are losing money and many others are making the equivalent of the dole. Yet, we are expecting people to work under these conditions and provide us with an essential food that is the best quality in the world. One couple wrote to me and said, in part:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If you have any further doubts about the debilitating financial position we are currently experiencing as a direct result of farm gate milk prices, please feel free to contact our local Commonwealth bank manager who will be happy to give you a full indication of the financial pressures of local dairy farmers.</para></quote>
<para>They concluded by saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I thank you for your time and trust that this matter will no longer be ignored, as dairy farmers are relying on your assistance to bring about some drastic changes to the industry so we can continue to provide fresh local milk to Western Australian families.</para></quote>
<para>How is the market failing milk producers? Currently there is a shortage and milk processors in WA cannot get enough fresh milk to meet their contract quotas. Basic economics acknowledges that if the free market was working properly this should mean a price rise to producers to stimulate growth in production. Has this occurred? No.</para>
<para>The price being offered to producers for their milk is not sufficient to drive increased production. It is not sufficient to raise capital and to grow earnings because it is not sufficient to grow milk volumes. Western Australian milk processors are not raising the price they pay farmers to stimulate milk production as the free market should dictate. Instead, they have been trucking in milk from the eastern states. This is because the supermarket duopoly in Australia dictates the price of milk to processors, who are left with no capacity to pay Australian dairy farmers adequately for their product. This is driving good farmers out of the industry. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tasmania: Tourism</title>
          <page.no>1867</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LYONS</name>
    <name.id>M38</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in the House today to speak on my vision for tourism in my electorate of Bass and the opportunities of the region. Tasmania is generally thought of as an eco-destination, but I see it as much more than that. Launceston was established in 1806 by free settlers. The area has fine Victorian buildings from the 1870s and 1880s and elegant contemporary architecture. We have many unique attractions, such as the Cataract Gorge, a natural wonder only a 15-minute walk from the city. There is also the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, the Inveresk precinct. The James Boag and Son brewery is just a block away from the CBD and a short drive out of the city you can glide through the treetops at Hollybank, one of Tasmania's newest tourism ventures.</para>
<para>Cool climate wines and fine dining are important fixtures of the Northern Tasmania experience and Launceston is the perfect base from which to explore the surrounding region. We are becoming a food bowl, with great local produce and keen innovators looking for ways to grow and expand their businesses. The Gillard Labor government has encouraged this through generous funding for irrigation projects around the state in conjunction with the state government. I am pleased to note that in February Stillwater restaurant in Launceston was voted by <inline font-style="italic">Australian Traveller</inline> as one of the top five destination restaurants in Australia. Me Wah in Launceston is also well renowned, winning many prestigious state and national awards.</para>
<para>Travelling around the region, the Tamar River flows north from Launceston to George Town with lavender plantations—which I visited just last week with the minister for agriculture, Senator Ludwig, the member for Braddon and the member for Lyons—vineyards, berry farms and orchards available to the public. I encourage visitors to do a Tamar River cruise to see the area by water. North-east of Launceston is Scottsdale, with its Forestry EcoCentre and art galleries.</para>
<para>I also recommend visitors travel to Bridport for fishing and the world-class golf. If you have not been to Barnbougle Dunes or Lost Farm you have not been to the best courses in Australia. When it comes to sporting events, we are home of the Tassie Hawks, a footy team that play at my club's old ground, Aurora Stadium. They are a great boost to our economy. Many tourists also visit for the Targa Tasmania event, which is a tarmac rally with competitive stages on closed roads for the best touring, sports and GT cars in the world. Launceston plays host to Targa Tasmania and this year will be the base for the first five nights.</para>
<para>Festivale took place during February. This is one of the premier food and wine events in Australia. It is a celebration of the great produce and arts that Tasmania creates. The organisers do a fantastic job, and I offer them my best wishes for the future of the event. The Tasmanian Breath of Fresh Air Film Festival, directed by Owen Tilbury, is also a standout attraction. The first Tasmanian Breath of Fresh Air Film Festival was held in 2010, an initiative of the Launceston Film Society, Australia's largest film society.</para>
<para>Cataract Gorge is a must for tourists. Here you will find walking and hiking trails, the world's longest single span chairlift, a swimming pool, restaurants, kiosks, peacocks and wildlife in the gardens, a suspension bridge, an interpretation centre and lookouts with spectacular views. Another great place to visit is the Tin Centre at Derby. The centre tells the story of tin and why it was of such vital importance not only to our region but to the world.</para>
<para>The Australian government TQUAL or tourism grants create another great incentive for tourism operators to invest in regional Australia. One such grant will help Velo Wines at Legana in the Tamar Valley construct a restaurant, further improving that facility. The Australian government is committed to maximising tourism's net economic contribution to Australia. There are truly magnificent places in Tasmania, places that will take your breath away. I encourage all mainlanders and people from overseas to look at the island down under for their next holiday and encourage entrepreneurs to invest in our region. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Regional Health Services</title>
          <page.no>1869</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SECKER</name>
    <name.id>848</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week I took part in a great regional health forum in Mount Gambier. It was hosted by my South Australian colleague Senator David Fawcett and coalition regional health spokesman Andrew Laming, the member for Bowman. It is great to see him here in the chamber. I am proud to say that I was the first Australian member of parliament to procure funding to help establish a doctors surgery in Meningie. That was some 11 or 12 years ago. We now have an Australia-wide program to upgrade doctors surgeries, which we did not 11 or 12 years ago.</para>
<para>Governments have widely accepted the need to make it easier for doctors to relocate to and practice in regional areas. The overwhelming theme during the Mount Gambier forum was the struggle by communities to meet the ever-growing demand for health services. This government, unfortunately, is doing nothing to help regional areas like Mount Gambier cope with the growing demand. Labor promised GP super clinics but the program has been plagued by problems, including construction delays and funding disputes as well as widespread criticism that it would damage existing local general practices. I have always supported helping existing practices to expand; I have supported extra funding for many clinics in Barker. Just last year in August, I added my support to the Keith and District Medical Centre in their application for funding for an after-hours service to provide Keith and surrounding districts with adequate after-hours care for patients.</para>
<para>In December I supported the Port Macdonnell community health service in its pursuit to upgrade the current consulting room, office/reception and toilets, and to improve the administration and operation of the service by constructing an extension to support additional general and specialised medical and health service providers to that facility and by constructing another secure extension to house the local pharmacy. Port Macdonnell is quite a small village, so it is very important that we can provide those services.</para>
<para>In May I added my support to the application by the Bridge Clinic to upgrade their emergency management and triage, ambulance undercover facility, mental health and chronic disease units, nurses stations and waiting room: all very important things for the local community. In May I also added my support to the Ferrers Medical Clinic in Mount Gambier to further develop their practice including additional consulting/treatment rooms, together with a conference/audio visual room, students room and library. I could go on, but I think the House gets the idea that I have always been an advocate for helping existing practices to expand their services. I have already had success in Meningie, Kingston and Naracoorte and Yankalilla, and certainly Barker hopes for those further upgrades that I have supported.</para>
<para>This government's fixation on centralisation of control to Adelaide and Canberra has led to growing bureaucratic inefficiencies in service delivery. I agree with Senator Fawcett and the member for Bowman when they state: 'Abolishing local hospital boards and regional divisions of general practice has not worked well in these communities at all.' As someone who has served on hospital boards twice in my life, for four years, I understand the absolute importance of keeping them, not only in regional Australia but also across the nation. That is coalition policy. I believe the people who know best how to run a hospital are those people who are directly involved, not a bureaucrat in Canberra. Often those serving on the hospital board are also those who are part of the community. Certainly in the smaller regional areas the board members are almost definitely people who have been involved in the community and the hospital for some time.</para>
<para>One just has to look at the Keith and District Hospital, a hospital I speak of frequently in this place. Its board is made up of extremely hard-working people who have other jobs but who devote a lot of time volunteering in the hospital and in their local communities. I must commend them on their efforts because, against all odds, the hospital still has its doors open. I cannot speak highly enough of local hospital boards and I have watched in anguish as this government has torn down that structure and favoured a big bureaucratic system. It does not work in regional areas.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Melbourne Ports Electorate</title>
          <page.no>1870</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DANBY</name>
    <name.id>WF6</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne Ports</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On Saturday night, despite all of the political events that were happening inside government, I had the pleasure of being the guest of honour at the 20th anniversary dinner of the Australian Institute of Polish Affairs at the beautiful Windsor Hotel in Melbourne. I would like to congratulate that wonderful organisation with its mission of introducing serious people from Poland to Australia, and Australians to Poles. The roles of a former president of the institute, Mr Eherenkreutz, and the head of SBS, Mr Zubrizki, are very well known to people here. If I could hear myself above the speakers across the other side of the aisle, I would also be able to recall that Professor Ruth Pearce, the Australian Ambassador to Poland, and Andrzej Jaroszynski, the very cosmopolitan Ambassador of the Republic of Poland to Australia, were also present, as was the president, my friend Professor Jan Pakulski, and very dear personal friends Adam and Margaret Warzel.</para>
<para>I have been involved with the Polish community for more than 20 years. As my friend Adam Warzel recounted, we were first involved in a concert to support a Solidarity bard, Jacek Kaczmarski, in Melbourne 26 years ago. Later, I offered the Polish community help with the visit of the great Polish journalist Leopold Unger. When I looked at the wonderful publication by the Australian Institute of Polish Affairs celebrating its 20 years, I was amazed at the number of leading Poles who had been to Australia and at the number of events that I had attended.</para>
<para>The great journalist Jan Nowak, the famous Polish activist Adam Michnik, and of course that great emissary and great professor Jan Karski, who had visited the ghettos and death camps in Poland and who met all of the wartime leaders—President Roosevelt, the American Supreme Court Judge Felix Frankfurter, even the British foreign secretary—and had tried, to his great detriment, to convey what was happening inside Europe, but he was not able to convince them. Jan Karski is one of the greatest speakers I have ever heard. I will never forget the night he addressed a local hall in Elsternwick in Melbourne. The Australian Institute of Polish Affairs has brought to Australia people like Professor Timothy Garton Ash; prime ministers and foreign ministers of Poland; Professor Michael Heller, the Templeton prize winner; and Adam Rotfeld, the former Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs. The work that the institute does is to its great credit.</para>
<para>Mr Speaker, I have a long-standing interest in Poland, as you may know, because my father was born in Poland in what the Germans call Poznan, the town of Torun, the spa town in what is now Poland. It was a great honour to be at the dinner given by the Australian Institute of Polish Affairs, which has done so much to encourage Polish-Australian relations. I think we do not reciprocate this enough on the Australian side. The Polish economy is such a great success and is one of the few economies in the world that resisted the global financial crisis. Only Australia, South Korea, Poland and Israel have officially grown since the GFC. I know that in some of the less-informed sectors in Australia the archaic perception of Eastern European Poland has not caught up with the reality of the fast-growing dynamic economy that is Poland. On Friday, unfortunately at a hearing of the foreign affairs committee, we heard another rather pathetic response by a leading banker in Australia who said that he did not know anything about Poland's economic dynamism and did not want to know.</para>
<para>A miraculous political and economic transformation has taken place in Poland since the fall of communism. It is no longer East-European in its national outlook. It is the central European hub of the EU. Unlike its Soviet bloc neighbours, Poland has taken incredible reforms to liberalise its economy. As we now know from recent events, there has been no banking collapse in Poland. They built an independent currency and had constitutional debt limits. Poland is the only EU member that has avoided recession and, unlike the Greeks, I am sure that the Poles are very glad that they stuck with the zloty.</para>
<para>Poland has, of course, at its head the wonderful foreign minister, Radek Sikorski, and I congratulate the Institute of Polish Affairs on trying to reach out to Australia, something that unfortunately this country and this government, and even this foreign ministry, the Department of Foreign Affairs, does not do enough to recognise. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gold Coast Compound, Lighthouse Calvary Care</title>
          <page.no>1871</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>22:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I take this opportunity today to recognise the efforts of two wonderful organisations within my electorate that I have the honour to visit on a regular basis. The first provides a safe and fun environment for our local youth, whilst the other supports needy families, providing a trolley full of groceries for just $20.</para>
<para>Upper Coomera is one of the fastest-growing areas in my electorate and also in the Gold Coast. It amazes me every time to go down there to see the new houses, the new developments, the new centres and all the building activity and development going on in that area. This area attracts a lot of families and, whilst developers and the local council do their best to design playgrounds, parks and other facilities, this area generally lacks the sporting facilities that are required for the numerous young people in our community. As we all know, keeping our young people active is of critical importance as boredom can lead to antisocial behaviour which may lead to incidence of vandalism or graffiti.</para>
<para>The Gold Coast Compound is an indoor recreation facility for skateboarders, scooter riders and BMX riders. It also caters for musicians, artists and for school excursions for kids interested in those things. The compound provides a community facility in which to perform, develop and enhance talents and skills in order to help young people achieve their goals and dreams. Additionally, GC Compound, as it is more affectionately known, provides a safe, controlled environment with positive role models for young kids.</para>
<para>I recently had the privilege to attend the GC Compound Challenge 2012 scooter event and was able to donate a trophy for the best and fairest rider on the evening. It was a great experience being there to witness all the hard work and determination of all those young competitors, and some of the tricks that they were able to do with scooters were truly mind-boggling. I would like to formally acknowledge the efforts of Tom Herzog, the Director of GC Compound, for his efforts and I look forward to providing my continued support to the GC Compound for the fabulous work they do in the Upper Coomera community, but also in the broader community as people from far afield travel down there to use their facilities.</para>
<para>The second organisation I wish to recognise tonight is Lighthouse Calvary Care. Some of our members here may remember a story which broke on national television late last year on the Channel 7 <inline font-style="italic">Sunrise</inline> program where a Logan food bank was robbed and vandalised. At the time Lighthouse Calvary Care had been stockpiling food and gifts ahead of one of their biggest community events in the area, the Lang Christmas Dinner, which is put on for more than 200 local needy families who, without the support and invitation to such an event, would have a much poorer Christmas experience. Thankfully the response to the story on the Channel 7 <inline font-style="italic">Sunrise</inline> program from the members of the wider community was overwhelming. Ron and Debbie Hill, who run Lighthouse Calvary Care, were astounded at the generosity of the community. Whilst the robbery interrupted their planning, the dinner was a huge success. Ron and Debbie Hill, the founders of Lighthouse Calvary Care, are dedicated to helping families in need. They have been working in the local area for nine years to support those struggling emotionally, socially and financially.</para>
<para>What originally started out handing out bread donated by local bakeries on a Saturday morning has resulted in a registered charity which provides over 1,500 trolleys of groceries every week at the cost of only $20.00. Some weekends, I head down to their headquarters and assist with the packing of trolleys, and each weekend there are more people coming from far and wide in desperate need of this service. I am very thankful for the wonderful work that Ron, Debbie, their staff and volunteers at Lighthouse Calvary Care do supporting the people in our community.</para>
<para>I have made it my business to support community organisations like the GC Compound and Lighthouse Calvary Care as they are pillars of strength in our local community and are part of the fabric of the Forde community that makes it such a great place to live, a place where you can experience a true sense of what community spirit is all about. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fowler Electorate: Vietnamese and Chinese New Year</title>
          <page.no>1872</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>22:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAYES</name>
    <name.id>ECV</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is well believed that multiculturalism is one of Australia's greatest strengths. My electorate of Fowler is the most multicultural electorate in the whole of Australia and has thus given me the opportunity this year to enjoy more than one new year celebration. This year 23 January saw the celebration of the Chinese and Vietnamese New Year, the Year of the Dragon. Since more than 30 per cent of my electorate speak either Vietnamese or Chinese at home, you can imagine the size of the new year festivities in my area. The celebrations began in Cabramatta with the Lunar New Year Festival held over 14 and 15 January and ending at the beginning of February.</para>
<para>As a new member I wanted to do more than just read about the customs and traditions so I began my actions over the following days to immerse myself in the Asian culture. As I did last year, I visited 10 temples with Vietnamese and Chinese people as it is believed that this brings prosperity. I also attended mass with Father Paul Van Chi and Vietnamese Catholics at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Catholic Church. They gave me the opportunity to speak on that occasion on human rights.</para>
<para>On Saturday, 29 January, I had the pleasure of attending and representing the Prime Minister at the Vietnamese Community of Australia New South Wales chapter's opening ceremony at the annual Tet festival. My congratulations go to President Mr Thanh Nguyen as well as Internal Vice-President Dr Tien Nguyen and External Vice-President Mr Toan Nguyen on the fantastic festival showcasing Vietnamese traditions and culture. I also took three of my grandchildren to the Tet festival. They were quite excited to be taken there wearing traditional Vietnamese ao dai outfits for girls and boys which my wife had recently bought for them in Cabramatta.</para>
<para>I strongly believe the success of the event was due to the hard work of the VCA committee—who, I might add, are all volunteers. I congratulate Mr Thanh Nguyen on his re-election and look forward to continuing to work with him to serve our community in the south-west of Sydney. I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate Dr Tien Nguyen, a local doctor who practises in Cabramatta, as he has been chosen as a People of Australia Ambassador. Dr Tien's service to the community over the past couple of decades has been extraordinary.</para>
<para>During the opening ceremony for the Tet festival I spoke about a famous Vietnamese saying which a dear friend of mine, Dr Lieu Vinh Binh, had told me. The saying can be translated loosely as, 'When you eat the fruit you should have regard for those who planted the tree.' I reflected on the contribution the Vietnamese community have made over the past 36 years since the fall of Saigon. For a fairly newly arrived community, I am impressed with their achievement and humbled by their contributions. It was only 12 months ago that the Vietnamese community came together to raise funds for the Queensland flood appeal. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were raised by my community of Vietnamese Australians in the span of a couple of weeks.</para>
<para>Over the following few weeks I also had the pleasure of attending various Chinese New Year festivals. One was the Australian Chinese Teo-Chew Association. I extend my thanks to Chairman Frank Chou OAM as well as to the President and executive management committee member Hung Lee for their great work not only in what they do for the association but in what they do for the community in general.</para>
<para>I believe that the Vietnamese and Chinese New Year festivals are a time when they are able to showcase their traditions and their culture in a way that augments the diversity of our country. These festivals indicate those things that we hold dear. I feel extremely fortunate to be able to represent such a multicultural community in this parliament. I thank all the leaders for their attention to tolerance, inclusion and understanding as well as their commitment to sharing their culture and traditions with the broader community. In closing, I would like to wish everyone in this Year of the Dragon every happiness, success and prosperity.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gilmore Electorate: Road Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>1874</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>22:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs GASH</name>
    <name.id>AK6</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The New South Wales government recently announced a combined funding grant of $300,000 to enable a study to be done on the route options for the continuation of the Main Road 92 project. Goulburn, Palerang, Shoalhaven, Upper Lachlan and Yass Valley councils have put $100,000 towards this study, while the New South Wales government will make up the rest. Stage 1 of the road was completed in 2008, but the upgrade terminates at Nerriga. Two options are on the table. Option A, which has always been the preferred option of the Shoalhaven City Council, has the road continuing on through Tarago and then on to the Federal Highway and out at Gunning. Option B has the road continuing along the existing Braidwood Road corridor, spilling out on the Kings Highway just west of Braidwood.</para>
<para>Shoalhaven council, a strong advocate for the road, recently applied for federal RDA funding to upgrade the bridge at the Oallan Ford. This crossing has to be upgraded to lend viability for the extension of roadworks along Main Road 92 that will enable it to carry heavy vehicles. Considerable effort was made to impress upon the minister how vital this road is for the economic wellbeing of the future of the Shoalhaven. Surely, if any case for a direct investment with real returns could be made, this was it. However, we were unsuccessful. Instead $1.67 million went to the adjoining Labor electorate for the Four Winds festival at Bermagui. No doubt the residents of Bermagui were rightly delighted, but I for one could not see how this investment represents a superior case to that put by the Shoalhaven.</para>
<para>It was the Howard government which recognised the value such a road link would deliver to energise the flagging economies of the South Coast, long neglected by successive Labor governments. Some of us here would well remember John Sharp, a former transport minister in the coalition government. We in the Shoalhaven will always be indebted to him for giving us the funding for this road. It was the Howard government that backed the call with hard cash and drove the project: $34 million from the government and $34 million finally from the state. The whole project would never have happened if the Shoalhaven City Council had not put $12 million on the table to start it. The fact of the matter is the Carr Labor government was a reluctant player and made no secret of the fact that it was more concerned with proliferating national parks. That it took 10 years to construct the road, even after funding was made available, with a cost overrun to the New South Wales government of some $15 million, stands as testimony to the charge that it dragged its feet.</para>
<para>Imagine my surprise when the road was finished and the official opening took place. Who arrived enthusiastically to grab the glory and the photo op when the road was finished? None other than the state Labor member for Kiama, whose seat was not even in the area where the road was built, and the current federal member for Eden-Monaro, who had only just been elected. The fact that I did not even get an invitation until this government was eventually embarrassed into extending me an invitation was not lost on the residents of Nerriga. They knew exactly how this road came about. So they took it upon themselves to have their own, unofficial opening at which I was the official dignitary together with the former Mayor of Shoalhaven, Councillor Greg Watson, a major player in Main Road 92. To say I was humbled by the experience would be an understatement.</para>
<para>I can confidently say that the final completion of Main Road 92 is one of our region's top priorities. This recent funding for a scoping study, generously provided, recognises the need to keep things moving. I am forever hopeful this federal government will put its money where its mouth is when it says it supports regional areas and join with the New South Wales government and stakeholder councils to see through to the end Main Road 92. If Labor is fair dinkum when it says it supports regional Australia then I call on every candidate who is putting up their hand for Labor preselection in Gilmore to promise unreservedly to make Main Road 92 their No. 1 priority if elected.</para>
<para>I also thank my state colleague Shelley Hancock, Speaker of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly, for her efforts in obtaining the state funding of $200,000. To have the 54-kilometre road finally sealed will be of enormous benefit to all regional councils.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Schools</title>
          <page.no>1875</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>22:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The American education reformer Horace Mann once said the public school 'is the greatest discovery ever made by man'. My electorate contains many large schools like Raceview, Silkstone and Brassall state schools, all of which received $3 million in the Building the Education Revolution. But in my electorate I am proud to have delivered unprecedented funding to the small rural schools in rural Ipswich and the Somerset. In these rural communities west and north-west of Ipswich these small schools were much neglected by the previous, coalition government. Flagpoles were what they thought the schools needed.</para>
<para>The heart of these communities is the rural school. It is a place not just for education but for friendship and fellowship. It is a place that connects people. It is a place that offers country kids the joy of learning and a window to the world. It provides an equality of opportunity that would not have happened but for the funding of good facilities in small country schools. With 64 schools in my electorate of Blair receiving approximately $107 million for state-of-the-art libraries, school halls, science and language centres, performing arts facilities, classrooms and special needs facilities, my electorate has really received a lot of assistance from this federal Labor government. And these facilities would not have existed but for this federal Labor government. In this Year of the Farmer I am particularly proud to have opened many new facilities in our much neglected small country schools.</para>
<para>Those opposite declare that they represent the interests of rural and regional Australia, but it took a federal Labor government to bring these small schools into the 21st century. Just in the last week I opened a new library that cost $250,000, a $50,000 outdoor learning area and other improvements at Prenzlau State School, a school established in 1894. This funding will serve this community and its 24 students well into the future. This is a school that has been serving the community for a very long time. It is a school where the P&C president, Mr Terry Herrmann, recounts that his family were among the first intake of students.</para>
<para>I also opened the Marburg State School's multipurpose hall and other improvements worth $300,000. This school has three times the enrolments that it once had—about 62 students. That is only a fairly recent increase. Like Prenzlau, it has a proud heritage, having been established in 1879. Its long history of educating rural students goes back to times when it developed a forest plot. The school planted 275 trees, proving these rural schools ahead of their time. They taught about agriculture and horticulture. Today they would be called carbon farmers. Last year we saw a number of historic schools open new facilities. Clarendon State School got what it calls the Clarendome. This small school has about 60 students and is in the lower part of the Somerset region. It has what I think is probably one of the best ovals and sports facilities you could ever see, funded by this federal Labor government. They greatly appreciate it because it has become the heart: other small country schools use their facilities to come together for sporting activities and the kids get the opportunity to play sport on a collective and team basis. The Patrick Estate State School is also an 86-year-old school, near Lowood, and it received $300,000 for an outdoor living area. The facility is fondly named the Fishy Shed, in honour of Shirley Fisher, who is a former student and was a teacher aide for 21 years. The facility services 51 students, double the number since last year. That shed was the basis from which the school was rebuilt after the devastation of the floods in January 2011. It is the same with the Harlin State School, where the new library is the place where the whole community meets. That 103-year-old school had 36 students last year and it now has 42.</para>
<para>I could go on and on about how this federal Labor government has made a difference in rural and regional Queensland. To the eternal shame of those opposite, they have opposed every last dollar and every last cent into these schools. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Flinders Electorate: Health Services</title>
          <page.no>1876</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>22:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to talk about the ongoing fight for better health services in the electorate of Flinders, in particular in the precincts of Hastings, Rosebud and the southern peninsula, and Phillip Island and the Bass Coast. We have made progress in all three areas in recent times, even though there have been some challenges and setbacks. Most recently, in the Hastings area, we have seen the town hit by the recent closure of the Hastings Medical Centre. The town as a consequence only has one clinic, known as the Hastings Clinic.</para>
<para>Against that background, what we have set out to do is to work firstly with Peninsula Health, which has purpose-built medical rooms at the Hastings Community Health Centre from which it currently operates paediatric and antenatal clinics. Peninsula Health is working towards securing GPs to operate from these medical rooms and we are hopeful of an announcement soon. I would respectfully say to the board of Peninsular Health: 'Let not the perfect to be the enemy of the good. Do not seek too high a rent which would prevent doctors coming in and, firstly, participating and, secondly, offering bulk-billing services.' If these rooms are vacant, it is far better to have somebody in what is currently a great but, tragically, empty facility with regard to the GP rooms.</para>
<para>The second thing that is being done in relation to Hastings is that Neale Burgess, the state member for Hastings, and I are already in discussions with the Crib Point Medical Centre and there is work afoot to try to attract those doctors to open a second facility, this time in Hastings. They have been part of a broad-ranging program in Tooradin, Baxter, Crib Point and soon in Rosebud. That group of doctors will have established clinics in all four towns, so a fifth clinic in Hastings would be a real breakthrough. In the same vein, the Crib Point Medical Centre itself currently has surplus capacity. So I urge Hastings residents to make use of the Crib Point Medical Centre as an interim measure while we look to advance the Hastings Community Health Centre or to set up an additional clinic in Hastings involving and associated with those who have set up the Tooradin, Baxter, Crib Point and soon-to-be Rosebud clinics.</para>
<para>This brings me to Rosebud. In Rosebud I am delighted that a new medical clinic, the Advantage Medical Centre, is about to open its doors. I will support any new clinic which comes to the area, and this is the latest. It is a tremendous boost for the town. It gives local residents greater choice and flexibility and, along with a project which the member for Bowman helped inspect recently when he was in Flinders representing the Leader of the Opposition, it offers a great step forward. That project is the acquisition of a CAT scan for the public health services, which in turn will help lift the standing, the status and the longevity of the Rosebud Hospital.</para>
<para>The hospital itself is not under threat but its services have diminished, and to offer a CAT scan facility has a double impact. It offers the CAT scan advantages but it also allows greater training and therefore greater attraction of young medical professionals. It is about attracting, retaining and developing staff. That is why it is such an important step forward.</para>
<para>This brings me to the third area within the electorate of Flinders, which is the Bass Coast. I am particularly delighted that the Bass Coast Community Health Service is establishing aged care nurse practitioner clinics in Corinella, Grantville and San Remo. A nurse practitioner is a registered nurse who functions in an advanced and extended clinical role, and who plays a critical role where a doctor is not directly available. They are very important to local communities and can make a huge difference in some of these small towns.</para>
<para>And the next step is a very important one. That is to bring together the funds from the Warley Hospital trust with federal funding and to work with the Bass Coast Community Health Service to secure expanded medical services for Phillip Island—a community health hub which, hopefully, will offer many of the features of a hospital and which will offer the community what it has lost. It will redress the balance which was taken away by this government. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Canberra Electorate: Trades Training</title>
          <page.no>1877</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>22:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRODTMANN</name>
    <name.id>30540</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Nearly two weeks ago the Prime Minister and the Minister for School Education, Peter Garrett, received a rock star reception when she officially opened the trade training centre at St Mary MacKillop in Isabella Plains in my electorate.</para>
<para>The trade training centre is the first of four in the Catholic school system in the ACT. The other three are at St Clare's College in Griffith in my electorate, and at Merici and St Francis Xavier colleges in the electorate of Fraser.</para>
<para>The opening had been months in the planning and was a major production—almost an MGM production—thanks to the event organisation skills of the wonderful team at St Mary MacKillop College. While I am grateful to the entire school community, and those of the schools in the area and region, I would particularly like to thank the principal, Michael Lee, and Sandra Darley, Garry Seary, Karen Hundy, Cindy Dean, Aiden Brunskil, Tony Lazzarato, Kim Maloney and Janelle Maas—all from St Mary MacKillop College—Mark Hogan, from the Catholic Education Office, and Father John Armstrong, parish priest from Corpus Christi—the former Holy Family parish—who did the blessing. He stepped in at the last minute because the Monsignor unfortunately had an accident. I would like to thank all of them for making the day such a success.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister and the minister were greeted by a procession of students at every turn from local schools: St Francis of Assisi, St Anthony's, St Clare of Assisi, Holy Family and the lovely parish of St Gregory's at Queanbeyan. Tyler Friend and Ashley Evans, the school chief captains, did a wonderful job of escorting the Prime Minister 'hither and yon'. Liam Pitt provided the acknowledgement of country and Liam Brown, the Indigenous Support Officer, performed on the didgeridoo. Maria Suraci, who has the voice of an angel, sang an evocative version of the national anthem, and little Joseph Sergi from St Gregory's in Queanbeyan had everyone in stitches with his speech and his reference to Joseph, Mary and baby Jesus as the first working family.</para>
<para>In honour of the Prime Minister's Welsh heritage, the choir sang the Sunset Prayer of Reverend Eli Jenkins from <inline font-style="italic">Under Milk Wood</inline> by Dylan Thomas. It was a very, very moving rendition of that beautiful piece.</para>
<para>As if that were not enough, the Prime Minister and Minister Garrett then went on a tour of the new trade training centre. The centre, which was built thanks to a $5.7 million investment across the four schools, trains students in hospitality and construction. The Prime Minister and Minister Garrett mingled with students and guests and shared a brief afternoon tea in Cafe Bella, which had been upgraded last year as part of the construction of the trade training centre. We also had the opportunity to experience and indulge in the wonderful food that was prepared in the new industrial kitchen that has been built as part of this trade training centre. The students did a beautiful spread and many of them are mini master chefs. We all ate way too much for an afternoon tea.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister and Minister Garrett also had the opportunity to speak with students who were developing basic woodwork skills and building a house on site.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The honourable member will refer to the minister by his title.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRODTMANN</name>
    <name.id>30540</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I beg your pardon, Mr Speaker.</para>
<para>All of the students praised the centre and the training they were receiving. Some wanted to go on to study a trade as a result. Others thought it gave them a skill to help them through uni. All of them spoke about the world of new career options opened up by the centre.</para>
<para>I am looking forward to attending the official opening of the St Clare's College centre, which is currently under construction. I was at St Clare's recently to present my School Legends awards to some of the recipients there, and saw the progress to date. At the moment, it is just a big pit in the ground, but I am very much looking forward to watching it grow over the coming year and attending the official opening some time later in the year or early next year.</para>
<para>I am also looking forward to the official opening of the Tuggeranong Sustainable Living Trade Training centres, which are being built at Erindale College, Lake Tuggeranong College, Calwell High School, Caroline Chisholm High School, Lanyon High School, Wanniassa Senior School, and Namadgi School thanks to an $8.1 million investment from the Gillard government.</para>
<para>Canberra has a significant skills shortage. In fact it is acute according to the Canberra Business Council, particularly in trades. This skills shortage has the potential to impact on our future growth and prosperity. That is why the investment in these centres is so important. They go a long way towards addressing the trades skills shortage here in Canberra, while giving students hands-on training to prepare them for the workforce. They are a very welcome addition to the vocational education landscape here, and provide a range of career and money-making options so that our students can realise their full potential, reduce our skills shortage and contribute to the future prosperity of the ACT. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>0V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! It being 10.31 pm the debate is interrupted.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 10:31</para>
<para> </para>
<para>The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms AE Burke) took the chair at 12:00.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <maincomm.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" background="">
        <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-MCJobDate">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a type="" href="Main Committee">Monday, 27 February 2012</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-Normal">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms AE Burke)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 12:00.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>1880</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hindmarsh Electorate: Schools</title>
          <page.no>1880</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I had the great pleasure last Thursday, together with the member for Kingston, Amanda Rishworth, of welcoming the Prime Minister to our area. We welcomed the PM to the local area for an education forum titled 'Your School Our Future'. The forum was held at Brighton Secondary School, an outstanding school in South Australia, in the beachside suburb of Brighton. Even though it is not in my electorate, it is just outside it—on the border—and a lot of the students who attend Brighton are from the Hindmarsh electorate.</para>
<para>So it was a great pleasure to have the Prime Minister there, to have a discussion with the principals from Amanda Rishworth's area and from my own area to discuss education and the future of our schools. The Brighton school jazz choir was fantastic—they had a young Buble in the making there! There were principals and parent reps from all over. This was the first of a series of forums that the Prime Minister will be holding around the country on the government education agenda. We know how important education is. We know that the foundation of prosperity and of the future of this nation is the education that we provide for our children. Being a father of two boys myself, I know how important it was for my kids to get an education, because I knew it was tied to their prosperity in life. It is important to be able to provide the types of education that children require.</para>
<para>Of course, not all students will go on to university. So I am very pleased about the trade training centres that have been announced in and around my electorate. For example, we have a magnificent engineering trade training centre at Thebarton Senior College and a catering trade training centre at St George College on South Road in Kate Ellis's electorate, which is the border of our two electorates. Again, it is a big feeder for my area.</para>
<para>It is so important for those children who perhaps do not want to go on to university to have the ability to learn the trades whilst they are still at school so that when they do decide to take on a trade they already have some of those skills at hand. As a father myself, one of my two boys went on to university and finished his degree. The other one was never going to go to university—you could tell from a very young age. How wonderful it would have been if he had had a trade training centre to enable him to learn some of the skills he learnt while he was doing his apprenticeship. He would have finished his apprenticeship a couple of years earlier, and it would have been very beneficial. I am sure there are hundreds and hundreds of students around the country in the same situation.</para>
<para>As I said, I was pleased that we could discuss these things with the Prime Minister and the principals in my electorate. I am sure education will be a big part of our future policies. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Dawson Electorate: Peak Downs Highway</title>
          <page.no>1880</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHRISTENSEN</name>
    <name.id>230485</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>So the Labor Party dogfight rolls on: clawing, barking, yelping and biting. It is a cannibalistic fight for the top of the dog pile—and for what? To lead this government. It is certainly nothing to be proud of. Any association with today's Labor Party should be a cause for great embarrassment and shame. The dysfunction, the incompetence—the Midas touch in reverse, if you will—is very frightening indeed.</para>
<para>I have taken the opportunity to sift through the smoking pile of broken promises this government has left in its wake—and it is a big pile—to see if there is a disaster looming in my backyard, in my electorate. On the fringe of the pile is a project on the fringe of my electorate of Dawson: the Peak Downs Highway. The people of Mackay, my constituents, are frustrated. Their desperate pleas for investment and infrastructure are falling on deaf ears. Along with WA, Mackay is a wealth-producing region for this nation, yet we have Labor governments in Queensland and in Canberra who happily suck all the money out of the region with no regard for the sustainability of their economic bonanza. But be careful what you wish for. You could end up with a pink batts program in your neighbourhood. The federal government has promised $120 million towards the state controlled Peak Downs Highway, and I am wondering how they can turn this into a disaster. Incidentally, $120 million is only a third of the funding needed, according to the Road Accident Action Group, a key local group that is trying to fight against road fatalities. The former Rudd government said this funding was linked to the mining tax but there is something fishy about that claim. We know from the budget that $120 million has been allocated but we do not know over what time period. We know the government says $5.6 billion is to come from the mining tax but those proceeds are to flow from 2014-15 onwards. We know, from the government's Nation Building website, that the timetable for the Peak Downs highway upgrade states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Construction is expected to commence early in 2014 and is scheduled for completion by early 2016.</para></quote>
<para>Even if the expenditure did not occur until commencement, money would have to be spent in early 2014, this being the 2013-14 financial year. But the mining tax does not raise income until the 2014-15 financial year, so this project will not be funded from the mining tax—it just cannot be. But the government claims otherwise.</para>
<para>Where is the money coming from? Why have we been conned on where the money is coming from for the Peak Downs highway upgrade? Why, if it is not linked to the mining tax, is the highway upgrade happening after the next election? Why can't it happen how? The answer to all of these questions is that is just smoke and mirrors—another broken Labor promise, but this one is exposed before it is even broken. There will be no Peak Downs highway upgrade under this government because the money is not there to do it. This is such a very sly way to con the public on the Peak Downs highway.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Canberra Electorate: Organ and Tissue Donation</title>
          <page.no>1881</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRODTMANN</name>
    <name.id>30540</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On Friday I had the pleasure of attending the ACT Chief Minister's Awards for Organ and Tissue Donation. The awards recognise the tireless efforts that people in the ACT community go to in order to promote and raise awareness about this important issue. As we all know, last week was Donate Life Week and the awards were a great way to end what was a very busy week in Canberra. One of the highlights of the week in Canberra was the Donate Life Walk around Lake Burley Griffin that ends with a well-deserved breakfast of egg and bacon, this year cooked by one of the <inline font-style="italic">MasterChef </inline>finalists at Regatta Point. This year, 2,000 people took part in the walk, which goes to show how much support there is for organ and tissue donation in Canberra. The walk has been held for six years—it used to be called the Terry Connolly Walk and now it is the Donate Life Walk—and it just keeps getting bigger and better every year. As usual, this year we had a mass of schools, public servants and businesses turning out for the event. It has always received very strong support from the Canberra community. I do encourage government schools to also attend the event. We have a great representation from the independent and Catholic schools in Canberra but we need greater representation from the broad public sector schools.</para>
<para>While the walk is a chance for everyone to show their support for organ and tissue donation, Friday's awards were all about recognising the unsung heroes in our community. Many have experienced their own heartbreak having members of families who have passed on and having to make the choice about organ and tissue donation. However, they continue to advance the cause because they personally know how important it is.</para>
<para>The awards were presented to seven very worthy recipients on Friday by the ACT Chief Minister Katy Gallagher, who is patron of Gift of Life, which is the leading non-government body in the ACT for organ and tissue donation. This year's recipients included Rick McQualter for the Annette Taylor Award for Community Service; Laurie and Marguerite Wiseman for the Matthew Reynolds Award for Community Service, who are the parents of Ben Wiseman and have been very active in the organ and tissue donation sector for years; Pat Siciliano, who is a board member of Gift of Life—I used to be on the board with him—for the Jenny Deck Award for Community Service; Dhale Brown for the Ben Wiseman Award for Healthcare; Greg Bayliss, well-known media personality in Canberra, for the Angus Fairbairn-Cody Award for Media Support; and David Gough for the Terry Connolly Award for Community Awareness Raising—the first year that that award had been conducted and David had just returned from driving around Australia to raise awareness. His daughter Melody died a number of years ago and she was also an organ and tissue donor.</para>
<para>This year's events in Canberra were highly successful, as usual. I thank all those Canberrans who took part in the awards, particularly those who got out for the walk on Wednesday. It was a great turnout. I look forward to it being even bigger and better next year.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lieutenants Morant, Handcock and Witton</title>
          <page.no>1882</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAWKE</name>
    <name.id>HWO</name.id>
    <electorate>Mitchell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to mark the 110-year anniversary of the sentencing of three Australian veterans at the Boer War. The Breaker Morant case, who was convicted in 1902 along with two others, Peter Handcock and George Witton, for executing Boer prisoners of war is, of course, embedded in our nation's psyche. On behalf of their descendants, who still seek but are unable access justice, I rise once again in this parliament to say that it is timely for the Australian government to do everything it can to assist the modern-day descendants of these men to access a judicial review of this case.</para>
<para>It is the case that the executions were conducted with extreme haste and without appeal. The Australian government was not informed until some two months after the events. At the same time around 80,000 Australians signed a petition to release George Witton and to pardon Morant and Handcock. Considering that at this time this represented about 2.5 per cent of Australia's population, this was an extraordinary number of people. Today, of course, it still remains in the psyche that this injustice could be perpetuated upon Australian soldiers in that the executions were done without fair process or judicial review.</para>
<para>I last addressed this parliament on 15 March 2010 after a public hearing conducted by the Petitions Committee. On that occasion I described the case for the pardons as strong and compelling. Given that other countries in recent times, including Canada and Ireland, have sought redress of injustices on behalf of the British in World War I and have received same under the Defence Act 1903 and, given that the men who were executed—Morant, Witton and Handcock—led to the saving of hundreds of Australian soldiers' lives in World War I because they were unable to be executed by the British because of what had happened in the Boer War, I think it is important that we seek British government's assistance in releasing all of the available records in relation to this case so that the modern day descendants can know what happened and rightly, if necessary, receive a judicial review and pardon.</para>
<para>It is an episode that appeals greatly to every Australian because of the doctrine of fairness which says that no-one should be treated differently because of their birth, rank or status. We do know that these men were treated differently because of their birth, rank and status. We certainly need legends in Australian history.</para>
<para>I note that the former Attorney-General Robert McClelland announced that he was persuaded by the evidence that had been submitted to him that these men may not have been tried and sentenced according to the laws of 1902, and that he was concerned about the absence of procedural fairness. He also announced that he would write to the British government to make his views known, which he did at the time. The matter now rests with the current Attorney-General, the member for Gellibrand, Nicola Roxon, for consideration and action.</para>
<para>I am convinced that some form of redress is necessary in this matter and could provide the current generations with some relief after decades of controversy. The passing of time does not diminish any injustice. I urge members of this parliament to support the review undertaken by the former Attorney-General and urge the current Attorney-General to forward the evidence that substantiates calls to overturn the convictions and sentences of these men.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parramatta Electorate: Holroyd City Council</title>
          <page.no>1883</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms OWENS</name>
    <name.id>E09</name.id>
    <electorate>Parramatta</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to talk about the great work being done by Holroyd City Council to tackle the problem of asbestos in my electorate. Australia suffers one of the highest rates of incidence of mesothelioma in the world with estimates of 13,000 cases by 2020 and a further 40,000 to 45,000 cases of asbestos related cancer.</para>
<para>It is a dreadful disease. The survival rates for mesothelioma are extremely poor with only five per cent of patients still alive five years after diagnosis. We have known about the dangers of asbestos for a long time. As far back as in 1917 and 1918 several US studies showed that asbestos workers were dying unnaturally young. From 1916 Prudential Insurance in the US would not give life insurance to anybody who worked in an asbestos related industry, yet the material continued to be produced for decades.</para>
<para>The issue of asbestos is a significant one in my electorate of Parramatta where James Hardie built its factories in the thirties. The factory remained open until 1982 and continued to sell its stockpile until 1987. Asbestos was used in the surrounding houses and also as landfill. The legacy is in our land, under our houses and our schools and in places that we are unaware of, as well as in the living bodies of many people who worked in the factories or shared a house with workers, and with the lost families and community members who succumbed to the fibres.</para>
<para>Today most houses built prior to 1990 in Holroyd have asbestos used in their construction. Thankfully, Holroyd council is recognised as a national leader in tackling the issues surrounding asbestos, a recognition afforded to it by the Asbestos Diseases Foundation of Australia in 2010. The council have been instrumental in managing the high prevalence of asbestos in my community. For example, during Asbestos Awareness Week in November last year they launched a program to educate home owners, handymen and renovators about the dangers of asbestos. They have also been working with youth, together with students from Holroyd High School. Along with the Information and Cultural Exchange, Holroyd council last year developed the 'Ease the wheeze' educational video launched during Asbestos Awareness Week. It highlighted the health dangers of asbestos and used the students' creative song writing and filmmaking skills to sell the message. This kind of youth oriented medium is ideal for getting the message across to our youth. The young people of the area did a fine job in making that video; it really is very well done. I congratulate the Holroyd City Council for the work they are doing to educate the community about the dangers of this quite prevalent material in our electorate. They have done an extraordinary job, and I commend their work to the House.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>McPherson Electorate</title>
          <page.no>1884</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I would like to speak about two very important community organisations in my electorate of McPherson on the Gold Coast: the Coolangatta Senior Citizens Centre and the Robina Lions Club. These two organisations do great work in different areas of the southern and central Gold Coast and their efforts certainly deserve recognition.</para>
<para>Firstly, I would like to talk about the Coolangatta Senior Citizens Centre, of which I am the patron. The centre is located on the southern end of the Gold Coast and provides wonderful support and services to its 1,200 members as well as to other local seniors both from the southern Gold Coast and from northern New South Wales. Seniors make up a large section of the community on the southern Gold Coast. Through this centre a variety of activities for senior citizens are offered seven days a week, including: bingo, indoor bowls, line dancing and monthly bus trips and concerts. Importantly, the centre offers these activities at very affordable prices so seniors are able to participate in a wide range of activities without incurring a huge cost.</para>
<para>On 20 January this year I was invited to attend the centre's January concert, and I was very pleased to accept that invitation. I took the opportunity during a short break in the concert to recognise the great work that the centre does by presenting them with a very special Australian flag that was flown in the House of Representatives chamber on 12 September 2011. I congratulate the president of the centre, Sue Wickham, the vice-president, Carmel Finn, and their team on the fantastic work that they do. I look forward to continuing to work with the Coolangatta Senior Citizens Centre.</para>
<para>Secondly, I would like to acknowledge the Robina Lions Club. On 22 February I attended the judging of the Robina Lions Youth of the Year Quest, which was held at Bond University. Each of the six contestants, all of whom were women, were outstanding and should be very proud of their efforts. Each contestant was required to answer impromptu questions followed by a prepared speech, and I would like to acknowledge each of those contestants: Caitlin Gallagher, from Varsity College, who spoke about fear; Ayu Imoaka Asis, from Robina State High, whose speech was entitled 'Is beauty a beast?'; Sophie Tan, from Somerset College, who spoke about the Horn of Africa famine; Alynna Li-Vy Wong, from Robina State High, who gave a speech on 'Fear of the unfamiliar'; Janie-Marie Burgess, from Marymount College, who spoke on 'Gatecrashing and the juvenile criminal system'; and Madaline Hartwig, from St Michael's College, who spoke about 'Staying Australian'. Congratulations to the public speaking winner, Alynna, and the overall winner, Janie-Marie, who will go on to the next round of the competition on 3 March. Congratulations also to the president, Heather Veltmeyer, the chairman on the night, John McIntyre, and the Robina Lions for the wonderful community work that they do.</para>
<para>I am very proud to work with these two groups and will continue to do so into the future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Year of the Farmer</title>
          <page.no>1885</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SIDEBOTTOM</name>
    <name.id>849</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Good afternoon, colleagues, on this very historic day. This is the first sitting of the Federation Chamber, and here we are, so we will be part of history again.</para>
<para>I have spend the last three days with my minister, Joe Ludwig, and my colleagues the member for Lyons, Dick Adams, and the member for Bass, Geoff Lyons. We spent three days on the road celebrating the Australian Year of the Farmer. This is part of our ongoing commitment to honouring and celebrating agriculture in particular in Tassie. As you know, Tassie is a crucible for agriculture, forestry and fisheries in Australia.</para>
<para>We visited sawmillers in Dunalley, we went to Tasmanian Gourmet Potatoes and we also went to Tas Alkaloids—a massive alkaloids processing facility that is the largest producer of thebaine in the world. We visited the headquarters of the Road Dam Irrigation Scheme in the north-east of Tassie. There are some really interesting prospects there, particularly the expansion of dairying, and also—interestingly enough, right in the middle of the countryside—aquaculture. It is fantastic what water can do. We also went to the innovative rhubarb producers, one of the largest in Australia, called Razz Rhubarb. We tried their rhu brew, which I recommend to everyone who wants particularly to clean your system out. Then we went to Bridestowe Estate lavender farm, the largest lavender farm in Australia, second only to the French and probably surpassing them now and the Japanese. I really recommend you go and visit, particularly if you like lavender cheese and lavender sausage, followed by lavender ice cream, which is probably still on my other coat. We also met with vegetable growers and processors in my village of Forth.</para>
<para>We then went further into the beautiful north-west to Britton Timbers and Ta Ann processing facilities in Smithton, where we again reiterated the importance of the IGA process in Tasmania and our support for Ta Ann, a sustainable producer of value-added wood products. And we condemned again the outrageous behaviour of some of those environmental groups that are threatening their customers. We also met with the Van Diemen's Land Company, Hammond Farms, Greenham Beef and Tasmanian Dairy Products, who of course are part and parcel of this extraordinary expansion and explosion of dairying in north-west Tassie. We thank those people who hosted us so very well in this the Year of the Farmer.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Member for Throsby</title>
          <page.no>1886</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs GASH</name>
    <name.id>AK6</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I share with the House the words of Michael Grogan, a constituent of the member for Throsby, published in the <inline font-style="italic">Illawarra Mercury</inline> earlier this month. 'Stephen Jones needs to get his priorities straight,' he wrote. He went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">On August 23 I wrote a letter to all local state and federal MPs following BlueScope's announcement to downsize the Port Kembla steelworks by approximately 800 people. That very day I received a phone call from Joanna Gash. … She showed genuine interest in both my family's wellbeing and that of my fellow steelworkers. She asked if she could read my letter in Parliament in order to highlight the plight of the local area.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">She was true to her word and did so.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I have since heard from Ryan Park, the state Labor member for Keira, but Anna Watson, Lee Evans, Sharon Bird and Stephen Jones have remained silent.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Given the significant events impacting on local manufacturing industry and the subsequent job losses that have occurred and are occurring, I am perplexed at how the member for Throsby chooses to preoccupy himself at this time with the subject of gay marriage.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I would have thought the preservation of jobs in Throsby would have riveted his interest. Especially intriguing in light of statements by his former leader committing Labor to the creation of an additional 500,000 jobs within three years.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Confusing the issue even more is the admission in the Member's maiden speech that 'he comes to this parliament believing in the values that formed around the dinner table of a large Catholic family'. Given the Catholic Church's views on gay marriage, it was an extraordinary statement to make and then to repudiate by his stand.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Jones should be making headlines primarily by encouraging growth and employment in our region and providing tangible solutions to the problems faced in the Illawarra.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Instead he has elected to push his own leftist ideologies at the expense of his obligations to the people who elected him.</para></quote>
<para>Mr Grogan's comments are not isolated. Even Throsby's own Labor Party branches are attacking him for not consulting or listening to his community. Stories of the member for Throsby ignoring inconvenient issues in his electorate come into my office on a surprisingly regular basis. The member is often quick to criticise me and I plead guilty to one of his charges. Yes, I do not support a carbon tax. Do you know why? Between the Throsby and Gilmore electorate since the member for Throsby was elected in 2010 thousands of workers who were formerly employed in the local manufacturing industry have lost their jobs. BlueScope Steel is the most prominent, and now I am hearing the possibility of further job losses at Kembla Grange, those at Bredero Shaw and APC Socotherm.</para>
<para>That is a tip for the member for Throsby: put your ear to the ground, open your eyes and get your head out of the clouds. According to the Illawarra Business Chamber, key economic indicators show that Wollongong is losing ground when it comes to jobs growth and business attraction. But the leadership the member for Throsby offers does not extend beyond his socialist ideology. Mr Jones's inactivity in protecting jobs impacts on my constituents in Gilmore. He can do something about it but he is turning his back on the reality of events unfolding around him. He needs to show some initiative and coverage and not distract himself from the task at hand by pet projects.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Corio Electorate</title>
          <page.no>1887</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Every city has its stories—tales of triumphant and tragedy, enterprise and energy that tell us where we have come from and shape our sense of who we are. Geelong is no different. Our stories give us a sense of belonging to a community, to a town and to a region. The building blocks for many of our stories—the primary source, if you like—are held on our behalf in the Geelong Heritage Centre, a treasure trove of local history that sits within Geelong's city library. Here we find records detailing the lives of Geelong's earliest residents. There is the original marriage register from Geelong's Christ Church, the oldest church in Victoria still on its original site. This precious book, dated 1853, contains the names and signatures of some of the colony's earliest pioneers. There is also a more unusual public record, the Meredith dog register. Dating from 1864, when dog registration became law, it provides a fascinating glimpse into the lives of the region's early farmers. There is an impressive collection of drawings by renowned Geelong architects Buchan, Laird & Buchan. In it are plans for some of our most significant buildings from the Geelong art gallery, opened in 1915, to the city library, which opened in 1959.</para>
<para>The heritage centre is also the custodian of a very precious set of more than 400 pressed ferns and licha pods gathered by one of the early curators of the Geelong Botanic Gardens, John Raddenberry. It is considered to be internationally significant. There are more than 100,000 photos, including a huge and growing collection of family photos donated by Geelong families over the past 30 years, and an almost complete set of the <inline font-style="italic">Geelong Advertiser</inline>—Victoria's oldest newspaper title and Australia's second oldest from its beginnings in 1840. There is a pair of 100-year-old Geelong Football Club socks as well as a scrapbook of sporting memorabilia dating from the 1890s and put together by Geelong West resident Louis Schweitzer. His vast collection of tickets, flyers and posters provides a marvellous step back in time. For those who remember with pleasure a visit to the old Bright and Hitchcock's department store, there is a wonderful collection of photos, clippings and memorabilia that spans the 120-year history of this much loved local business.</para>
<para>Last year the Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government, Simon Crean, announced that $10 million from the first round of the Regional Development Australia Fund would help pay for the rebuilding of the library and heritage centre. And the rebuilding development comes just in time. With its leaking roof and lack of space, the heritage centre has been struggling to do what we need it to do to keep our records safe. But in celebration of this, it would be wonderful if the City of Greater Geelong put on display in the library some of those treasures of our past. And so today I call on the City of Greater Geelong to do just that. A new heritage centre will allow the public easier access to the collections so that generations to come will share our knowledge and add their own and hopefully feel the same belonging to this great city that we do.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Swan Electorate: Hospitals</title>
          <page.no>1887</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr IRONS</name>
    <name.id>HYM</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Wednesday I visited Bentley Hospital in my electorate—its antenatal unit—with the Deputy Premier of Western Australia, Dr Kim Hames, who also happens to be the health minister. I want to quote to the chamber now from Dr Hames' subsequent report to the Western Australia parliament. The reason I want to get it on the record of this parliament as well is the amount of misinformation that has been said about the hospital. Noting that fact, I think the health minister deserves to be quoted in this parliament as well. He said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">There is no question that some degree of upgrade of that obstetric facility is needed, so we will be going through, getting a report done and working out what needs to be done. However, what is clear is that there is confusion around what is going to happen to that maternity service once Fiona Stanley Hospital opens. So I will go through that again to make the intentions of this government very clear.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Under the previous government, when Hon Jim McGinty was the minister, he made the decision that when Fiona Stanley Hospital was built, the Bentley Hospital obstetric service would close and those services would be provided by the new Fiona Stanley Hospital. In opposition, we had no reason whatsoever to doubt that that was good policy. We totally disagreed with what he was going to do with obstetric services at Osborne Park Hospital and campaigned to keep them, and he subsequently changed his mind and said he would keep those. However, we were in agreement about the potential closure of Bentley obstetric services. As we moved forward, we talked a lot to the local community, particularly to Steve Irons, as the local federal member and the local mayor, and there was strong support for continuing to retain that hospital in the future. The risk in that is that a report has been done by a prominent obstetrician that lists about 1 000 deliveries a year as the ideal size for an obstetric service, which is about what is done at Osborne Park Hospital. Currently at Bentley Hospital it is about 890, which is marginally under that level. However, it is expected that when Fiona Stanley Hospital opens, that service will not be required. The commitment that we gave, I think, a year or 18 months ago, which seems to be lost in the translation somewhere, is that we will now wait and see and reconsider once Fiona Stanley Hospital is open. So we will wait until early 2014 when Fiona Stanley Hospital opens. Given that there are only 20 obstetric beds that we have not changed from the Labor Party plan at that site and that Kaleeya is proposed to be closed as an obstetric service, we will wait and see what happens. People will vote with their feet. I have said that if they continue to support the Bentley obstetric service and if the number is getting close to the 1 000 that are needed, we will reconsider and reinvest whatever dollars are required to bring that up to a high-quality obstetric service. It is silly for us to go and spend millions of dollars there now, with only two years to that decision. However, in the meantime, we will do some work to freshen up the appearance of that obstetric unit and make sure that the people going there now—the nearly 900 of them who go there during a year for their deliveries—have a quality level of service. Once again, I want to make that public. Bentley obstetric service will not definitely close when Fiona Stanley obstetric service opens.</para></quote>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>83S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! In accordance with standing order 193 the time for constituency statements has concluded.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>1888</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Standing Order 31(a) Automatic Adjournment</title>
          <page.no>1888</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WASHER</name>
    <name.id>84F</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>According to research by Professor Drew Dawson, head of the University of South Australia's Centre for Sleep Research, staying awake for 17 hours has the same effect on performance as having a blood alcohol level of 0.05 per cent and, after 21 hours awake, people demonstrate the same deterioration as having a blood alcohol content of 0.1 per cent. Many people begin to show signs of mental fatigue later in the working day and tasks seem much more complicated, concentration wavers and mistakes can be made. Late nights spent working can cause mental fatigue, making it harder to recollect information and affecting the ability to think clearly.</para>
<para>As representatives of the Australian people, our role is to make decisions on the passing of new laws and amendments or changes to existing laws, debate legislation and policy statements and make decisions on what we believe is right for our electorate and for our country. We make decisions on how we should be spending taxpayer's money whether we are in government or opposition. The quantity of information that can be processed by the human mind is limited. The mind tires and begins to ignore or forget information. How many of us have sat listening for hours at information being delivered, yet at the end cannot recall most of what has been said. In psychology, decision fatigue refers to the deteriorating quality of the decisions made by an individual, after a long session of decision making. It is now understood as one of the causes of irrational trade-offs in decision making. Decision fatigue can be caused by continual mental effort such as making decisions and brain overload where the brain cells have become exhausted. Although we do not feel physically tired, the more choices we have to make throughout the day, the more fatigued we become and the less likely we are to make hard decisions but go with the recommendations of others or no decision at all.</para>
<para>In a recent article in the <inline font-style="italic">New York Times</inline>, John Tierney talks about decision fatigue, the newest discovery involving a phenomenon called ego depletion, a term coined by the social psychologist Roy F Baumeister:</para>
<quote><para class="block">No matter how rational and high-minded you try to be, you can't make decision after decision without paying a biological price. It's different from ordinary physical fatigue—you're not consciously aware of being tired—but you're low on mental energy. The more choices you make throughout the day, the harder each one becomes for your brain, and eventually it looks for shortcuts, usually in either of two very different ways. One shortcut is to become reckless: to act impulsively instead of expending the energy to first think through the consequences. (Sure, tweet that photo! What could go wrong?) The other shortcut is the ultimate energy saver: do nothing. Instead of agonizing over decisions, avoid any choice. Ducking a decision often creates bigger problems in the long run, but for the moment, it eases the mental strain. You start to resist any change, any potentially risky move.</para></quote>
<para>Work schedules that require people to work for extended periods of time disrupt circadian or body clock rhythms and increase the risk of fatigue. A person suffering from fatigue may in turn experience difficulty in concentration, impaired recollection of timing and events or judgment, reduced capacity for effective interpersonal communication, reduced hand-eye coordination, reduced visual perception, reduced vigilance and slower reaction times.</para>
<para>British researchers have found that, through a long-term study done on 10,000 civil servants, working more than 11 hours a day increases the risk of heart disease by 67 per cent compared to working a standard seven- to eight-hour day. It was thought that working hours alongside other factors like blood pressure, diabetes, exercise and depression, could help doctors work out the risk of heart disease. Another recent study has also shown that people who work more than 11 hours a day are 2.4 times more likely to suffer depression. The British study found that working long hours may affect your mental health because of difficulties in unwinding after work and prolonged increased levels of the stress hormone cortisol.</para>
<para>The less control one has over potentially stress inducing events and the more uncertainty they create, the more likely people are to feel stressed. Even the typical day-to-day demands of living can contribute to the body's stress response. The long-term activation of the stress-response system and the subsequent overexposure to cortisol and other stress hormones can disrupt almost all of the body's processes. This results in an increased risk of numerous health problems, including heart disease, sleep problems, digestive problems, depression, obesity, memory impairment, worsening of skin conditions such as eczema, and it depletes the human immune system, increasing the risk of cancer and infectious disease.</para>
<para>I appeal to my political colleagues from all parties to support this motion not only for their own health and wellbeing but for the health and wellbeing of the staff of this parliament, for whom we all have a shared responsibility. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms HALL</name>
    <name.id>83N</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Firstly, I would like to acknowledge that this is first day that we have sat in this chamber now that it has been called the Federation Chamber. Secondly, and most importantly, I would like to acknowledge the fine work that has been done by Dr Mal Washer in trying to make the hours of this House more reasonable, rational and sane. His voice has been the one voice out there all the time arguing that human beings cannot function effectively without sleep. We work really long hours in this place. A member may get in at eight o'clock and leave at 11 o'clock. Not too many people in the community work those sorts of hours. As members of parliament, we are role models for the community. If we cannot have reasonable hours and demonstrate to the rest of the community that reasonable hours are the way to go, how can we expect reasonable hours to be the norm for the community as a whole?</para>
<para>I am not sure that the wording and the points in the motion are exactly the way I would like to go, but the sentiments that have been expressed are the ones that should be adopted by this parliament. We need to introduce some rational hours into this place. Dr Washer—and I emphasise 'Dr' Washer—is a man of science, a man who has researched this issue fully. When he puts to the parliament the impact the lack of sleep has on an individual and he recites his sources and the research that has taken place, it demonstrates that this is a fact. In a former life, I actually worked with people as a rehabilitation councillor. I worked with people who were injured at work. One of the factors that often caused injury at work was the fact that the person had worked very long hours, was over tired and had made that mistake. A mistake in some environments can cause serious injury or loss of life. In our work environment, I think that poor decision making can impact on a lot of people's lives, not just on the lives of people in this parliament but also on the lives of the Australian public as a whole. It is an obligation of our office to ensure that we consider legislation and issues before the parliament in a rational, sound way.</para>
<para>The research that I have read also demonstrates the impact that these long hours have on individuals. It is well known that people who do shift work and rotating shift work have severe problems with sleep, and that also tends to manifest itself with physical and mental disabilities. There has been a lot of research done in the area of rotating shift work and the underlying effect of people not having standard sleep patterns. They are not able to work, rest, recover and then come to work the next day and make sound, rational decisions. You need to be able to have a balance in your life.</para>
<para>As I mentioned, the impact of sleep deprivation is well researched. Dr Washer quoted research that indicates that 17 hours without sleep equates to 0.65 alcohol content in your blood. My daughter-in-law works as a nurse at one of the hospitals in the Hunter. She does night shifts all the time. Sometimes, her husband has to go and pick her up because she does not feel that she can safely drive home from work. She is unable to drive her children to school and to day care after she has worked a night shift. It really does impact on a person's life and impacts in a number of ways. It does lead to long-term psychological problems.</para>
<para>It is well researched that constant lack of sleep leads to depression and other forms of mental illness and anxiety. People are much more likely to have a stress response to a situation. In this parliament, we work in a very combative environment and late at night I have noticed that people tend to have a much shorter fuse. Communications is a vital part of our job in this parliament. If you are tired, if you lack sleep and if you are stressed then you are not going to be able to communicate effectively. Dr Washer made the point about sleep disorders and the impact of the lack of sleep on a person's life is very well documented in all the research. The other issue I would like to touch on is one that not only affects us, as members of parliament, but also affects the staff of each and every one of us. I know that when my staff have been here into the early hours of the morning and hop into a car to drive home they are quite concerned about their safety as they drive home. I can remember a six o'clock or seven o'clock morning here, and I would not have trusted myself behind the wheel of a car. Isn't it an obligation on us, as members of parliament, to ensure the safety not only of our staff but of all those staff who work here in Parliament House—the people who look after us in the chamber, the people who come here early in the morning and then maybe go home the next day at 10 o'clock.</para>
<para>There are rules in place about how long a person must have off before they can return to the workplace. You cannot do an overtime shift in which you work from nine to five, then do overtime and then turn up the next day. There are laws that regulate the amount of time you need to have off work. In this parliament we do not look at the impact that continuous sittings and work have on all those involved in this place.</para>
<para>I know that Dr Washer has had a long-term concern about this issue. He has highlighted the psychological impacts, the physical impacts and the short-term and long-term physical impacts of sleep deprivation. He is a man who cares for the interests of this House, the members and all the staff who work here at the heart of this nation. It gives me great pleasure to support him and his efforts to try to bring some rationality to the way this parliament sits.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>McMillan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Firstly, let me acknowledge the work of the member for Shortland's daughter in her night shift. It is not only your daughter who is working that night shift but also paramedics of Australia and policemen, people who work in the water industry, truck drivers and others in transport working late at night, child protection workers, firemen, and the list goes on. These people all contribute out of hours to this nation. That is not what we are here for. I will give you some background. There are two people in this room who have been here since 1990: the member for Banks, Mr Melham, and me, the member for McMillan. From 1990 we have been through many nights where the parliament sat through the early hours of the morning and into the very, very early hours of the morning.</para>
<para>We thought that with this new parliament those days were gone—finished, history, it will not happen again—but we had an occasion a few months ago where we filibustered into the night, and that is all you could call it. On a very serious issue in this parliament we filibustered into the night and it was totally unnecessary. But with this parliament as it stands, as a hung parliament, you cannot give leave to your team to go home while the small team bats on. We are all here, we are all in it, and a vote can be held at any time, called by one side or the other, so we have an obligation to be standing in this House on behalf of the constituents who elected us. We accept that. So, why can't we come to a resolution whereby the parliament, in good commonsense, comes forward as we have here? Why didn't it go through the Procedure Committee, or to the whips, or to the leadership or to the Prime Minister to get this outcome? The reason is that it would not have happened, because people have vested interests and they do not want to take away the opportunity to take account of what is happening on the other side at any given time and call a vote. That leaves us with only one option now, as Dr Washer very expertly put it. If you want a technical reason for what we are doing, read Dr Washer's speech. If you want a reason for what we are doing—out of common sense and because of the real world we live in—listen to what I am saying. The members of this House do not perform well after 11 o'clock. I have been here since 1990 and I have never seen backbenchers or frontbenchers performing well at all after 11 o'clock at night. In fact, on occasion—and I am looking at you all at the moment—some of your performances have been atrocious after 11 o'clock at night. That was the inspiration for this bill: that this parliament should not be looking at very serious legislation that is before this House and that impacts on every person in our community, often the children and the generations ahead, at that time of night. I say that having heard the evidence put forward by Dr Washer and having listened to the concerns of reasonable members of parliament in this place.</para>
<para>I know the general public will say: 'What are they complaining about? They have it easy.' I spoke to a woman this morning who said: 'I have had two lives, Mr Broadbent. I have had a life in the Public Service, where I was getting ministerial briefs up to people like yourself all the time.' I said, 'That would have been hard work.' And she said: 'It was hard work, and intense sometimes. But I've got this other life now, where I'm actually watching, very close hand, what politicians do. I have a changed opinion of you as a group.' I said, 'Thank you very much.' It is not known, other than by those closest to us—our staff, our family and the other occupants of this building—what politicians actually do, the work they do on the behalf of their constituents and the time that can often take. That is extremely important. So is the business of government. I want to make the business of government so important that we knock off at a reasonable time and come in the next day with a greater opportunity to do the best on behalf of this nation that we can possibly do as individuals.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is a great honour and privilege to represent my electorate. It is an area where I have lived all my life. I was born there. My family has lived there for generations. Just over 1,000 people have been elected to the House of Representatives since this country came into existence. My observation in the four years I have been here is that politicians of all persuasions and political parties work hard in their electorates. They are not working from 9 am to 5 pm; they work six and often seven days a week. Those of us who campaign regularly know that it is required in a marginal seat. Our staffs work very, very hard. Sometimes I think there is a special place in heaven for our staff. They work just as hard as we do when we are here in Canberra; you can see that: staff leaving at the same time as politicians at the end of a long session. And what about the attendants? What about Hansard, and the other staff here? They have to work those hours as well. Thousands of people work in this building. It is not just the 150 in the House of Representatives and the 76 in the Senate but all those other people as well, all the ministerial staff and the public servants.</para>
<para>So I think we have to have some degree of reasonableness and common sense about the hours we work. My first job in life was as a cleaner in the meatworks. I worked a night shift. When the foreman asked me to work other than during university holidays, for example, when I was a full-time student at law school at the University of Queensland, I found it extremely difficult and could barely do it. So I used to restrict my work hours in the meatworks to university holidays.</para>
<para>Let us get realistic. It is not as if we actually start work at the hour prescribed in the standing orders. I get picked up at 6 am and I go for a run and go to the gym. I see many politicians in there getting those few hours of exercise—it is for their mental health, as well as their physical health. I see the member for Ryan here. She and I have had the privilege of making more speeches than any other Queenslanders in the House of Representatives, but it takes time to do that when you are down here. You do your constituency work as well and there are endless meetings. For example, I am more tired after Monday than I am on any other day during the session. I am pretty fit. I run regularly and I lift weights. There are a lot of people in this place who do the same. But I know on Tuesday that I am extremely tired because, generally, we have made lots of speeches and it takes work. We do lots of representations made to ministers.</para>
<para>If you cannot do your work properly, you cannot serve well the people you are elected to represent. I have heard speeches from those opposite and I have heard our speeches in the wee hours in the morning. Some of those speeches are not their finest hour. But it is not just the speeches; it is the decisions that they make. I think the long hours currently in our standing orders and the fact that we seem to more often honour them more in the breach than in the observance, result in the fact that there is more irritability and erasability amongst politicians on both sides. We agree on about 80 or 90 per cent of the legislation that goes through. We disagree violently on lots of issues. I think we are always right and they are always wrong, but they think exactly the opposite. That is what it is in a democracy.</para>
<para>Let us be an example and let us show compassion and understanding. If we believe in good workplace health and safety not for just ourselves but for the staff of the parliament, the public service, the ministerial advisors and our staff as well, let us think about good industrial practices in this place. On our side of politics, we pride ourselves on a simple, fair and flexible workplace arrangements. We might disagree on a few issues on the other side such as industrial relations but I think in their of hearts that they know their employees should also be cared for.</para>
<para>Most small businesses are family business, but most big businesses have human relationship advisors as well because it is important. This place needs to have a bit more emphasis on mental health, not just for the politicians, but for the staff who work with us as well. It is important that we be physically fit and also be mentally fit. The Prime Minister and the cabinet make decisions which affect people's lives every day as do backbenchers. I applaud the member for Moore and thank him for the way he has looked after me at various stages when I have been ill in this place.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PRENTICE</name>
    <name.id>217266</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I also rise to support this motion, not to make our lives easier by any stretch of the imagination, but to make them more effective. My understanding—and I am sure the member for McMillan and the member for Banks can tell me—is that, when this Federation Chamber we are in today under its current name was created, the purpose was so that we could get through more work in reasonable hours. I am sure that was the purpose of facilitating the Federation Chamber. It was acknowledging that we had a big workload, acknowledging that we had many bills and many motions to get through but also acknowledging the fact that, once you get late into the evening, you are past being able to perform appropriately and effectively. That is why we have the second chamber. I have to admit that, while I have been in this parliament, I think there has been only one or maybe two occasions that we have actually met after 11 o'clock. I would also suggest that no politician is saying that their life is not 24/7 on call. At all levels of government, as members, we are there when needed for our constituents, probably local government more so than any other level, where we are able to respond. What we have today in the form of a motion from the member for Moore, Dr Washer, is the fact that we do not perform well when we have had long days. Just as we exhort drivers to stop and revive, this is what we are saying. We are not performing at our best if we are working long hours.</para>
<para>In particular, I wanted to speak today in agreement with the member for Blair about the support staff. It is not about us. I remember working long hours in small business. Who has not worked through the night getting the BAS statement done? Who has not worked through the night getting that tender in? Often, when you check it the next day, you have missed some obvious points because you have been tired. But here in this chamber and this House are the staff. As the member for Blair said, it is not just a handful of staff, our personal staff, but literally hundreds of staff who are here for as long as we are. Those staff have to turn up again the next day. Those staff have families. Those staff have homes that they need to go to, and they do not sign on to work the long hours that we do. We know some of the pressures we are under but the staff who work in this wonderful parliament, who make things go smoothly for us, also have pressures. Madam Deputy Speaker Burke, we can look here to the clerks who assist you with your speaking responsibilities and their officers and also those of the whips. We can also look to the drivers. We talk about being so tired that we do not want to drive ourselves home but we have drivers who are in the Comcars to take us home so that we can front up the next day. We have security staff who work around the clock for us, and of course the Hansard staff who have to be here for as long as we keep speaking or putting motions. In fact, there are a whole range of people who are here supporting this parliament whom we need to be mindful of. And isn't that what the job of politicians is about? It is about thinking of other people and the effect of our decisions on them. That is why I very strongly support this motion.</para>
<para>We talk about our role in speaking in the chamber and participating in the votes, but in this great electronic age we also have hundreds of emails sent to us. When we come down to Canberra we cannot stop doing our work. As the member for Blair said, we have speeches to write and committees to work on but we also have our constituency work, and that must continue as well. As Dr Washer pointed out, if we are going to cope with all of our various roles we do need to draw a line in the sand at some time during the day. I believe we should lead by example. Indeed, the member for Melbourne, I note, in an inquiry into work-life balance, talks about the need for flexibility. So I think everyone in this parliament is probably in agreement that we are not at our best after 11 o'clock at night and so, in the interest of making good decisions and in the interest of supporting the very hardworking staff in this parliament, I urge everyone to support this motion.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MELHAM</name>
    <name.id>4T4</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On 24 March next month I will have served in this place for 22 years, having been elected with the member for McMillan at the 1990 election. In that time I have served on and off on the Procedures Committee. I was actually a member of the Procedures Committee when Neal Blewett was the then chairman and brought down the report that led to the creation of this chamber, which has subsequently been picked up by the House of Commons. As the member for Ryan has alluded to, this chamber was brought about to make us more efficient and more productive. Non-contentious legislation was to be referred to it, and so it was a better way of managing the affairs of the parliament. The trade-off was better working hours. At that stage we were successful.</para>
<para>I led the charge within the government party room for better working hours in terms of the legislative program. We succeeded in having parliament in the main finish at 8 pm of an evening. Of course, on the last sitting weeks of each session or at Christmas we knew that we would sit longer. Sadly, that structure was abandoned on the election of the Howard government. The then Prime Minister John Howard and Ian Sinclair—there is no dispute about this; it was well intentioned—preferred the older hours. I think that was a mistake. The current sitting practice is a mistake, and I said so at an informal gathering of members of parliament of all political persuasions before the last Procedures Committee report—it has not, as I understand it, been picked up.</para>
<para>The current sitting practice is bad for health. I agree with everything that the honourable member for Moore has said in relation to health, amongst other things. I know why he is adopting the minimalist approach but I do not support the motion because it takes a minimalist approach. I am only speaking for my actions here. I think there should be a complete overhaul. It does not mean less work for members of the parliament. It means better conditions for staff and members of the parliament. It means better productivity. I think all the private members' business that we have as backbenchers is a mistake. We do not need an hour's adjournment every day of a parliamentary sitting. The whips on both sides have to get people out to do the adjournment speeches. There are other ways that we can offset some of this so that government business time is not lost.</para>
<para>I am someone who has always championed private members' business and private members' opportunities, but do not mistake an hour of adjournment debate on a night as quality debate or as providing quality speeches by members of the parliament. When I was shadow minister I was here at five o'clock in the morning and, during the native title debate I was here late at night, night after night, and at seven o'clock in the morning making speeches. We are walking around this place like zombies. That does not serve the parliament well. I think it is high time that the executive, the opposition executive and the backbenchers sit down and have a rational discussion in relation to our hours.</para>
<para>The problem with this particular motion is that an automatic adjournment can create problems for the government of the day. To me the automatic adjournment should be at 7.30 or eight o'clock of an evening, not 11 o'clock, and there should still be that flexibility where, if the government needs to go a little bit further, it should. It is not about working fewer hours.</para>
<para>I was a legal aid solicitor and barrister before I came into this place. On one occasion I had 24 briefs to appear in front of the court on sentences and a mention. I did three trials in three days, three trials in four days. I coped well. In terms of making speeches I was more tired as a shadow minister and sometimes when I was a more active backbencher because of our sitting hours than when I was actually representing people whose liberty depended on my advocacy. Why? Because of the way we have structured our hours. Our hours are Monday to Thursday, then we leave and go home to our electorates where we have different hours. Then we come back, again, to different hours from the weekend hours, to a variation in relation to the way we conduct our business. Then we have two weeks off, when we are in our electorates and we are at functions late at night.</para>
<para>I oppose the honourable member's motion because I do not think the motion goes far enough. This is my personal view; it is not the party's view. I do not think it is productive. I do not think it is good for business. I think that we have made sacrifices in this second chamber. It has worked well. There will be occasions where we need to sit beyond eight o'clock, which everyone can live with. But this automatic 11 o'clock at night adjournment is a joke. It is insane; it is madness. No-one else would cop it. We should not cop it.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>1896</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Marriage Amendment Bill 2012</title>
          <page.no>1896</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r4749">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Marriage Amendment Bill 2012</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>1896</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEPHEN JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
    <electorate>Throsby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>83S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Lyons</name>
    <name.id>M38</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion pro forma.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEPHEN JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I am pleased to provide the second reading of the Marriage Amendment Bill 2012, a bill for an act to amend the Marriage Act 1961 to establish marriage equality for same-sex couples and for related purposes.</para>
<para>The bill is short and to the point. Its focus is on making an amendment to the definition of marriage that is now set out in section 5 of the Marriage Act 1961.</para>
<para>The provisions of this bill</para>
<para>Item 1 of schedule 1 of the bill will amend the definition of marriage that is currently in section 5 of the Marriage Act to read:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Marriage means the union of two people, regardless of their sex, to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.</para></quote>
<para>The bill also amends section 46(1) of the Marriage Act to reflect this new definition of marriage.</para>
<para>Freedom of religion</para>
<para>In Australia, the separation of church and state extends to the law of marriage.</para>
<para>Our laws of marriage primarily exist to regulate a legal contract in which the parties to marriage enter into this contract willingly. They are both free to enter into this contract and they comply with the laws regarding marriage so that this civil arrangement is legally valid.</para>
<para>Our laws also recognise and respect the role of religious organisations to practise their faith, including their practices concerning marriage.</para>
<para>Because Australia's proud tradition of religious freedom is such a fundamental tenet we subscribe to, the bill before the House today inserts a new subsection into section 47 of the act, to reinforce the existing provisions that ensure a minister of religion is under no obligation to solemnise a marriage where the parties to that marriage are of the same sex. This provision will absolutely ensure that the principle of religious freedom is maintained when it comes to the laws of marriage in Australia.</para>
<para>This Marriage Act became Commonwealth law after Sir Garfield Barwick introduced the bill into this parliament in 1960 to provide for uniform marriage laws across Australia. In his second reading speech, Sir Garfield made the following observation:</para>
<quote><para class="block">…it will be observed that there is no attempt to define marriage in this bill. None of the marriage laws to which I have referred contains any such definition. But insistence of its monogamous quality is indicated by…the provisions of the Matrimonial Causes Act which render a marriage void where one of the parties is already married and by a provision in this bill making bigamy an offence.</para></quote>
<para>As many of those in this place would well know, the definition of marriage in the Commonwealth Marriage Act is a relatively recent inclusion.</para>
<para>Indeed, it was not until the Marriage Legislation Amendment Act 2004, introduced in this place by the then Attorney-General and current member for Berowra, that the Marriage Act included the current definition.</para>
<para>In his second reading speech to the bill, the then Attorney set out the following reasons for inclusion of a definition of marriage:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Including this definition will remove any lingering concerns that people may have that the legal definition of marriage may become eroded by time.</para></quote>
<para>Far from representing an erosion, this bill extends the right of marriage to same-sex couples. Far from eroding it, it recognises that marriage equality is now something that the majority of Australians are comfortable with and accept.</para>
<para>While marriage is an old institution, it is not immutable.</para>
<para>Practices and understanding of marriage have changed in accordance with societal norms and they will continue to do so. I believe this is reflected in the fact that the Commonwealth laws with regard to marriage have been amended by every single government in this place since their inception.</para>
<para>Why this b ill?</para>
<para>At the end of 2011 the Australian Labor Party voted to change its policy to allow for equal access to marriage for all adult couples, irrespective of sex, who have a mutual commitment to a shared life.</para>
<para>The ALP also voted to allow a conscience vote on any legislation due to give effect to this.</para>
<para>The bill that I bring before the House today reflects that change in policy.</para>
<para>Conclusion</para>
<para>The aim of this bill is to end discrimination against same-sex couples who wish to have their relationship recognised by the state.</para>
<para>In practical terms it will give same-sex couples the same rights and obligations in their marriage as I have in mine.</para>
<para>It also sends a powerful message that our belief in equality and a fair go is not limited by a person's sexuality.</para>
<para>I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHRISTENSEN</name>
    <name.id>230485</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In a video recorded for the Australian Christian Lobby and for the benefit of people of faith right across this country, just before the 2009 election, the Prime Minister made this statement:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We have determined, as a Labor Party, that the Marriage Act will stay unchanged so marriage will be defined as it is in our current Marriage Act, as between a man and a woman, and we have also said that the Labor Party policy is we do not want to see the development of ceremonies that mimic marriage ceremonies and so that's the party policy and as Prime Minister, as leader of the parliamentary Labor Party, that's obviously my policy and that's what you should expect to see from the Gillard Labor government if we're re-elected.</para></quote>
<para>That is a pretty clear, explicit and unequivocal statement from the Prime Minister, from the leader of the Labor Party. To press the point, in the context of this interview, the interviewer—the Australian Christian Lobby's Managing Director, Brigadier Jim Wallace—went on to ask the Prime Minister:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Can I just say that obviously one of the concerns of the constituency here is the knowledge that this was only, it seemed, upheld by direct intervention of the highest levels of the party at the last Labor conference. So you're saying that a Gillard Labor government will keep that policy in place?</para></quote>
<para>To which the Prime Minister replied, 'Absolutely'.</para>
<para>Then she went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I was personally and directly involved in this policy and its development at the last national conference.</para></quote>
<para>So it is very clear that at the 2009 election the Australian Labor Party made a solemn commitment to the electorate to support the legal definition of 'marriage'—that definition, as it is in the current Act, being as between one man and one woman.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister famously made another promise less than a week before election day 2010 when she said, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.' And just like we saw that promise broken last year, this month we have seen another promise broken with the introduction of the Marriage Amendment Bill 2012 by the Labor member for Throsby after Labor changed its policy at the national conference. And just like the broken carbon tax promise, this broken promise has come at the pushing of my good friend the member for Melbourne and also the Greens. It just shows, after the events of this morning, that in the Labor Party absolutely nothing has changed. We still have a minority government that does not know where it is going and that is completely driven and led by the nose by Senator Bob Brown and his Green colleagues.</para>
<para>Instead of hearing excuses as to why this change happened and hearing lines from the Prime Minister like 'I still support marriage as it is currently defined', the question needs to be asked as to why the Labor Party has gone awry on this issue. That is a decision the Labor Party has made. It obviously has the support of their rank and file and I assume the parliamentary party as well, or at least the majority of members. For the people who sit in churches every Sunday, who cast their vote for the Labor Party on the basis of the Prime Minister's statement, let me read that again:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We have determined as a Labor Party the Marriage Act will stay unchanged, so marriage will be defined as it is in our current Marriage Act as between a man and a woman.</para></quote>
<para>I read that for those people who cast their vote for the Labor Party on the basis of this issue—this sacrosanct issue for them—not being changed, for the definition of marriage to be retained. What those people should hear from this government and from this Prime Minister is: 'Sorry. Sorry that we once again have duped you. Sorry that we said one thing before the election and now are doing a very, very different thing afterwards.'</para>
<para>But the proposal by the Labor Party to change the legal definition of marriage is not just wrong on the grounds that it is a broken promise. It also flies in the face of Australia's international obligations, because same-sex marriage lends itself to more children being raised without both their biological mother and biological father as their parental figures. Every child deserves a mother and a father. Article 7 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.</para></quote>
<para>Every child deserves a mother and a father. You know why? Because it works. A 2010 Australian Institute of Family Studies report entitled <inline font-style="italic">Families then and now</inline><inline font-style="italic">: 1980-2010</inline> showed that 72 per cent—almost three-quarters—of Australian families with children under the age of 18 years are intact biological families. That is about 2.1 million families in this country. We only need to look at other examples of where children have been robbed of this right to be raised by their mother and father, by their natural parents, to see what trauma it has caused them. When we look at the Aboriginal Australians who were removed from their parents, possibly with the best of intentions of the governments involved at the time, we can see the deep and lasting psychological scars that many Indigenous people still have to this day brought about by their removal through government policy.</para>
<para>Last year's Senate inquiry into the donor conception system in this nation exposed the angst felt by many persons. One such person speaking publicly on this issue said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I was always really proud of being donor created—</para></quote>
<para>from time to time we do hear children of same-sex families say they are proud—</para>
<quote><para class="block">but, once I had kids of my own, I realised what I had been deprived of. I have a fantastic relationship with my parents … but things are missing; things that couldn't be provided—identity, heritage, history.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">When I look in the mirror, I don't know who that person is.</para></quote>
<para>When I read those words from someone who has been robbed of the right to a mother and father I wonder to myself if we can honestly be sure that as result of this bill we will not be hearing from children of same-sex marriages in the future saying that they have been deprived of a mother or a father and talking about being robbed of their identity, their heritage, their history and their right to a mother and father.</para>
<para>Marriage is all about family—it is all about children; it is all about creating a legal union between a man and a woman, providing permanence in their relationship and establishing a legal bond between those two people and their children. Yes, it is for the benefit of parents but more so for the benefit of children and, as a result, the benefit of society. The only way society can continue is through children. The only reason government is involved in the regulation of relationships through the Marriage Act is because procreation is the only way society can go on. If it were not for that fact, the government would not be playing in this field at all. This is a very important issue that has been neglected in this whole debate. The Labor Party need to come back to the Australian people with what they promised them before the 2010 election. That promise was that the policy would be retained—the Greens can have their policy, but the Labor Party policy—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>83S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member should remember he is speaking to a private member's bill—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHRISTENSEN</name>
    <name.id>230485</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Put forward by a Labor member—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>83S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes but as a private member, and you should reflect upon the seriousness of that as an issue.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHRISTENSEN</name>
    <name.id>230485</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I would say that the private member is a member of the Labor Party and at the last election— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We have reached a pivotal moment in our journey towards marriage equality. Parliament now has before it three bills that, if enacted, would remove discrimination from the Marriage Act, and across the country support for equal love is now deeply felt and widespread. There is a sense of inevitability about the change coming—that love will, eventually, prevail. In fact, the Prime Minister is reported to have acknowledged this inevitability at a recent dinner at the Lodge with same-sex couples. Yet the path to marriage equality is still blocked—blocked by a Prime Minister frightened of more division in her party; blocked by an opposition leader unwilling to let go of the past; and blocked by a lack of courage amongst many in this place who know what is right but as yet are unwilling to stand by their convictions.</para>
<para>As I have said, this is a pivotal moment but also a moment of great danger to those who seek to make marriage equal. There is a real danger that if we act too quickly and move too fast on progressing these bills, we will lose the best opportunity we have of bringing about lasting change. That is why the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill, cosponsored by the member for Denison and me, will be examined by the House and Senate inquiry before we move to a vote. That is why I have sought to work with other members in this place to put in place a single bill to end discrimination. I hope that the committee process can identify which elements of the three bills are the best and that we use the next few months to bring together a single bill. There are some differences between this bill and the Greens' Marriage Equality Amendment Bill—for example, the manner in which the bills deal with religious protections and the extent to which consequential change to related legislation can be made. These are small but significant differences that should be examined.</para>
<para>I say to the mover of this bill, the member for Throsby, and others in Labor, that there is nothing to be gained by pressing forward with this bill at this time and everything to lose. Labor forfeited the right to treat this issue as a government reform when it moved to a conscience vote, so this is a private member's bill. As we have seen time and time again in this place, the best chance we have of getting such a bill through this place is one that is co-sponsored across the parties. So I urge those in Labor who want to see marriage equality to slow down, take a deep breath and work with members across the parties to get this through. The reality is that we do not yet have the numbers in place to pass these bills—neither my bill, nor the member for Throsby's bill nor Senator Hanson-Young's bill. That is the fact of the matter. We do not have the numbers yet to pass these bills because the old parties are not yet willing to support full equality. Yes, Labor changed its platform; but it squibbed on real reform by allowing a conscience vote. At the moment, this has left the fate of marriage equality in the hands of the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, who has bound his cabinet against change and, as a result, has tied the hands of most of the Liberal members in this place. This is despite the Liberal Party's claim to support individual liberty and freedom.</para>
<para>So we are in a dangerous situation, potentially, where a step forward too fast will mean that the last several years of campaigning could come to nought. There is no doubt that many in the old parties would like the push for marriage equality to fail. We know that there are those who would like to push this bill to a failed vote and then, perhaps, to blame Tony Abbott. There are others who have stated publicly that they would rather that parliament discuss a proposal for civil unions that would entrench two tiers of citizenship in this country. Without taking anything away from those who have chosen to participate in the civil unions just legislated in Queensland, we know that civil unions are not full equality. So there are potentially other agendas here. There are many in the old parties who want to get marriage equality off the agenda and they want to move forward to a losing vote on these bills. I want to make it absolutely clear that the Australian Greens will not be part of any such agenda. Every last member of our team supports marriage equality. We have been fighting for full equality for years and we are not going to give up now. So I call on the member for Throsby and those on the government side who support marriage equality to hold off on a vote on this bill. Regardless of today's debate, we should not rush headlong to a vote that we will lose.</para>
<para>The process that I have just outlined is what those who wish to marry would want, and that is the clear message from equal marriage advocates. Let us take time to build more support. This reform will surely fail if any one party tries to own it. In order to get this reform through we have to be prepared to share the love. The march to freedom and equality has never been easy. It is a road that takes many twists and turns. It must forde many streams and climb many obstacles. I believe that freedom's march can never be denied, because it is powered by one of the most powerful and fundamental of human values—that is, the power of love. It is the love of others and love of those close to you. It is the love of humanity and the love of one's neighbours and friends. It is the love of one's children and the love of one's partner. This is the persistent motivation that has driven history's struggles for freedom and it continues to be today. Regardless of attempts to deny it, this love will not be denied.</para>
<para>In one of his most famous passages, from Corinthians, St Paul said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Love is patient, love is kind.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.</para></quote>
<para>So I believe that, with love's perseverance, we will one day soon remove the barriers to equal love. But if marriage equality is to be achieved it will need love's patience as well. I want to thank the member for Throsby for his commitment to marriage equality and I say again: let us work together to get this done. On that basis and with those reservations I commend this bill to the House, I commend my and the member for Denison's bill to the House and I commend Senator Sarah Hansen-Young's bill for consideration. It is my fervent hope that, after the committees have inquired into these bills and reported on them, we will be able to move forward in a unified position joined, which is my greatest hope, by someone from the coalition benches who believes what they say when they say that an individual should have the right to do as they choose provided that it does not harm someone else.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 13 : 31 to 16 : 00</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2011-2012, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2011-2012</title>
          <page.no>1902</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <p>
              <a type="Bill" href="r4743">
                <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2011-2012</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a type="Bill" href="r4742">
              <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-SubDebate">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2011-2012</span>
              </p>
            </a>
            <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-Normal">
              <span class="HPS-Normal">Cognate debate.</span>
            </p>
            <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-Normal">
              <span class="HPS-Normal">Debate resumed on the motion:</span>
            </p>
            <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-Small">
              <span class="HPS-Small">That this bill be now read a second time.</span>
            </p>
            <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-Normal">
              <span class="HPS-Normal">to which the following amendment was moved:</span>
            </p>
            <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-Small">
              <span class="HPS-Small">That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:</span>
            </p>
            <p style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;" class="HPS-Small">
              <span class="HPS-Small">"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House is of the view that, in light of global economic uncertainty and existing pressures on Australian industry and jobs, the Government should not appropriate funds for measures associated with the introduction of a carbon tax to allow for the postponement of introduction of the tax until after elections have been held for the 44th Parliament and the Parliament has met."</span>
            </p>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp> (Dawson) (16:01):</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHRISTENSEN</name>
    <name.id>230485</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to highlight issues of significance both nationally and in my electorate of Dawson. Contrary to what this government would have us believe, people are doing it tough. The Prime Minister and Treasurer have been eager to spruik the economy and to say that everything is so much better than it is in Greece, but they have failed to mention how this government has emptied the country's bank account and racked up the biggest debt we have ever seen.</para>
<para>The problem with this drunken-sailor approach to running the economy is that it only works for so long—the money runs out, so the drunken sailor borrows more and more. Eventually the government will reach a point where it cannot keep borrowing money and will have to start paying it back. While this government points the finger at other economies around the world which are in dire straits because they spent beyond their means, the fundamentals that drive the economy long-term are getting out of control. People are hurting, and, with a drunken sailor at the wheelhouse, things are only going to get worse. People are scared of the carbon tax for a reason. They call it a fear campaign, but it is simply a matter of telling the truth—and the truth is that people should be scared. Electricity will cost more under the carbon tax. Rates will cost more under the carbon tax. Food will cost more under the carbon tax. The truth is that everything will cost more under the carbon tax, even when families are already struggling.</para>
<para>Businesses are also struggling. Here are some examples of how much more businesses will pay just for electricity under the carbon tax. Bushman's Bread in Mackay will see an increase of between $18,000 and $24,000 in its electricity prices under the carbon tax. Harrup Park Country Club will see an increase of between $39,600 and $52,800 in its electricity prices under the carbon tax. G&S Engineering will see an increase of between $63,000 and $84,000 in its electricity prices under the carbon tax—so we will be looking at an additional cost of $84,000 to that business for electricity because of the carbon tax.</para>
<para>How does a small business or a growing business offset a cost such as that? Businesses in my electorate have already told me that they are going to have to look at cutting back on staff. The Prime Minister said last year about the carbon tax, 'It has price impacts. It's meant to. That's the whole point. If you put a price on something, then people will use less of it.' So another alternative for businesses would be to operate according to the reasoning of the Prime Minister, the Labor Party, the Greens and the collection of Independents, all of whom think that an increase in the cost of electricity for Bushman's Bread in Mackay will mean that the company will cut back and only bake half a loaf of bread or half bake a loaf of bread—one of the two.</para>
<para>The problem is that this tax is a half-baked plan from a half-baked government that is half confident in its own leader. They do not even have a mandate for the carbon tax. Business owners did not give them the mandate; neither did the families they employ, who are already struggling. Families living in Mackay are bearing the brunt of the resources boom. It is a boom for some, but not everyone is working in the mines. The increased demand in the city has driven up prices as businesses compete for resources, especially labour, and people compete for housing. If you are not employed in the resources sector but are stuck renting an average home for $500 a week or more, you are going to be struggling. If you were not in the resources sector in nearby Moranbah, where rents range from $1,400 to $3,200 a week, you were squeezed out of town a long time ago. In the nearby Whitsundays there is one industry, tourism. How can a family not be struggling in this region when they have suffered several cyclones, including a direct hit, and had the tourism destination's image trashed by the media, creating the impression that all of Queensland was at one stage flooded out? To top things off, a tourist destination relying on international visitors will always struggle to come out of the global financial crisis when the skyrocketing Australian dollar is deterring overseas visitors and driving domestic tourism offshore. Tourism is an exporter and a price taker. If Australian tourist destinations cannot compete with overseas destinations then Australian tourism just does not do business. So why on earth would this government introduce a carbon tax which Australian companies in tourism, including airlines and marine operators, will have to pay but which their overseas competitors will not have to pay? That is driving business out of the country and locking the door behind them.</para>
<para>The same applies to the northern parts of my electorate, where the entire economy of the Burdekin is underpinned by the sugar industry. It is our second biggest market in Mackay. Sugar is another export market, another price taker. This is another industry that will have to pay the costs of this ridiculous carbon tax and will not be able to pass on those costs to their overseas customers. Canegrowers, the peak body, estimates that the carbon tax will cost farmers more than $80 million in its first five years. So, if people are hurting now, worse is to come.</para>
<para>This government made a big deal at budget time last year of the fact that the budget was all about jobs, jobs, jobs. With deference to the tourism industry, where the bloody hell are they? For the first time in 20 years Australia recorded zero jobs growth, and that is with a government focusing on jobs creation and before the carbon tax has even started. What will the carbon tax contribute to jobs growth? It will not boost jobs, that is for sure. Where are the green jobs going to come from? Nowhere—but we can see where the jobs will go. You cannot push business offshore, you cannot push industry offshore, you cannot push manufacturing offshore without pushing the jobs offshore as well. People in Mackay locked into big mortgages cannot afford to be unemployed. In the Whitsundays, the remaining businesses cannot afford to operate if the community sees further job losses. In the Burdekin, job losses would kill the town and destroy our nation's food production capacity.</para>
<para>In Townsville, in suburbs like Wulguru and Oonoonba, we have battlers already struggling to make ends meet. How do they feel when they see the government imposing a carbon tax and on the other hand wasting taxpayer dollars? What do they feel when they read about this government delivering set-top boxes for $698 when they know they can walk down to the local retailer and get one for $19 off the shelf? It is no wonder these people feel that they are the forgotten families. They have had enough of the drunken sailor approach. They have had enough of this government pandering to a handful of minority interest groups in the capital cities.</para>
<para>I am very fortunate to be in an electorate that is driving the economy of this nation. My constituents are proud of what they are contributing. The wealth of the country is produced by hard work and long hours put in by people in regional Australia. It is the wealth that is keeping the nation afloat. What they are not proud of is the disdain with which they are treated by this government. They work hard, they pay high taxes, they pay the high cost of living and the high cost of housing, and this government rewards them by taxing them more. They put the world's biggest carbon tax on everything and give these hard workers nothing in return. There is no compensation for people working in the resource industry, regardless of how hard they work or the fact that their real disposable income is often lower than that of capital city families who receive compensation. They want the government to stop wasting the wealth that regional Australia generates and to start investing in the regional infrastructure required for sustained wealth generation. They want to see a fair share come back to the region in the form of roads, in the form of a safe and reliable national highway and in the form of the same sort of social infrastructure that capital city families take for granted.</para>
<para>Within the electorate of Dawson one of our most serious concerns is the condition and safety of our road network, a network badly damaged during a summer of natural disasters—and again, this summer, there has been a lot of heavy rain in the north. I have spoken already in this place about local roads and how federal funding is needed. Peak bodies and government departments at local and state levels all agree that with the current funding levels local governments have enough money only for asset replacement. They simply do not have the money for capital investment in infrastructure and do not have the ability to keep slugging ratepayers to raise those funds. So how do we build new roads?</para>
<para>How are we to reconstruct poor and dilapidated roads and roads damaged by heavy traffic associated with the mining boom in my region? Ratepayers cannot continue to be slugged through their rates. There is only so much money that each household has to contribute. We need to have a decent offer on the table from the federal government's roads funding program, Roads to Recovery. I do not care which colour of politics is in power, I will always be an advocate in this House for a minimum of $1 billion a year to go to the Roads to Recovery program to fund some of these roads.</para>
<para>In addition to local roads, we have the Bruce Highway which last month was described by a RACQ spokesman as 'the most dangerous of the national highways in the country'. At about 40 deaths a year on average, it is a serious issue that the government needs to step up and improve. It is not just a matter of safety; it is a matter of reliability. Just within my electorate, the Bruce Highway has flood-prone sections that impair industry frequently for prolonged periods. We have the Goorganga Plains which cut the airport off from the tourism area of the Whitsundays. Today flights in and out of the Whitsundays have been cancelled due to a flooded Bruce Highway. We have Sandy Gully near Bowen where even a brief shower can stop workers from getting to the multibillion-dollar project in the north, Abbott Point. We have Yellow Gin Creek just before the Burdekin which is regularly flooded, cutting off access to Townsville. We have the Haughton River bridge, a small and unsafe bridge without proper guardrails.</para>
<para>One area where the Bruce Highway also has difficulty is in Mackay due to traffic congestion. In addition to local traffic and highway traffic, we have an increasing number of trucks accessing the industrial hub and the port. We have a state government that has waited far too long to address the issue of connecting the northside residential areas with the southside and western employment areas. Now that upgrades have been made on some bridges, we still see congestion. The combination of a ring-road and a river crossing to connect the port with the industrial centre, while bypassing the city, will make the task of getting to work and getting things done a lot easier. It will free up other routes for more productive purposes. It will be faster, more efficient and more productive. I note with interest that the local state Labor member for Mackay, Tim Mulherin, recently said his idea for a ring-road would be a connector from the northern beaches of Mackay to the southside industrial area. They say imitation is the greatest form of flattery, because yours truly came up with the concept 18 months ago and put it out publicly after a discussion with the local mayor, Col Meng. I made it public during the election campaign.</para>
<para>Maybe that is why the Leader of the House was looking at my website a few weeks ago, searching for more ideas. I can only guess that he got on Google and typed in, 'How to fix the Bruce Highway' to find my Fix the Bruce campaign. I have some advice for those opposite and the Leader of the House: stay tuned. For their information, the Fix the Bruce campaign will start in April and we will be encouraging the community to nominate areas of the Bruce Highway that need upgrading and to contact the federal Treasurer about funding it. It has become clear that the state Labor government and the federal conglomerate government are incapable of prioritising work. But we will compile information and use it when it comes to funding priorities when this government is sent to the naughty corner at the next election. While the state government has a main roads minister who would not know a ring-road from a ring hole, a minister too busy putting his left foot in and putting a press release out to fix potholes, the Liberal National Party in Queensland and the federal Liberal-National coalition have been putting together a plan.</para>
<para>If that is their vision for the highway, they must have binoculars, because they are leaving things to the state government's 10- to 20-year time frame. They are leaving this to be addressed for up to a decade or more, knowing they will be long gone from government by then and a long time from being in government again. We cannot wait a decade; we certainly cannot wait two decades for stuff to be fixed. We need a fix for the Goorganga Plains now. We need a fix for Sandy Gully now. We need a fix for Yellow Gin Creek now. We need the Haughton River bridge fixed now. We need a fair share returned to the region, so we can continue to produce the nation's wealth.</para>
<para>The people of Dawson also need the social infrastructure and they deserve it. Just the social infrastructure promised during the election campaign would be a good start. I have growing concerns about the red tape and bureaucracy that the government is putting in place for local groups who were promised funding during the 2010 election campaign. That is a concern when you look at the long list of infrastructure that is needed. The Mackay ring-road I spoke of is a critical piece of infrastructure that will remove obstacles for the mining sector. An upgraded road network is also required in the industrial sector that services the resources sector. The upgrade should include Connors Road bridge and the duplication of Milton and Paradise Streets, taking access to four lanes.</para>
<para>But infrastructure is more than just industrial needs; social infrastructure cannot be forgotten. Both of these projects—the ring road and the Paget upgrade—were outlined as priorities by Mackay mayor Col Meng when he recently outlined his wish list for the region with the state election there. The mayor rightly included important community and social infrastructure projects on his list. I note in particular the community's need for an upgrade to the showgrounds, a $20 million redevelopment; and projects in the northern beaches of Mackay, notably a $6 million community hub and a $2.5 million injection into sporting infrastructure in that growing residential area of Mackay. The mayor knows, as do the people of North Queensland, that simply ripping money out of the regions through a mining tax or with the state government with mining royalties, not to mention through a carbon tax, is not sustainable in the long term. The government must recognise the needs of regional communities by allocating appropriate funding and getting value for the dollars that are coming out of these regions. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">WYATT ROY</name>
    <name.id>M2X</name.id>
    <electorate>Longman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Australian society that I believe in is a society that encourages its citizens to expand their horizons and to dream big—a society that instils in its citizens the ethos that, with hard work, your goals, your ambitions and your aspirations are always obtainable. So embedded are these aspirational values in our culture that our generation has grown up understanding that homeownership will be reality and employment in our dream job a probability. Our generation has grown up believing that all of our aspirations are possible, because we have grown up in a country that understands the importance of fiscal responsibility, a country that has a strong society and a strong economy.</para>
<para>But something is changing. In this country we have a Labor government that has walked away from the people it once claimed to represent. No longer can our generation afford to assume with careless confidence that our aspirations are understood and respected by the key decision makers in this country. This Labor government is betraying a generation of Australians by threatening our economic stability and way of life, and miserably failing to understand what this country needs. It is for this reason that I rise to speak today.</para>
<para>The aspirations and goals of so many Australians are under threat due to this Labor government's self-serving survivalist nature. Instead of a respect for the forgotten Australians, the very people this government should represent, this government has chosen to pursue its own agenda, to focus internally on its own political survival instead of listening to the forgotten Australians—those hardworking Australians simply trying to get ahead. This government spends most of its time listening to pollsters and spin doctors.</para>
<para>The point is this: since this Labor government took power in 2007 home affordability and real household wealth have declined. Australians are not working any less than they were four years ago—working to own their own homes and maintain their lifestyles, the very things that they aspire to—but this Labor government have continually taken moves that have put real pressure on Australians achieving their aspirations. They have consistently made the lives of hardworking Australians harder, not easier. If this Labor government were listening to those forgotten Australians, they would know that higher taxes and greater government intervention in our lives make it harder, not easier to get ahead.</para>
<para>Let me put this into context how this Labor government has lost its way. It has delivered the four biggest budget deficits in Australian history. This government has turned a $20 billion surplus into $167 billion of accumulated deficits, by taking government spending from 22.9 per cent of gross domestic product to 26.2 per cent of GDP. It has managed to stack up a massive $133 billion of debt, equating to $6,000 for every Australian man, woman and child—a debt burden that will be carried across generations. Australians have watched as this Labor government has turned a $20 billion surplus into $100 million a day in borrowings with a $20 million a day interest bill—a bill that is having lasting damage on our fiscal position. Labor's addiction to wasteful spending is having a broad implications for Australians and Australian business. It is adding pressure to interest rates, which have begun to rise independent of Reserve Bank decisions. Debt, deficits and borrowing are nothing new for the Labor Party. As I have said in this place before, in my lifetime there has not been a single Labor budget surplus handed down. The Labor Party is heading towards its 10th consecutive deficit. Compare this with the 10 coalition surpluses out of 12 budgets. The truth of these statistics is clear: the Labor Party is under the influence of a long-term addiction to wasteful government spending. It is this addiction that has caused the four biggest budget deficits in our country's history. It is in Labor's DNA to waste taxpayers' money and produce budget deficits just as much as it is in the coalition's DNA to be prudent when spending taxpayers' money.</para>
<para>Just like all addicts, this Labor government is making its best efforts to disguise its addiction. In a direct hit on the Australian people and the Australian way of life Labor is attempting to disguise its addiction by penalising the taxpayer. Over the past four years, Australians have been hit with 19 new and increased taxes. What that says to me is that this Labor government is making the aspirations of Australians less achievable in 19 ways. The costs of living are increasing for everyday Australians in 19 new ways. Home ownership is less affordable. Interest rates are going up. Real wages have declined. Real household wealth has declined. Net job availability has declined and productivity has stagnated. This does not paint a good picture for the future of Australia.</para>
<para>There is a better way. We once again need a government that will scrap unnecessary taxes, cut wasteful spending and reduce the tax burden on business. Once again we need a government that is guided by a belief that governments do not have any money of their own; they only have the people's money held in trust. If Australians are to have every opportunity to achieve their aspirations, we again need a government that understands that a hand-up is always better than a handout. We need a government that understands that opportunity is always better than subsidy. We need a government that understands that all Australians should have freedom of choice and we need a government that rewards hard work instead of penalising it. We need a government that recognises that it may not have a solution to every problem, that all too often it is the problem. We need a government that does fewer things but does them better.</para>
<para>These are the fundamental principles that will always guide us as Liberals. These are the principles that the Labor Party will never understand. While we will always believe that you know how to spend your money better than anyone else, the Labor Party will believe that the government know better than you. They will always be driven by a desire to spend more and more of your money. Let us look at Labor's record. We have seen a constant example of waste and mismanagement from a government that refuses to rein in its expenses on poorly planned and executed programs. Over the past four years, we have seen a program giving away set-top boxes at $700—something that could have been purchased and installed commercially for less than half the price. We have seen a billion dollars to install Pink Batts and then another billion dollars to pull them out again. We have seen school hall rip-offs, with a blatant disregard for taxpayers' money.</para>
<para>All of this waste and mismanagement leaves Australians asking what the future holds for our country. This government speculate that they will repay $1.5 billion off their debt next year. Even if we are to believe this speculation, which seems highly unlikely based on their past record, even if we could count on this repayment, at this rate it will take 89 years to pay off the debt. That is like having a $20,000 credit card bill and paying $223 off the credit card in a year. At that rate, by the time Australia is once again in the black, I will be, potentially, 110 years old. That will see Australians of our generation destined to spend their entire working lives repaying this Labor debt, which was incurred in just four years.</para>
<para>Australians are aware that we must take personal responsibility for our financial future, but Australians also rely on us as legislators to make this task as easy and as practical as possible. Australians do not expect or want governments to be acting in ways that will make this task more difficult. Yet this Labor government have left our generation to carry the burden of their reckless decisions and mismanagement across the course of our working lives.</para>
<para>It is clear that this Labor government is out of touch with the aspirations of the people that it once claimed to represent. The last thing that the people of my community expect is that their hard earned dollars will be used to fund the waste and mismanagement of an inefficient and overly bureaucratic government. The locals in my community have a fair expectation that their government takes pressure off budgets, that their government facilitates a prosperous economy that has increasing job opportunities, that their government lives within its means, as they have to, and that their government values their money and delivers better services and infrastructure. Our country will face challenges in the future. Our generation will carry the debt burden of Labor. Our generation will see the challenges of an ageing population whereby we will inevitably have a much greater burden on government, drawing from a smaller tax base. We will face the challenges of a post mining boom economy. We as a nation must meet these challenges from a position of strength. We must take advantage of the opportunities that we now have. To meet these challenges we need to grow the productive capacity of the economy and we need to see more Australians earning higher real wages. It is here that we see the fundamental philosophical divide in our nation. While Labor still believe that they can tax a nation into prosperity, we as Liberals know the exact opposite to be true. As the great forefather of the Liberal tradition in this country, Sir Robert Menzies, said, 'We are a tax reduction party.' Menzies understood then, as the coalition does today, that 'real tax reductions would be the best of all incentives to increase effort, earnings and production'.</para>
<para>As I said in my first speech in this place, it is the Liberal side of politics that is the side of opportunity. We are the party based on encouragement rather than on subsidy and on a hand up rather than on a hand down. It is because of these philosophical beliefs that we will always fight for lower taxes, smaller and more efficient government and the individual's right to choose. It is these principles and this core belief held by the coalition which underline the fundamental difference between the coalition and this Labor government. A coalition government will cut the waste and mismanagement; it will respect the money of the people of Australia.</para>
<para>Under a coalition government we will see high productivity, job growth, sustainable development and a modern enterprise economy that eradicates barriers to opportunity and engagement. Under a coalition government the $133 billion of Labor debt will be paid down and the country will stop borrowing $100 million every day. We will put downward pressure on interest rates, helping Australian small businesses and families, easing the cost of living and rising operating costs for businesses. We in the coalition believe that we need to maximise every available opportunity to plan for our future. We believe that the key to a strong prosperous economy is to get spending down so that we can get productivity up. That means less borrowing, lower pressure on interest rates and less tax.</para>
<para>The two sides of politics could not be further apart. Popular media all too often claim that the major political parties are moving closer together. This could not be further from the truth. There is only one side of politics with a strong plan for Australia's future. We believe in a nation of limitless opportunities, but we also understand that to achieve our aspirations we need to prepare for the future.</para>
<para>May I, once again, look to Menzies. When Menzies launched the first Liberal Party campaign, he said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We need to return to politics as a clash of principles and to get away from the notion that it is a clash only of warring personalities.</para></quote>
<para>The modern Labor Party is nothing more than a clash of personalities, a modern political party devoid of any principles, driven only by pollsters and spin doctors. We on this side of the chamber are prepared to debate principles. We on this side of the chamber, continuing in the Liberal tradition, stand for lower taxes, smaller government and an individual's choice.</para>
<para>Menzies was correct when he said 'We are a tax reduction party,' which stands in stark contrast to the 19 new or increased taxes of this Labor government. It is our commitment to these principles that saw the previous coalition government deliver a 20 per cent increase in real wages, a 100 per cent increase in the net wealth for each Australian and more than two million new jobs. Higher productivity cannot be mandated by government. It does not come from government interference. Higher productivity is born out of creativity and ingenuity of hardworking Australians. It occurs when businesses are part of a strong economy and are set free from red tape. The coalition will achieve higher productivity by cutting red tape for small businesses, helping small businesses with their books by putting downward pressure on interest rates and operating costs. A coalition government will save $1 billion a year in red-tape expenses by requiring government departments and agencies to set targets to reduce regulations and quantify the cost of their regulations. The coalition has a strong plan for Australia, a plan that will see a stronger economy by getting government spending down and productivity up. We will stop the borrowing and repay the debt, easing the pressure on Australians and allowing their aspirations to once again become tangible realities. As the elected representatives of the Australian people our greatest responsibility in this place is to make the lives of those we represent easier, not harder. The coalition will once again restore hope, reward and opportunity to Australian society.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>McMillan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I cannot help but note that there has been an historic event in the life of the parliament in that a Prime Minister has been challenged, and in the lead up to that there were conversations between the challenger and his constituency, which were the front and back benches of the Labor Party and, to a further extent, a jump to the hearts and minds of the Australian people through the press corps and any other medium that may have been opportune for the member to get a message across. In doing so I saw a light at the end of the tunnel, that the combined wisdom of the parliamentary party of the Labor Party was looking at a review of the carbon tax through the challenger.</para>
<para>Having said that, it was a hope not only for Australia but for my electorate of McMillan and the electorate of Gippsland, where we are sitting on perhaps thousands of years of brown coal opportunity and all of the issues that surround the emissions controls that we need to look at as a nation, and which the world is also looking at. In the consideration that perhaps a change of leadership was to happen in this House today, one leader said, 'I would review the carbon tax if I became Prime Minister of this country again.' For me, that was a ray of hope—that some consensus of common sense might come into the debate.</para>
<para>Like all members of parliament I get bombarded from both sides of the emissions argument, and that is for us to deal with as we sift through the information we are given on any issue to try to come up with what is best for the nation, the Australian people and future opportunities. What I saw in this possible review was a clear intention that the road we have gone down at the moment with regard to the carbon tax is wrong for the nation on many counts. The main one is that at this time, when the dollar is at the heights that it is, our manufacturing is under pressure because of that. Growth opportunities for small business—the ideas and the research and the development that have gone into possible new products that may go onto the market across the world born out of Australian ideas and opportunities—have a pressure on them now because of the high Australian dollar. That makes it more difficult for them.</para>
<para>Of course, in my simple thinking if you then invade that situation with a tax that will make us more disadvantaged, you are going to come to a place where the rest of the world must be looking at us and saying, 'Why, when you supposedly have all these things going for you, are you imposing a tax in front of what the world is doing without consideration of what it is going to do to your own economy, nationally?'</para>
<para>You have the protagonist in the former Prime Minister saying, 'Look, there's an issue here.' So why did we have the tax in the first place?</para>
<para>We did not have the tax in the first place because either of the major parties desired it. That was not the reason we had the tax. We had the Prime Minister of the day, Ms Gillard, before an election campaign only 18 months ago, say, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.' Why did she say that when the broad consensus of the leadership of the Labor Party at that time was, 'The carbon tax is not for this country at this time'? She was brutal and forthright in that election campaign. She said to the Australian people many times through that same press gallery, through television and however else she wanted to get that message across, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government that I lead.' So why did we get a carbon tax? On the other side, Mr Abbott said that as sure as light follows day there will be a carbon tax. But the truth was that both parties were saying that there would not be a carbon tax, even though they had said previously that we would move towards an emissions trading scheme.</para>
<para>I spoke to an elderly lady the other day who said, 'Russell, we really should be doing something about our emissions.' There is concern in the community about our emissions. We get the story. But for the next 30 years we are reliant on coal. So we have some issues to deal with as a nation. Both sides of the House told the Australian people honestly that there will not be a carbon tax under the governments we lead. So why did we get a carbon tax? Why has this legislation come before the House?</para>
<para>Why did one of the protagonists for the leadership today say, 'I'll review the carbon tax when it is put in place'? There is concern within our business community on two counts. One: do not say you are going to do something and then not do it and do not say you are not going to do something and then do it, because that confuses all of us as to how we go about our business. Two: now that we have got the tax, we have to deal with it. But now it is suggested by a future leader of the Labor Party that it would be reviewed with a view to reducing it in order to bring it in line with the rest of the world. So, instead of the carbon tax being $23, it would be $5. But, hang on, you have not got the money for the compensation that you offered the people of Australia, and they still want that compensation—but you will not have the money for it.</para>
<para>We heard from the two previous speakers how this tax may affect individuals in their communities. That is not what I am on about. Why did we get this tax when the collective parliamentary wisdom said that we should not have it at this time because it will be detrimental to the nation? But, long term, the collective wisdom of the parliament was saying that we have to do something about our emissions. We have to do something because the Australian people gave us a hung parliament. A minority group was needed to form government. Out of 150 members in the House, one person in the House meant do or die for the Labor government. The deal was: you will give us a carbon tax or you do not get the member for Melbourne's vote.</para>
<para>So I say to the people of Australia and to the truck drivers who are moving across this nation at the moment, if you are feeling under threat it is not because of the collective wisdom of the parliament, it is because of a deal done with the leader of the Greens for a carbon tax. It is not an emissions trading scheme but a carbon tax set at a price that is four times the price that has been set in the rest of the world. In my simple opinion, we will be four times as disadvantaged in our dealings into the future as we would otherwise have been with an emissions trading scheme, which would balance itself with carbon trading around the rest of the world.</para>
<para>So all the Australian people are held hostage for this three-year period to one vote on a most important issue that affects every family and every business—every butcher, baker and life maker. And I do not think that is right. Personally, I am opposed to the carbon tax as it stands today. I am opposed to the carbon tax. I am opposed to the carbon tax because of the burden that it puts on my energy producers in the Latrobe Valley and therefore the workers in those industries—the threat to their livelihood and all that has gone before.</para>
<para>Some would argue that CO2 emissions are not an issue. Others would argue that they are a future issue and that global warming is terribly important. I let the scientists argue. I am of the opinion that we should take out insurance and work towards reducing global emissions, but not throw ourselves on the altar of the green movement for the sake of holding this government together. Perhaps we should have just gone straight back to an election campaign again and had it all out, and let the Australian people decide, so that good governance could come back into this place. Now this government has done a deal with the Greens with one vote in the House, and we have a carbon tax that both parties said was inappropriate for Australia at this time. This is not the way we should be running the nation for the best.</para>
<para>I have heard a lot about the best interests of the Australian people. A lot of cliches have been used this week that take just about anything to mean, 'We are working in the best interests of the Australian people.' I summon all the integrity that I may have to say that I hope they are working in the best interests of the Australian people with regard to our competitiveness overseas, our exports and everything we do, including our education exports. We actually need students from overseas to come here, have their education here, take it back and in turn make their own country wealthy. But outside of saying that, this carbon tax that we are burdening upon ourselves for only political reasons, not for the good governance of the nation, is wrong, and we should be stepping back from it. If the leadership of the Labor Party had changed today, we would have been changing that within a few months. We would have been saying: 'No, this carbon tax is wrong. Yes, we can move to an emissions trading scheme, but this carbon tax that we are imposing on people right across the nation is wrong. It is wrong for the nation. It is wrong for the best outcome for the Australian people.' I know there are people overseas looking at us today and saying: 'Why are you doing this? You are crazy. It's not to the benefit of your country.'</para>
<para>We have not limitless resources anymore, although I believe this nation will be, once again, a wealthy nation. But one day the mining boom is going to be over, and we are going to be relying on what we produce, and what we sell, and what we grow and the other things we have on our side. What we have had on our side for a long time has been cheap electricity so we can manufacture. I am not talking about how we should be into old-fashioned manufacturing, because this nation needs to get the best it possibly can out of its education system, to put us at the forefront of what we may be exporting into the future, which is our intelligence, and we have been very good at it.</para>
<para>So I say to you, Deputy Speaker, today, on behalf of all Australians, that the government of the day should be taking the former Prime Minister's advice and doing a full review of our position with regard to this carbon tax, at risk of losing government. When will we have a government or a Prime Minister that puts the Australian people first, that puts the Australian economy first, that puts Australian business first? Because if you put business first, you put workers first as well—their health, their wellbeing, their future, their generations. I am keen today to make the point—I did not miss it. If Mr Rudd had been elected today, we would have had a review of this terrible tax. This tax is not good for this nation, not good for small business, not good for medium sized business and not good for big business. Therefore, it is not good for Australia. I plead with the government: have a review of this tax, have some strength, have the guts to stand up and say, 'All right, we know it's a deal with the Greens, but we are prepared to review it as a government.'</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms GAMBARO</name>
    <name.id>9K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2011-2012 and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2011-2012. These pieces of legislation give us a change to again highlight the massive waste and the irresponsible misuse of government expenditure by this Labor government. Underlying this is a complete lack of respect for taxpayers' money. Tax revenue is not government money; it is money given to the government by the taxpayers on trust. The men and women of Australia who work hard and pay their fair share of taxes have the right to expect that it will be spent on their behalf in a very responsible way. That is why it is such a shame that we continue to see their funds being abused by the Gillard government.</para>
<para>We know that, since the election of the Rudd government in 2007, approximately $4 billion of expenditure has been wasted by Labor. The trend, unfortunately, continues. The very latest example is the set-top box scheme. This scheme, whilst currently incomplete, is running at approximately $700 per set-top box. That is roughly what was originally estimated. It is many times the amount for which they can be purchased at a retail level. We heard the revelations from Senate estimates that the NBN Co. has used the services of UMR Research, the Labor Party pollsters, to do polling. In an article by Lauren Wilson in the Australian on 15 February 2012, we see that the NBN Co. has spent $35 million on legal fees. That is an enormous amount of money. And yet this massive white elephant has only rolled out active broadband to approximately 4,000 customers.</para>
<para>Then we move to the rebranding of the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. This little exercise has blown out by five times the original $42,000 that was budgeted for. You would never, ever get away with this in the private sector. It demonstrates that those opposite have no appreciation for a dollar, because hardly any of them have ever been involved in the management of a business. That rebranding followed the $31.5 million that was spent on government advertising trying to sell another white elephant, the carbon tax, to the Australian people. This was subsequently criticised by the Auditor-General.</para>
<para>Then we come to the most outrageous of them all: the massive blow-out in the Department of Immigration and Citizenship's budget. Across the entire immigration portfolio, and not including last year's blow-out, the increase for the four years to 2014-15 is $759 million. This is $559 million more than, or almost three times, the $197 million the Treasurer and Minister Bowen told taxpayers the bill would be for immigration when they released the MYEFO for the period last November. In just two months the government appears to have blown out their estimates by almost $560 million. The blow-out revealed in these estimates takes the total budget blow-out from Labor's border protection failures over the three years since the 2009-10 budget to a massive $3.9 billion. And all of this is because of the fateful winding back of the Howard government's border protection measures. In direct contrast to the failed Labor policies, the coalition has a plan to stop the boats and therefore save money by reintroducing temporary protection visas and also restarting the processing of illegal maritime arrivals at Nauru. The shame of all this is that, because of the shameful waste and misappropriation, there are now so many worthwhile projects that will not be funded. I want to talk about some of these local projects that I have been made aware of recently and that I have been happy to support. I spoke in the House recently about the Mental Illness Fellowship of Queensland, which is in my electorate and is trying to get assistance to fund the redevelopment of a new headquarters in Herston. This organisation provides a tremendous service to people across Queensland that suffer from some form of mental health illness. Its new building will be a headquarters, providing mental health support and services. Given that this issue is so important in our community, I really do urge the approval of the application.</para>
<para>There is another current grant application that has recently come to the attention of our office. It is by the Kelvin Grove State College. This fine institution is one of the area's oldest established secondary colleges and enjoys a fine reputation in the local community. The college accommodates approximately 1,800 students from prep to year 12 and offers a number of signature sport excellence programs. The purpose of their particular grant was for a rebuilding of their current tennis facilities. I understand Kelvin Grove's courts had not had a major refurbishment for over 25 years. This project will enable the college and the wider community to have access to four international-standard tennis courts which can be used both day and night on seven days a week. As the college is home to the Queensland Tennis School of Excellence, this refurbishment is absolutely necessary for a standard suitable for elite players.</para>
<para>I also bring to the attention of the House, and express my support for, an application from the Sisters of the Good Samaritan Foundation for funding to assist with the marketing expenses of an important community educational program. The Good Sams foundation, as they are known, provide a wide range of essential community and welfare services in Brisbane. Their key role at the moment is to provide supported accommodation for women and children escaping domestic violence. The foundation plans to run a domestic violence awareness workshop, called Breaking the Silence, in a selected number of Brisbane schools and in the general community. This program will address an urgent and genuine need to promote a very difficult topic which is quite sensitive. The aim is to increase awareness and understanding of the many forms of domestic violence and to offer resources in such a way that the victim can remained unidentified and yet benefit from the courses provided within a session. Hopefully, through awareness we will reduce the number of future victims. The Good Sams foundation would like to supplement the workshop with printed brochures and marketing tools such as a banner and data projection for PowerPoint presentation. These items will be an ongoing resource to attendees and the foundation.</para>
<para>Now I turn to Telecross, another very worthwhile initiative with a program of enormous benefit to the community. It is a program on which I have been working with the Red Cross for a couple of years. The proposal is to set up a system whereby a staff member or a volunteer is scheduled to ring every day an elderly person or a disabled person or an older person who is socially isolated in our community and ensure that they are okay. This is a wonderful idea and I am very supportive of it because there are many people living alone in their homes who do not have too much external contact. Say they fall or have an incident: many elderly people are often found in their homes many weeks or months later. This is a wonderful prevention program because it ensures that a phone call is only a short while away. The program has many community aspects and it involves volunteers. A large number of organisations, including the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, have indicated in the past that they will support the program. It is a low-cost service that will cover the whole of Australia. I estimate its cost at about $9 million and it will save us from the terrible scourge, and the terrible reports that we see, of elderly people being discovered in their homes many months or weeks after an adverse event. No society should go through that. We owe our elderly people our support.</para>
<para>Recently I was at the Kitchener Road Childcare Centre. This is an occasional day care centre and this Gillard government has ripped $12.6 million out of occasional care funding. Occasional care funding gives mums a break if they need to go to a doctor, or if they need to have an operation. They do not want long day care funding, they just want a day here or there that will help them, a day where they can have a dentist appointment or do some occasional study. This is such a worthwhile program, and the Kitchener Road Childcare Centre has been going for over 40 years. It was a very solemn meeting that I attended. Some 60 parents showed up. They have already increased fees. They do not have the option of fundraising. They have looked at different ways to apply for government funding. They do not have the money to convert the centre into a long day care centre. They have funding available until 30 June this year, and after that their future is pretty uncertain. That centre needs $40,000 a year—a very small amount but it impacts on the lives of many families, parents and children. It is worthwhile programs like that that had money ripped out. Many families are being hurt. Then you look at the millions and millions of dollars that are wasted on programs like the pink batts program. That very small amount of money is providing so much community support. Programs like Kitchener Road Childcare Centre are so important to the local community and yet we see other programs where millions are wasted.</para>
<para>The government continues on its misguided and incoherent policies, leading to mismanagement. You just keep reading about it and seeing it. As a federal member of parliament I constantly see these examples of incompetence. The budget deficit is now at $37 billion and rising. Each day it continues to grow. I have a little widget on my website reminding my constituents every day of the levels of debt that continue to rise under this Gillard government. The carbon tax and the recent private health rebate cuts will come into force on 1 July and they will further add to the cost of living for businesses and families in the electorate of Brisbane. But this government stumbles along blindly, too focused on itself and not on the real issues that face everyday Australian families. It prefers instead to wind the clock back 30 years and play that class warfare card and the politics of envy. This 1970s type attitude has no place in modern Australia. This country desperately needs an election to give the Australian people a say on who they want to lead this country through the difficult challenges ahead. I call on this government and I call on the Independents to do the right thing and allow an election to be held so that the people of Australia can decide what direction they want to go in.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HARTSUYKER</name>
    <name.id>00AMM</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the opportunity to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) and Appropriation Bill (No. 4). It certainly has been interesting to watch the theatre over the past week. We see a government tearing itself apart—not focused on the needs of the people of Australia, not focused on our future, but busy fighting amongst themselves over the leadership of their political party. We see a Prime Minister who has lost the trust of the Australian people. We see a Prime Minister whose word is not considered fair dinkum by most Australians. They have seen the promise the Prime Minister made that there would be no carbon tax under a government she led. They saw the promise that the government made to the member for Denison in relation to gambling reform. They saw the promised east Timor solution. On all of these issues, statements were clearly made and clearly articulated by the Prime Minister—an actual statement put not only in words but in writing with the member for Denison, promising that the Prime Minister, as a precondition to her forming a government, would support mandatory precommitment on poker machines. And what happened? As soon as it suited this Prime Minister, she abandoned that promise and we were left with just another example of how this Prime Minister cannot be trusted.</para>
<para>We also see that the Australian people cannot trust this Prime Minister and this government with money. Before us today we have appropriation bills, and the theme of my contribution today will be the endless waste and mismanagement of this government, because whenever this government tries to fix something it seems to get worse. Whenever this government has a new scheme to save us money, we seem to end up deeper in debt. When this government plans to save the planet, we find that our jobs in our factories and in our businesses start moving offshore. Of course this is just a political game for the government with the aim of clinging to power just a little longer. But, for the people I represent, the government's dysfunction and mismanagement is having a real impact on day-to-day living. Full-time, well-paid jobs are more difficult to find because employers are hesitant about the future, and interest rates are higher than they need to be because of the actions of this government. The actions of this government through new taxes are eating into family budgets and, on top of all that, the impact of the carbon tax is yet to be realised.</para>
<para>To give you an example of how out of touch this government is, we discovered recently that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry which was allocated more than $100 million through these bills, recently spent $77,627 on rebranding. Consultants encouraged the department to change its mission statement to exclude the words 'agriculture', 'fisheries' and 'forestry'. Is there anything more absurd than to have a rebranding exercise that removed the words 'agriculture', 'fisheries' and 'forestry'? The farmers and fishermen in my electorate do not care how the department is branded. What they want is freedom from a carbon tax and some degree of confidence that the government understands and respects the work that they do.</para>
<para>Of course, we know this government has failed also in the area of border protection policy, with an additional cost of over $330 million in this year alone. When the Rudd Labor government was elected in 2007, illegal immigration was barely a blip on the political radar or on the budget papers due to the Howard government's strong border protection policies. But, when the Labor government started to roll back the coalition's border protection policies in favour of a policy proudly authored by the now Prime Minister, the boats started arriving and costs started to grow—costs that are being met by the taxpaying men and women of Australia. The additional estimates released by the government recently show a blow-out of a third of the budget in asylum seeker costs: some $866 million to 2014-15. This is almost $560 million more than the figure released in MYEFO only two months ago. The immigration budget now is $2.7 billion for this year alone. Processing and detaining boat arrivals has become a multibillion dollar task which is draining funds away from more productive tasks.</para>
<para>The government would not have had to rip $2.4 billion out of private health insurance if it had not dismantled the Howard government's strong border protection policies. The irony of the government's wasteful spending is that the Prime Minister promised before the last election that she would maintain spending restraint, yet everywhere you look there are cost blow-outs. Unfortunately, we have come to realise just what a promise from this Prime Minister is worth and we now know a promise from this Prime Minister is worth absolutely nothing. The member for Griffith knows the value of a promise by this Prime Minister. He knows more than anyone.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Marino</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Denison.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HARTSUYKER</name>
    <name.id>00AMM</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Denison, as I said, knows the value of a promise from this Prime Minister. He knows all too well, with a document signed in blood by the Prime Minister to support mandatory precommitment. What happens when the pressure is on? We just walk away. With friends like that, who needs enemies?</para>
<para>The Australian people now know exactly how much a promise from this Prime Minister is worth. That is why I concur with my colleague the member for Brisbane, who said, 'What is needed now is an election'—and it very much is. The people of Australia are sick of broken promises. The people of Australia are sick of having a Prime Minister they can no longer trust. The people of Australia are sick of hollow words. We heard all too clearly her promise in relation to the carbon tax, and many people trusted the Prime Minister at that time, to their detriment. Small businesses in my electorate are very concerned about that broken promise on carbon tax. The tourism industry in my electorate is very concerned about that broken promise in relation to the carbon tax. Unfortunately, the carbon tax which we were not going to have and which we are getting on 1 July is going to make it much more difficult for those businesses to survive and compete with competitors overseas. It is of great concern. We are seeing a total lack of confidence out in the community, and a major driver of that lack of confidence is that people have no faith in this government. The small business community has dramatically lost faith in business conditions and in this government because they see a government that is not in control. They see a government that is out of control and is too busy fighting itself to be concerned about the issues that are important.</para>
<para>Increasing prices are flowing through to aviation. Qantas is having to increase its fares. Those fare increases have already taken effect for flights after 1 July, and that is going to have an adverse effect on travel to my electorate in the very important tourism industry. We see other countries defending their airlines against a ridiculous carbon tax. We see the Chinese and the Americans standing up for their airline industries. But what does our Prime Minister do? She just rolls over and plays dead. We do not mind slugging our aviation industry with a carbon tax. We do not mind one bit. We do not care if it is going to put people out of work. We do not care if it is going to have an adverse effect on our tourism industry. We are going to sit there and do nothing in relation to international airlines and we are going to actively work against our airline industry in relation to our local carriers. Many airlines around the world will be flying carbon tax free. Their governments were wise enough to realise that this is a tax that is bad for our country and that is not going to improve the environment one bit. Let me quote the words of Professor Garnaut in relation to the price rises under a carbon tax. Professor Garnaut said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">These higher prices will require households to spend a greater proportion of their incomes to obtain the same goods and services purchased before the introduction of an emissions price. This will reduce households’ real incomes and purchasing power.</para></quote>
<para>I could not agree with him more. He has really belled the cat. This will reduce households' real incomes and purchasing power. Thank you to this government. Thank you to the Independents for supporting this carbon tax, which is so unpopular in their electorates.</para>
<para>What does the government say? They say: 'Don't worry. Some of you will be 20c a week better off.' The Prime Minister says, 'Trust me.' Twenty cents a week better off! If I were the member for Denison I would not be trusting the Prime Minister that you could be 20c a week better off. If I were the average Australian I would not be trusting this Prime Minister that I would be 20c a week better off. If I were a small business person, apart from the impact on my business I would be very concerned about that 20c margin of error. Twenty cents! This is a government that said we were going to have a $22 billion deficit this year, and it blew out to $37 billion. They were out billions and billions in their budget forecast, yet their forecast in relation to the adequacy of compensation—and we will get to compensation in a moment—depends on a margin of error of 20c. I think average Australians are, rightfully, worried about this. As I said, they do not trust this Prime Minister and they certainly would not trust a 20c margin of error.</para>
<para>Another issue that is of great concern is the wasteful spending in the NBN. The coalition agrees there is a need for high-speed broadband. Every Australian should have access to high-speed broadband. We saw a project which, in the true way this government does things, started off at $4.3 billion—fibre to the node; a fairly workable solution. But then there was a rethink. A feasibility study was done by Senator Conroy and the then Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, on the back of a drink coaster on a flight to Perth, and what did we get? A $4.3 billion project blew out to a $50 billion project almost overnight. That would have to be the mother of all cost overruns.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Marino</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And it is not over yet.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HARTSUYKER</name>
    <name.id>00AMM</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And it is not over yet, thank you to the member for Forrest. It is not over yet because day by day we see prices blow out. Day by day we see low take-up rates. Day by day we see the very business plan that underpins the NBN falling apart. The connections are not meeting up with what is anticipated, the speed of construction is nowhere near what is required to meet the business plan estimates, and the cost is blowing out. On April Fools' Day last year we saw that the tender process had to be abandoned. They had 14 tenderers, they went out to the market, and what did the market say? You have not got enough money, guys. You have not budgeted enough. It is going to cost us more. So miraculously, and again there becomes an issue of trust, through a magic process a contract was struck—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Marino</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A magic pudding!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HARTSUYKER</name>
    <name.id>00AMM</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, it was a magic pudding. A contract was struck with Silcar. We do not know what it says; it is completely secret; it is commercial-in-confidence; but we have to trust this government that the contract with Silcar has not exposed taxpayers or the Australian government to increased risk of cost overruns. We do not know what risks we have bought for this contract with Silcar, but I think it is a pretty fair bet that we cannot trust this government. I think it is a pretty fair bet and it is of great concern. Yes, we want high-speed broadband; but we want it done in a timely way and we want it done within a reasonable budget. A $50 billion budget, which is going north, is not reasonable, is not sustainable and is of great concern.</para>
<para>Another concern is the fact that this project is not targeting the worst areas first, and that is a most important thing. It would be common sense to look at those areas where broadband is most deficient and start attacking them immediately. But what do we do? We have a largely politically motivated rollout that picked the eyes out of the politically appropriate sites and have a duplication of services where broadband is already adequate—we actually pay taxpayers' money; we pay Telstra and we pay Opel for nothing more than not to compete with the NBN. Now, if this project were so incredibly superior, as the government would make out, would you not think that market forces would drive people to rush in hordes to the NBN? They would be like barbarians at the gate, trying to get in and get connected. But what happens? We saw in Armidale a take-up rate of two per cent!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Marino</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And 18,000 in total.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HARTSUYKER</name>
    <name.id>00AMM</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That is right: 18,000. We have got about 2,000 people connected to fibre. We have got another 2,000 on satellite. We have got about 18,000 people connected but not using. So it is a pretty small total. And it is of concern that so much money has been poured into it without a feasibility study. This was a government that came to power promising total assessment of major investment decisions. We had Infrastructure Australia formed—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Marino</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>To let the sunlight in</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HARTSUYKER</name>
    <name.id>00AMM</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, the sunlight was going to flow in. We were going to be irradiated with a new warmth and a new glow and we were going to feel confident! What have we got? We have got a Prime Minister who cannot be trusted and a project that is running off the rails. It is north of $50 billion. Who knows where it is going to end? It is of concern. This government cannot manage money. This government cannot be trusted. This government should be facing the people. People should be offered an election so that they can pass their judgment on this government for all of its faults—too many to mention here in the 15 minutes I have available to speak.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TUDGE</name>
    <name.id>M2Y</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I also rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2011-2012 and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2011-2012, which are in front of us. I would like to use the opportunity, if I may, to discuss three important national issues which are confronting my electorate. My electorate is in suburban Melbourne. It is very much a middle-income electorate, 15 or so kilometres out from the centre of Melbourne. It is made up of middleclass families, hard-working people and small business people—aspirational people. So the issues which confront them, I believe, also are very likely to be issues that confront the broader Australian community. There are three issues particularly which they have been raising with me which I would like to touch on today: cost-of-living pressures, job security and manufacturing. The first, cost-of-living pressures, would be one of the issues which gets constantly raised with me when I am out in the community, and I am sure other members equally would have this issue raised with them. It gets raised in the churches, it gets raised at school fetes, it gets raised when you are at the footy or cricket clubs on the weekends. The reason is that people know that the cost-of-living pressures on basic household goods are rising more rapidly than their wages or pensions. These are not discretionary items; these are the necessary items which you and I and every family has to rely upon: petrol, food and groceries, electricity, water, medical expenses and the like. These are the things that are going up well in excess of wages or the official CPI indexation rate.</para>
<para>The difficulties which constituents of mine articulate to me are backed up by the official statistics. When you look at the official statistics of some of these basic household necessities you see that they have gone up already by an extraordinary amount. For example, people's water bills have gone up by 46 per cent since 2008. Their electricity bills have gone up by 50 per cent since 2008—an enormous increase in electricity bills, which, of course, directly impacts on your household budget. It is something that you cannot not use, particularly in winter and particularly in a cooler climate like Melbourne, where you do need to have your heater on. If you are a pensioner, you are often in your house all day and you need to have your heater on. Gas prices have gone up 30 per cent since 2008; medical expenses have gone up 20 per cent since 2008. I think you are starting to get the picture, Deputy Speaker Oakeshott: the official statistics directly back up what constituents and local residents on the ground are telling me and telling other members in this chamber.</para>
<para>There are many reasons why prices go up in excess of the CPI or of our wages. Of course, there are supply and demand issues which impact prices. But a government can also have a significant impact on prices through its policy settings. My critique is that this government's policy settings have been set in the wrong direction and so they are deliberately putting prices up unnecessarily. That is unforgivable. Yes, of course, prices will increase over time because of supply and demand pressures, but, when the government itself is causing prices to go up, that is what is unforgivable.</para>
<para>I want to talk about a few areas where this government has done that. Let me start with the macro level, because at the macro level if you run large budget deficits, which this government has now for four years in a row—$37 billion this year, $50-odd billion, a further $50 billion the year before; the three biggest budget deficits in Australian history—that puts upward pressure on inflation and upward pressure on interest rates. That is the first criticism that I have of the government. Its fiscal policy puts upward pressure on all prices and upward pressure on interest rates.</para>
<para>My second criticism is at the individual level. When you look at individual items, again the government is having an impact on prices going up. Let me start again with electricity. High electricity prices is something that is hurting everybody, and it is particularly hurting pensioners and other people on low incomes or low fixed incomes. What is the government doing? To start with, some of its renewable energy policies, which have been poorly designed, are putting up electricity prices. On top of that is what is coming on 1 July, as all of us in this chamber know. From the government's own figures, the carbon tax will add an additional 10 per cent to the price of electricity. If you ask the electricity sector, they will tell you it is a 20 per cent increase. There will be a 10 per cent increase in the first year alone, let alone in subsequent years when the carbon tax is legislated to increase. So electricity prices will continue to go up through a measure of the government. That is my critique. Let me look at gas prices. Again, with the carbon tax, gas prices are forecast to increase by nine per cent in the first year alone and will continue to go up.</para>
<para>Let us look at child care, another item that is not a discretionary expenditure. If there are two parents at work or if you are a single parent who works, you need to put your child into child care. What has the government done in relation to child care? The first thing they did was cap the rebate so that many families are hitting that cap. But that is not the worst thing. In my view, the worst thing they have done is change the childcare staff-to-child ratios. Whereas it was one staff member to five children, they changed it and mandated that, from 1 January this year, it must be one staff member to four children.</para>
<para>As you can appreciate, in a childcare centre your staffing is your major operational cost so, if you force a childcare centre to go from five to one to four to one, you are in essence increasing your operational costs by about 20 per cent. That flows directly through to childcare prices. You could say that that is improving the quality of the childcare centre. But I ask what the government has to do with this when: (a) there is no categorical research that says four to one is better than five to one; and (b) why can't parents themselves decide in their own right whether they want four to one or five to one? If they are happy with five to one, they can go along to that and it will be a cheaper childcare centre. If they want four to one, I am sure there would be a childcare centre where there is a four to one ratio.</para>
<para>I mention one childcare centre in my community. A woman I have mentioned before in this chamber, Mrs Kulkarni, has written to me saying that there has been a 21 per cent increase in the fees for her this year. She asked:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Why are we being penalised for working hard and paying our taxes? The changes in staff-to-children ratios will not make a life-changing impact on my two-year-old now or over the next three years until he starts school. All of us were very happy with the care being provided before.</para></quote>
<para>But, no, the government here in Canberra knows what is best for my constituents in outer eastern Melbourne! That is what I find egregious. We have residents who are happy with the service and we have childcare centres happy with the service they are providing. But what does the government do? It has to get its fingers in there and say, 'Oh, no, it's not good enough for the childcare centre and not good enough for the parents; it's got to be four to one,' and as a result the prices will go up by 21 per cent. Thanks very much! What will happen then? Parents will pull their kids out and parents will not be able to work. We have a participation problem that is contributing to a lack of productivity, which is a problem. It is poor policy design like this from an overbearing government which is also contributing to price increases.</para>
<para>Health care is the next item on my list. We debated this last week. Changes to the health insurance rebate will cause an increase in all health insurance premiums, which will go up by an estimated 10 per cent across the board, according to Deloitte. That will mean that some people will pull out and go to the already overburdened public hospital system, and for the taxpayer overall it will be more expensive. I fail to see how that is good public policy. It just adds to the cost-of-living pressures of everyday families in my electorate and, indeed, across Australia.</para>
<para>It is not just the policy designs that have led to price increases; there have also been a number of targeted tax increases which have put up prices for everybody on things like cigarettes, motor cars and alcohol. Prices have been forced up for residents.</para>
<para>The carbon tax will add an additional $400 to the cost of an Australian made motor car. It will not be added to the cost of a Hyundai, coming in from South Korea, but it will be added to the cost of a Holden, a Toyota or a Ford, which are built right here in Melbourne and South Australia. It is unbelievable. Do you think that will make a difference to the climate? Will the weather be different because we are adding $400 to the cost of an Australia made motor car? No, it will not. All it will do is make those motor cars more expensive for Australians and lose jobs in the Australian motor car industry.</para>
<para>Not only have we had taxes increased but we have had benefits reduced. In the last budget many people had their family tax benefits A and B frozen. Over 10,000 people in my electorate alone were impacted by that. Even microbusinesses at the micro level—the low-income, independent business owners—have now lost the entrepreneurs tax offset, which provided a little bit of tax relief for those microbusinesses earning less than $75,000 a year.</para>
<para>At the macro level we have a poor policy setting. We have taxes up across the board, we have poor policy design in a number of areas—which puts up prices—and in many cases we have had benefits removed. All of those things contribute to cost-of-living pressures for everyday Australians both in my electorate and across Australia. Thatis my criticism of the government. Sure, there are supply and demand issues, but my key criticism is that they have put in place poor policies, increased taxes or removed benefits because they are trying to get control of their budget, which is presently completely out of control.</para>
<para>In the last couple of minutes I have available to me, let me touch on job security and manufacturing. We know that job security is an emerging issue in this nation. The unemployment figure is at 5.2 per cent, but I believe that that significantly underestimates the real figure. Roy Morgan estimates that it is more like 10.3 per cent and, if you also include the underemployed, it is 17.8 per cent. Those are extraordinary figures. I am not suggesting that governments can just create all of these jobs. The government cannot create jobs; businesses create jobs. We as a nation need to make the business environment attractive for businesses to thrive. That means lowering taxes, getting the budget under control so that interest rates can be lower. It means a more flexible industrial relations system where individuals and bosses can come to some sort of agreement which is mutually beneficial for them both. It means incentives for R&D so that innovation can be the real driver for productivity. It means generally creating a sense of hope for our business community that there will not be another hit around the corner, which is presently what many businesses currently think. If you put those sorts of things in place, that is how you get productivity, job creation and businesses to thrive. Indeed, that is how we will best support our manufacturing industry. It cannot be sustained by having the government throwing money at it. It will only be sustainable in the longer term if those businesses are profitable in their own right. We can help achieve that by creating a strong business environment.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MARINO</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Unfortunately for the people in my electorate and those right around the country these bills, Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2011-2012 and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2011-2012, are the latest evidence that the Labor government is utterly incompetent. It cannot manage the Australian economy and it cannot even manage its own programs. These bills are classic and practical examples. The government created a massive problem when it changed the coalition's proven strong border protection policies. In fact, the total blow-out in asylum seeker management costs since the 2009-10 budget, revealed in the latest estimates, is $3.9 billion. Over 15,000 people have arrived as a result. You have raised some important issues, member for Aston, and I ask: who was paying? I think we know—our electricians, our plumbers, our teachers, our nurses, our truck drivers, our farmers and our small businesses are all paying for this. Once again the Labor government is imposing more cost and more debt—$3.1 billion alone in these bills—on hard-working, aspirational Australian taxpayers. The government is doing this simply because it is dreadfully incompetent and absolutely addicted to wasteful spending. This government is borrowing $100 million every single day just to feed the greatest net debt our nation has ever seen. It has borrowed $136 billion and counting, which is larger than the disgraceful debt legacy of the Hawke-Keating Labor era. It also has cumulative deficits of $167 billion. They are appalling figures.</para>
<para>In 2007, Australia's total budget was $272 billion, but, as a result of the government's spending, it is expected in 2011 to be $370 billion plus. That is an increase in spending of $100 billion—40 per cent. Also, the government has lifted the gross debt ceiling from the 2007 level of $75 billion to $250 billion. The government has disgracefully wasted billions on its pet projects such as pink batts, which cost $2.5 billion and counting and is still wasting taxpayers' dollars even in this misnamed 'clean-out phase'. I see in one of the newspapers that nearly a quarter of the jobs in the program now are either unsafe or substandard, so it is still costing.</para>
<para>I believe the Australian people deserve to know the full extent of this out-of-control but tragic debacle. The judicial inquiry called for by the shadow minister for climate action, environment and heritage, the member for Flinders, is needed. The government, however, does not learn by its mistakes; it is a repeat offender. Just look at the reckless spending on set-top boxes. The cost of each one is now estimated to average $698, which is almost double the government's original estimate and more than the cost of a digital TV with a 106 centimetre screen. The set-top box program is so hard for pensioners to access that they often give up and themselves pay $100—a sum which includes installation—for a set-top box. We also know that the government has spent nearly $1 million on legal bills so far for the alleged corruption investigation into the member for Dobell. This Labor government, as we have seen this past week, is far more interested in its own survival than it is in the welfare of the Australian people. That is an indictment of it, and it is its legacy. This Labor government will be remembered for all the wrong reasons well into the future.</para>
<para>Let us look more closely at the appropriations in these bills. According to the government's own latest estimates, there has been an additional budget blowout in asylum seeker costs of $866 million. As a result, the government has come back to this parliament to seek an immediate appropriation of $330 million to cover the shortfall in last year's costs and the expected increase for this year. On top of this, the government is asking for an extra $759 million over the four years from 2014-15. In 2011-12, the immigration budget will cost Australian taxpayers $2.73 billion. That is $1 billion more than the $1.69 million it cost in 2007-08. This stands as a towering monument to the incompetence of the Gillard government, whose failure has to be subsidised by working Australians. In many cases these working Australians, who are underwriting Labor's failures, are the very people—those aspirational Australians—who are under attack by the Gillard government for working hard to support themselves. Average working families on standard incomes are being hit again and again to subsidise Labor's waste. They were hit by the baby bonus means test and by the family tax benefit means test, and they will be hit by the carbon tax ahead of us—all of which the Labor government promised was never going to happen. 'Trust us,' the government has said before each election. The government will also hit hardworking Australians with their private health insurance costs, and I am waiting to see what will happen with private school costs.</para>
<para>The small business sector in my electorate and across Australia is in the direct firing line of the government. Given the over 12½ thousand pieces of legislation introduced by the government, small businesses are virtually being red-taped into bankruptcy. Small businesses are doing it tough—we know there are, I think, 10,000 fewer than last year. And the South West is no exception. This would probably come as no surprise to members on our side of the House, who maintain very close relationships with their small business operators, but it must be news to the government or they would be acting to ease the burden on small businesses, which are the foundation of the Australian economy and employ millions of Australian workers.</para>
<para>The coalition take their issues very, very seriously, and we have formed our own committee to examine the impact of government regulation on the small business sector. During a recent walk through central Bunbury to talk to business owners in my electorate, I met several who were having to close their doors. These people should have been able to concentrate on their businesses, on making a profit to be able to employ people, instead of having to concentrate on government red tape.</para>
<para>Let me turn to what would be an appropriate expenditure that could have been addressed by the bills before the House, in the expenditure, had the government not wasted billions and billions of dollars. There are so many good projects out there that could and should be funded, and now is a prime opportunity to invest in the infrastructure needs of the South West. Such investment would not only secure the economic future of the region but would ensure good planning and social outcomes. Of particular importance is the transport infrastructure that is needed in the region and which I have raised repeatedly in this House. The billion-dollar blow-out in border protection alone—one of those billions—would have funded the infrastructure needs of the South West for a generation, including the delivery of the vital Roads to Export plan.</para>
<para>The region is a major exporter of alumina and mineral sands products. It will become a major coal exporter—but only with adequate investment in transport, as identified in my own infrastructure plan and in the Roads to Export plan developed by the South West Development Commission, the South West regional development authority and the Bunbury Wellington Economic Alliance.</para>
<para>The region will also only maintain and expand its tourism status with investment in safer roads, additional rail and a genuine regional airport able to take larger aircraft with the possibility of direct interstate flights. The Capes region has been identified as a prime location for a larger regional airport, and it would be a visionary investment in the South West. These are some of the projects that could be funded through the waste of Labor's spending.</para>
<para>After a two-year campaign to fix what was a disgraceful, independent-youth-allowance form of discrimination, which the Labor government arbitrarily inflicted on students and their families, the government was forced to change their rules—only to treat those same students badly again. The untrustworthy government told the Australian community that they would end the discrimination, but basically there is a parental means test for students seeking independent youth allowance. These are the students who already have to face anything from $15,000 to $30,000 a year more in costs just to go to school, just to go to university in a city, and these are costs that metropolitan and urban students do not have to find. For those outer-regional students, it is the first time that this means test has been applied, and it is just another attack on working families in my part of the world, in rural and regional Australia. It took a two-year campaign to end the appalling discrimination that we saw with youth allowance. What was even worse in this one was the number of young people who actually changed the courses they were taking while this was in place because they knew their families could not afford to send them on to university.</para>
<para>Two years ago I raised in the House the threat posed to the environment in my part of the world by phytophthora dieback. I have been disappointed by the lack of government action on this looming biodiversity disaster. Last year an update on the impact of dieback was given to the Committee for Climate Change, Environment and the Arts, which I hope will provide some greater impetus for the government to take action. The need to manage this insidious disease cannot be overstated, and I am seeking a far greater effort. I want to see a detailed, comprehensive map, including the South-West Land Division, assembled as quickly as possible. We need to know exactly where dieback is and where it is not on both state-held and private land. Following the comprehensive mapping of dieback, we must develop a planning and management toolbox that tells all landholders how to manage and reduce the spread of dieback in their specific areas. We also need to join the international science community and invest in research to find newer and better control mechanisms, including a treatment that can eliminate dieback from infected plants.</para>
<para>These are just some of the programs that could have been funded simply with the waste that we have seen generated by this Labor government. Ahead, particularly for small business, is the issue of the carbon tax. In spite of what has been said, there are many small businesses who, for many reasons, do not have the capacity to pass on the additional cost of a carbon tax. There are farmers who fit into this category. Dairy farmers are absolute price-takers. They have to cool millions and millions of litres of milk every year, and they are going to have to bear the cost of the carbon tax. I would like to see whether the major supermarkets are planning to pass on any additional return or price to the dairy farmers who are supplying them with milk, because they are having to meet the additional cost of cooling the milk as a result of the additional cost of electricity, which will be at least 10 per cent—I would say even more.</para>
<para>When transport, including that run on diesel, becomes part of this equation, as we know it will in 2014, the cost of the carbon tax is going to be far greater and certainly more than was projected for farmers and people living in rural and regional areas. We know how far loads are carted around Australia and we know the size of the freight task. So this tax is going to impact on small communities right around Australia, particularly those in my electorate. It is going to impact directly on small business. A whole raft of businesses are really concerned. They do not have confidence right at this moment. They do not have confidence in the policies of this government. They do not have the confidence to invest in themselves into the future. They do not have the confidence to continue employing people.</para>
<para>Last week I and other people from a range of businesses attended a meeting of transport operators, earthmoving operators and those involved in servicing that sector in my electorate. There was an incredible level of uncertainty and concern there. There was uncertainty around the carbon tax and the liability facing their businesses. They will have to either buy the expertise or employ people just to deal with this issue, to run the ruler over their businesses and to see what this tax is going to cost them, what their liability might be and how their businesses are going to manage going forward. So there is a lot more ahead for small to medium enterprises as a result of the carbon tax.</para>
<para>As I said, the appalling thing for people right around Australia and particularly for those in my electorate is the untold waste and mismanagement. I am sure every member would be able to identify many other purposes for that waste. We would have far less debt if there had not been the waste that we have seen from this government. The lack of confidence right around this nation is a result of the decisions made by this government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOHN COBB</name>
    <name.id>00AN1</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In speaking on appropriation bills Nos 3 and 4, I want to concentrate on the need for agricultural skills now and particularly in the future. Two weeks ago we learnt that the University of Western Sydney will, for the first time in 100 years, no longer offer a degree in agriculture at its Hawkesbury campus. With fewer than 10 enrolments for 2012, the course is not viable and the university has been forced to suspend it. According to reports, the number of campuses offering degrees in agriculture in 1989 was 23 and the number now, I believe, is around nine or possibly 10. Further investigations have also revealed that fewer than 700 agricultural science students will graduate nationally this year. The amazing thing is that every one of them can get a job whether through corporate agriculture, commercial positions in agribusiness or working for government. Mind you, governments, particularly state governments, are employing fewer and fewer people. This government actually cut its graduate program at one point—until public outcry forced them to stop that.</para>
<para>We need agricultural scientists. We need researchers from the point of view of biosecurity and quarantine. There is nothing agriculture needs in the future so much as those people with the ability to scientifically protect it or have the knowledge and the experience to scientifically protect it from the biosecurity angle. This is for two reasons. One, the greatest selling point that Australian agriculture has is our virtual disease-free situation. We are lucky enough to be the world's largest island continent. But it is not just that. It is also because we need to protect ourselves from those things which enter the country as well as those things which leave it.</para>
<para>The only thing that has kept agriculture out there over the last 40 to 50 years has been the increases in productivity it is able to generate. Up until about eight or nine years ago it had an annual growth rate of something over three per cent, which is phenomenal and probably greater than anything any of the developed nations of the world have ever had. In the last few years it has plateaued out, not just because of drought. In recent times we have had a far greater influx of bio-issues for our departments to worry about. The truth is that state governments have to a large extent abdicated their responsibility. More and more this is an issue that the federal government has to deal with—but not this one. It is not dealing with it.</para>
<para>Degrees and courses in agriculture are imperative, particularly in research. We have to start encouraging this, whether through scholarships or whatever it might be. We have to work with industry to increase the number of people doing ag science and postgraduate research. There is a lot a federal government can do with the state governments. We have to get them back in the game. However, this does seem increasingly unlikely with the current federal government's inherent ignorance of all things agricultural. I hesitate to say that they have a down on agriculture. I think it is just total carelessness. Their knowledge of things commercial and things which agriculture actually needs is quite staggering. Some of them are so careless you would think that they could not do it on purpose—it is just ignorance. But the list is growing—biosecurity incursions which have not been dealt with, myrtle rust and the Asian honeybee. There is a lack of transparency on foreign ownership. And, on the live cattle ban, not one action taken by this government has frightened Australian business, be it corporate or small business—they could sell razor blades, face creams or steel—like the overnight ban on the live trade to Indonesia, without talking to the customers. If they can do that to something which cannot be stuck on the shelf for six months until it is convenient to sell, what the heck would they do to something that can be stuck on the shelf for six months? Not one action frightened Australian business so much as that, let alone the offhand way in which they dealt with the country in question.</para>
<para>The passing of the carbon tax—I do not know whether it is ignorance or whether they realise what they are doing—will have a greater effect on agriculture than on almost any other business, even though they say we are not involved in it. Everything we do is involved with the carbon tax effect—it is on everything we buy or transport or whatever. Also, the comments by both the current minister and the previous minister about how the milk price war would not do any harm to anyone and was good for consumers show total and careless ignorance about how the market system works and how dairy farmers are affected by this, and dairy farmers will be very much affected by the carbon tax.</para>
<para>The Murray-Darling Basin Plan failed to deliver an environmental water plan that shows how they will achieve the environmental outcomes. They have decided they have to take all this water from productive outcomes.</para>
<para>You may say, 'By God, that must have taken a while,' but it took just 12 months for all those things to happen. Two weeks ago we learnt that the department had changed its mission statement. The mission statement used to say the things you would expect a specific department within government to do: talk about agriculture, its needs, its aspirations, its need for trade, its need for good practices et cetera. Now it says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We work to sustain the way of life and prosperity of all Australians.</para></quote>
<para>Well, hooray, that is what every government should say. But for a specific department to remove any reference to its reason for existence does make you wonder.</para>
<para>What hope does agriculture have when even the government and a specialised department are turning their backs on it, are totally deaf to its needs and are not even aware that that is what they are doing? Agriculture in Australia drives $155 billion a year in economic production. It is over 12 per cent of the GDP. We might not ride on the back of it any more, but by heavens we contribute to it. It generates around 1.6 million Australian jobs and $32 billion a year in exports. That is in farm exports. They are creating—along with the small business sector in Australia, in particular—a genuine lack of confidence.</para>
<para>This is terribly sad because this should be a challenging and exciting time for agriculture. In the last 8 years particularly, the UN and everyone else truthfully says that commodity and agriculture prices have risen. It is not because we have gone from six billion to seven billion in 11 years. That is part of the reason, but it is not the big reason. They are not saying the future is great because they are talking about nine billion in the next 20 or 30 years or so. They may be reasons. But the real reason is that in the past 20 years our nearest neighbours, Asia and South-East Asia, have developed a very significant improvement in lifestyle by middle income earners, whether it is Indonesia, China, India or whatever. Previously, when we have had a lift out of Asia it was caused by Japan or Korea. The actual lift in possible market gain by China, India and Indonesia is probably something like 15 times as strong as what is already happening in Japan and Korea. It is not because of the size of the populations. It is because they are getting used to the meat that we—</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 17:54 to 18:02</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOHN COBB</name>
    <name.id>00AN1</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Government rolls on. I think that in the Australian Year of the Farmer—and I hope this current government, with its renewed Prime Minister, as it were, can start to grasp that this is the Australian Year of the Farmer—the whole of Australia does not need to worship farmers, or try to set farmers on a pedestal, because they do not want that. But agriculture does need the people of Australia to realise that it is not just a matter of going out there, putting something in the ground and, by and by, selling it. It is enormously difficult to be a farmer, having to meet what our nation deserves and expects in the name of quality, in the name of biosecurity, in the name of food safety, in the name of productivity. We do need an agricultural sector that can continue not just to meet our expectations. The fact is that we set a benchmark in the world's exports not just for quality and not just for our products being virtually disease free. The fact is that, while we are nowhere near one of the world's biggest producers, we are number 4 in the world's largest exporters of agricultural commodities. That is because we are only 20-odd million people but we grow three or four times as much as we need ourselves. We are not in any way, shape or form going to run out of food, but we have to make sure we continue to produce what we do. We need to set a benchmark around the world so that those with the necessary degrees, with the necessary research capabilities and with the necessary abilities can continue to help farmers grow more with the same or less moisture on the same soil as they had before. We can only do this if we have not fewer graduates from university but more.</para>
<para>One of the great things that corporate agriculture does in Australia is employ a lot of these people. The family farms perfect what the larger corporations do, but we still need those with the resources to try them. They also employ those who have the ability to come up with new products and new ideas.</para>
<para>This government must be cognisant of the fact that it has totally ignored—as much carelessly as deliberately—the needs of agriculture. In the three years that I have been responsible in the coalition for agriculture, I think I have had the head of every faculty in Australia that has run an agricultural course say to me that they need more encouragement, particularly from the federal government, including encouragement for young people to enter agricultural science and the like through the universities and further education that Australia has to offer.</para>
<para>Agriculture has an enormous amount to offer the country and the world, but it needs the right people in the right place to do it. It needs this government to act. We are committed to encouraging students and encouraging R&D. This government has cut the personnel involved with biosecurity and quarantine. It has cut the money available. It has taken out a whole department from the area. This is incredibly dangerous. Nothing makes me as nervous as this government's attitude to quarantine and biosecurity. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr JENSEN</name>
    <name.id>DYN</name.id>
    <electorate>Tangney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Defence have a record of getting things wrong and attacking detractors who tend to be accurate with data. Defence needs comprehensive reform and needs a defence minister with the guts to take it on. Unfortunately, of late—and I am not just talking about this government—we have not had defence ministers who have done this. When I was in the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit, we would continually hear from Defence, when we were looking at projects, that they accepted that things had been awry six or 12 months in the past but that things were hunky-dory now. Then we would find, six months or 12 months later, that in fact things were not hunky-dory. The excuse would always be 'complex systems management'. Look at some of the gas trains in the north-west, for instance—they involve complex management, and yet they manage to get things right. Look at how quickly the motor industry manage to get a new car up and going without having a huge amount of problems at the outset. They are quite complex pieces of equipment.</para>
<para>I will go to the Joint Strike Fighter as a case example. First of all, let's have a look at the history of costs associated with this program and test how accurate Defence has been. The best estimate by the United States Air Force as of last year for the average procurement cost of a Joint Strike Fighter was $133 million. Defence have stated in the past that, as they will be buying early in the cycle, theirs will cost about 10 per cent more, so about $146 million. In fact, the Selected Acquisition Reports say that the cost will be about $154 million per JSF, which in the Australian context means about $170 million. Just to reiterate, USAF says $146 million; the Selected Acquisition Reports say about $170 million.</para>
<para>Now let's have a look at Defence's history on this. In 2005, Defence said that the so-called 'unit recurring flyaway cost' would be about $50 million, while the USAF at the same time said that it would be around $80 million. So, really, in the Australian context at that time, it should have been $88 million. Defence were out almost by a factor of two. A group called Air Power Australia said in 2006 the procurement price would be $165 million per aircraft. In 2009 Defence talked about $70 million unit recurring flyaway cost when the United States Air Force, using the same measure for what is called 'low rate initial production batch 6', had $117 million per. APA now estimates that in the acquisition they will probably cost around $215 million each. They do have various allowances, plus and minus, in their figures. As can be seen, Defence have been third rate in their costing estimates compared with Air Power Australia. Remember that Defence are supposed to have access to all of this good information directly from Lockheed Martin and that they have people in Washington DC working with the United States Air Force and congress. They have been hopeless with their costings. They have been third rate in their costings, but they have claimed that in fact they knew the true price. When you think about that, if they did know, then they have chosen to mislead parliament by what they have said.</para>
<para>Let us have a look at schedule. When are we going to get these Joint Strike Fighters? In 2005 Defence said that they would achieve what is called 'initial operational capability' in 2012-13—in other words, this year. In 2006, the year later, Air Power Australia said that IOC would occur in around 2020. In 2007, the year after APA was saying 2020, Defence said it would be around 2014-15. In fact in 2008, the then head of the Defence Material Organisation, Stephen Gumley, said on schedule: 'It is not something I lose much sleep about.' That is a real worry. In 2011 Defence said that initial operation capability would be in late 2018. Remember it was only back in 2005 that they were saying it would be in 2012-13. Once again, it was a dud projection.</para>
<para>We are supposed to believe their assurances when, by their own definition, with a 10 per cent increase in costs and a risk management matrix used by DMO being almost certain—in fact in this case it has eventuated, and then some—you have extreme risk. That is their own definition: extreme risk. The schedule has slipped by six years, from 2012 to 2018, and Defence says that that 12-month slippage is 'extreme risk'. Yet they are blithely going on as if there is no problem in the world with this. There are dud predictions wherever you look, but we are supposed to take Defence's word at face value and trust them.</para>
<para>The problem is that they have actually acted as Lockheed Martin's salespeople and simply accepted their assertions on cost, schedule and capability. Where is the supposed role of Defence acting with due diligence and accepting caveat emptor? With the JSF program in the United States, just in the last 12 months the director of operational test and evaluation has written a damning report on the Joint Strike Fighter. Similarly, a quick look review which was conducted was similarly damaging in its assessment. But Defence seem to be as happy with this program as pigs in mud.</para>
<para>Due to the Super Hornet purchase, this dud decision to purchase the Joint Strike Fighter has already cost us billions. By Chief of Air Force's own optimistic admission, the Super Hornet will be overmatched in the region by 2025, yet this is Defence's plan B. I recall discussing this in committee with DMO head Stephen Gumley. He said about the schedule slip with the JSF, 'It hasn't cost us anything', forgetting about the opportunity cost associated with the Super Hornet. We would not have needed the Super Hornet if the Joint Strike Fighter had arrived on schedule. The problem is that, apart from cost increases and schedule slippages, Defence has given us no idea whatsoever. Where they would say, 'Hang on. This now is unacceptable and this is something we shouldn't proceed with', they were assuring us that capability is good; whereas analysis that I have seen, having looked at the data myself, this capability is certainly nowhere near what it should be. Similarly, when looking at another Defence acquisition debacle, the Super Seasprite, you have a waste of over $1 billion. This helicopter ended up being scrapped. They had numerous warnings, notably again from Air Power Australia, from 1998 that they had to spend 20 per cent to 25 per cent of acquisition budget on test and evaluation or else abandon the project. The project was very, very risky and this was deemed to be the level of spending required. Defence ignored the advice and carried on for around 10 years on this project and, as I said, it was scrapped. If the advice had been heeded there would have been over $1 billion in savings.</para>
<para>How do Defence treat those with expertise who give good and timely advice? In the case of Air Power Australia's Peter Goon and his company Australian Flight Test Services the answer is to blacklist the company. This has been confirmed by retired Air Commodore Garry Bates, who similarly, along with the likes of Air Vice Marshal Peter Crisp, have felt the ire of the Defence hierarchy for daring to question.</para>
<para>In the case of Australia Flight Test Services the Blunn review said that they must be paid for the work that has been done. Years later this has still not been paid, as Defence are wanting non-related issues signed away by Australian Flight Test Services before they will pay them. This is an unconscionable action. Defence should engage their critics professionally and thereby save a lot of money for a small outlay. Instead, they state that they will not professionally interact with, for example, Air Power Australia, despite their clear historical superiority to Defence in costing and schedule at the very least.</para>
<para>Defence have similarly acted negatively towards RepSim, despite Mike Price, one of their principals, having been written a commendation by General David Hurley, now Chief of Defence Force, for simulation work that they have done. RepSim similarly have dared to question the Defence line, showing that the joint strike fighter will be shot down at a rate of three to one by Russian designed Super-Flankers, and this is not even the Russians latest design.</para>
<para>We have also seen a problem with communications within Defence—for instance, with night vision goggles. When I went to Afghanistan and also when the committee met with the commandos, they stated that their night vision equipment was outdated and they needed more up-to-date gear. Yet the Chief of Army, when he spoke to the committee, was unaware of any concerns.</para>
<para>We find similarly that the DLA Piper review that was similarly supposed to look at abuses in and by Defence seems to be used as a cover-up mechanism rather than as a mean to transparency. I know of two cases of abuse, and I registered with DLA Piper, yet they ignored me in my role as a federal MP letting them know of abuses with prejudice. How much more would they ignore others with prejudice who are not MPs? Indeed, there was a little rudeness in my dealings with them, and I am aware of far worse with others. So much for Defence wanting to clean up their act. The problem was highlighted by ex-Chief of Air Force and ex-Chief of Defence Force, Angus Houston, who stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I cannot and will not do anything that would cause embarrassment to former and present senior Defence portfolio officials.</para></quote>
<para>Causing embarrassment to senior officials as opposed to getting good acquisitions, good capabilities for our men and women who are out fighting in war zones at the moment! Defence needs to put feedback loops into their organisation and engage professionally with those with demonstrated expertise as a matter of urgency.</para>
<para>It is interesting that in a report from the Australian National Audit Office in 1998 they were talking about life cycle costing. The report said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Defence policy has been set for life cycle costing for some time, but there appears to be little top-level enforcement or encouragement at present for the use of LCC throughout the acquisition life cycle. There are also few incentives for the middle management to adopt life cycle costing principles by making investments now to save operating costs later.</para></quote>
<para>We are now 14 years past this and nothing has improved—in fact, if anything it has got worse. Defence really need to clean up their act. They need to reform. They need to put processes in place whereby they can interact with those out in industry who do have the expertise required. The security of Australia and the lives of our troops, our sailors and our airmen depend on it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALEXANDER</name>
    <name.id>M3M</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on appropriation bills Nos. 3 and 4. These are important bills relating to the management of our nation's economy. It is through appropriations bills that we the legislators and decision makers elected by the Australian people establish how we want our nation's finances to be spent. This is the vehicle to tell our nation what our priorities are and what kind of legacy we want to leave for future generations. From the views I hear from my constituents and from what I see as their representative, this legacy is becoming an increasingly poor one. Program after program of waste is implemented by this government as the policies that we really need are left on the sidelines in the too-hard-basket, and we all suffer.</para>
<para>This is a modern-day version of Nero fiddling while Rome burns. Earlier today in question time the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport referred to our nation's 'infrastructure deficit'. As the member for Bennelong I am keenly aware of this issue and I have spoken many times in this place about the need for urgent attention to fix this disease. With five of the 10 most congested roads in New South Wales, made worse by the community's total dependence on buses as their only source of public transport, this infrastructure deficit is having a major effect on our local community. Average speeds of under 10 kilometres per hour during peak hours mean that our nation's productivity is squashed and that the important time for mums and dads to have with their loved ones is thoroughly impacted.</para>
<para>The other major infrastructure concern that has threatened my local community is the inappropriate development of high-density housing in suburban areas ill-equipped to deal with this increase in the local population. This concentration of people in areas without access to public transport or local shopping facilities only further exacerbates the problem of congestion on roads as families are forced into the car just to buy their groceries or other daily items, making it even harder to find an end to this worsening nightmare—after all, it is pretty difficult to put out the fire when more fuel is being continually added. These high-density planning decisions were forced upon the local community by previous state governments, using part 3A powers under the New South Wales Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. This gave the planning department and the state government two centralised authorities with little understanding of the local needs and capability of the local area the power to overrule decisions made by local government to prevent inappropriate development.</para>
<para>During the 2010 election campaign, I campaigned loudly and strongly on this issue, visiting example after example of totally unsuitable high-density residential blocks being built in tiny streets with no parking and no access to transport or shops. I joined with local councillors and state opposition MPs and marched down these streets and called on the New South Wales Labor government to let the local government do their job and to put the same faith in the local representatives that the people do to make the best decisions in the interests of the local community. It was clear for all to see that intervention from state and federal authorities over decisions of the local council representing the wishes of the local community was unacceptable, improper and simply bad policy. It was undemocratic.</para>
<para>In March last year, this campaign climaxed as Barry O'Farrell was swept into power. His first act was to get rid of part 3A and to put planning decisions back into local hands. I look back with great pride at this campaign because it was a perfect example of people power, of the will of the people being represented and of the trust in the local representatives.</para>
<para>Recently this issue manifested itself in the proposed redevelopment of the Ryde Civic Centre, a decrepit seven-story building perched on a key intersection directly opposite the massive and magnificent Top Ryde City Shopping Centre. The current building was once an icon in the local area but, like what happens to the best of us, age has taken its toll. An amount of $700,000 has recently been approved to ensure a reliable power supply and council has estimated that a further $12.5 million will be needed just to maintain the current structure over the next five years.</para>
<para>And so, since 1995, discussions have taken place about ideas of redeveloping the site, of bringing the seat of local government into the 21st century, of a structure that will have room for all council employees to be housed in one building and of a new icon for our local region. Of course, such development ideas do not proceed without tension. Despite elected representatives from both Labor and Liberal joining together to promote the idea, a local action group has been formed to oppose the redevelopment of this site. This is democracy in action, as concerned members of our community have attended council meetings and participated in real grassroots politics. For someone who is too often stuck in somewhat surreal disconnected halls of Canberra it is very fulfilling to hear the stories of real democracy in action. Aside from any individuals latched onto disgruntled voters as a way to pursue their own personal political ambitions, I offer my support to all those residents with genuine local concerns who wish their voices to be heard and who wish to participate in this democratic process.</para>
<para>This is not a partisan issue, as elected representatives from both parties have supported this development. It is a political issue, wrapped up in a bigger question about the future needs of our local Ryde community and how we want to get there. I remain strong in my view, just like I was during the 2010 campaign, that these local development issues are the domain of the local council. It would be inappropriate for me to become vocal on one side or another, just as it was for the previous state government to become involved by overruling local planning decisions. Yet these planning decisions affect my local constituents and me personally as a Ryde council ratepayer. So I have taken an active interest in being across the issues, speaking with local government representatives from both sides of the argument, including holding a 2½ hour meeting in my office with the council general manager and development director. During this meeting I pressed the need and sought assurances for a rigorous and transparent community consultation process, ensuring that all proper planning procedures are followed and that it remains in line with local environment protocols, unanimously supported by all local counsellors.</para>
<para>Whilst some redevelopment design possibilities have been tossed around, I understand that it will be up to the private developer to propose and the local council to approve the final design, shape and appearance of the structure. I have faith that the local representatives will be making these decisions in the best interests of the community and will fully respect the local amenity.</para>
<para>The philosophical approach to this concept that I do support, whether it be in Ryde, Epping, Macquarie Park or Eastwood, is that the focus of residential development should be around major shopping centres and bus terminals. By giving people the ability to travel to their work and perform their shopping duties without the need to take a car is a huge priority that deserves our support. So much of this local region has been destroyed through the demolition of street after street of suburban residential homes to build five-storey apartments, with no concept of supporting infrastructure. I personally experienced this several years ago, when my family home was gobbled up by developers, who gave us two choices: either sell to us or lose the value of your property because you will be next to apartments on all sides.</para>
<para>As an elected representative it is my duty and my goal to help my constituents avoid the need to personally endure such a distressing experience. The way to do this is through proper planning, ensuring there is logic, as well as supporting infrastructure, surrounding the decision to build higher density living. Planning is not what happens when a problem is overtaking a situation of our own making, when growth outpaces infrastructure. Good planning and timely commitment to appropriate infrastructure would in fact prevent such a situation occurring.</para>
<para>Across my local community and across the nation we see examples where, time and again, this has not happened. As a result our cities suffer from either a serious infrastructure deficit, whose solution requires a multiple spend to rectify through retroactive installation, or an excessively high cost of living, which combine to destroy our productivity, competitiveness and quality of life. It is a confounding situation that we find ourselves in a country where our single biggest asset is land, yet through these oversights we have produced, to our detriment, the most expensive cities in the world to buy real estate. It may be uncomfortable to come to terms—</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>1934</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Year of the Farmer</title>
          <page.no>1934</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRUCE SCOTT</name>
    <name.id>YT4</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, in this, the Federation Chamber, as it is officially now. What an appropriate place the Federation Chamber is to speak on this year being designated the Australian Year of the Farmer since, long before Federation, farmers across this nation were feeding our population and also contributing to many other countries who needed food from Australia, clean and green as it is. This is going to be a year-long celebration of the vital role farmers play in feeding, clothing and housing all Australians. It will really give us an opportunity to celebrate these achievements. At the same time, it is important that we strengthen the connection between rural and city folk across this nation. Getting those connections is also an important element of celebrating the Australian Year of the Farmer.</para>
<para>This motion, and the Australian Year of the Farmer, recognises the important role that farmers play in our food and fibre production. Our city cousins—and people in our regional towns, for that matter—go down to the supermarket or the local store and buy their food, and we want them to connect to the role that farmers play in providing that produce and to get the connection between the paddock and the plate. Not only is it important for our city cousins and those in larger regional areas, but it is also important that children at school during this celebration year of the farmer gain an understanding of where our food comes from. Food does not just come off the supermarket shelf; it has an origin. As we work through this year celebrating the farmer it is important that we are able to get that connection across not only to our city cousins but also to schools across this country.</para>
<para>Australian agricultural products and related industries inject more than $405 billion into our national economy. Australian farmers provide food for some 60 million people both in Australia and around the world each and every day. They provide food for 22 million people in Australia, and 98 per cent of our food in Australia is provided by Australian farmers. The rest of it is of course exported. The sector provides direct employment for more than 300,000 people in our nation who live and work in regional and rural Australia. But the complete agricultural supply chain, including the affiliated food and fibre industries, provides jobs for some 1.6 million Australians. That is a vital part of our national economy. In fact, one in six working people work in the agricultural, food or fibre industry in Australia.</para>
<para>The former Prime Minister and members of the government might say that they saved us from going into recession during the global financial crisis. But whilst there were initiatives taken by the government, which I acknowledged at the time, the agricultural sector continued to grow during that very tight economic circumstance of the global financial crisis. We had one quarter of deficit growth. In the quarter after that we were saved from going into a technical recession because the agricultural sector continued to grow. That is another reason to celebrate the importance of our farmers and our food producers across this nation. Both within and beyond our borders, Australian farmers are making a significant contribution to addressing the global food security and supply issues. When we sit down at the dinner table tonight, and around the world as families sit down around their dinner tables tonight, there will be another 240,000 mouths to feed. There will be another 240,000 mouths to feed tomorrow night. What that means is that this calendar year there will be another 40 million people—net population growth—globally. We have got to start to focus on this issue of global food security. There will be another 240,000 mouths to be fed in the world today, and another 40 million this year—that is the net number—and these are figures that have come from the OECD and the United Nations. The population is expected, globally, to grow from the current 6.5 billion to some nine billion by 2050. Of course, the other interesting thing is that the United Nations is predicting there will be a 40 per cent rise in food prices by 2020 because, as the squeeze starts to come on, supply-demand factors will come in. So not only are we celebrating this year, the year of the farmer, but there are great challenges ahead for us and our farming communities as well as for government.</para>
<para>I think it was the CSIRO who stated, and the UN has also stated, that in the next 40 years we have got to produce 50 per cent more food than we produce today if we are to meet this challenge. And that is against the backdrop of those countries where there are huge population bubbles, where the soil types have been farmed since before the birth of Christ. They are old—ancient—soils. They have lost lots of their organic matter. Many are in semi-arid or desert areas. And do they have a capacity to increase food production? The challenge is before us all.</para>
<para>I want, as a Nuffield scholar myself, to acknowledge the great role that the Australian Nuffield farming scholarships have played in the Australian agricultural industries. This year there will be some 21 Australian Nuffield scholars travelling overseas and looking at agriculture and the focus on agriculture globally, not just in our own backyard. I have two from my own constituency going this year: James Walker from Longreach and Natalie Williams from Jericho. Andrew Dewar is from Clifton in the east of my electorate; a vegetable producer, he is completing his scholarship which he was awarded last year. Nuffield is making a significant contribution to giving farmers an opportunity to study overseas, to look at the trends overseas, to gain an understanding of the great challenges ahead, and I know that all of those Nuffield scholars who come back will be able to take up the challenge that is before us. I commend Lord Nuffield for the foundation he established so long ago, and I am very privileged to have been one of the recipients of a Nuffield scholarship prior to coming into this place. I wish them all well and I know they will make a difference.</para>
<para>One of the things that we have got to do in this country is to increase R&D funding. What we have seen under this government is a reduction in R&D funding, and that is not what we should be doing, because R&D will indeed give us an opportunity to progress our agricultural production. It is also about developing new varieties, making sure that we can produce food in the era of potential changes to our climate. So R&D is indeed essential as we go into the next 40 to 50 years with this huge global challenge in front of us.</para>
<para>I want to touch just quickly on the families of my electorate of Maranoa. In fact, 22 per cent of the workforce in Maranoa, based on the 2006 Census figures—it would have changed recently with the resource sector—had worked in the agricultural sector. A quarter of the state's beef and cattle enterprises are located in the electorate of Maranoa. My own home town of Roma boasts the largest store cattle selling centre in Australia—sometimes they tell me it is 'in the southern hemisphere' but I will say 'in Australia' here. Much of the Australian sheep industry and the wool industry is based in my electorate. Meat goats are taking a much bigger place in the Charleville abattoir in western Queensland, which is processing up to 15,000 goats per week, and goat meat has the largest percentage of meat consumed of any of the meats in the world. Goat meat is the most popular in the world, and 15,000 of goats are processed in the electorate of Maranoa each and every year. There is cotton production across the Darling Downs and Dirranbandi and border regions. We have barley, of course essential in beer production, which I noticed would interest many of my colleagues. Around Dalby in my electorate we have sorghum, which is also being converted into ethanol. All the feedstock from that goes into an intensive animal-livestock feeding industry. We have fruit and small crops in the east of the electorate. Something like 10 per cent of Queensland's avocados are produced in the electorate. The story goes on. In fact, 95 per cent of Queensland's apples are produced in the electorate of Maranoa. I commend all members of this House to talk about this throughout the year. This is the Australian Year of the Farmer. I commend the directors, Chairman Philip Bruem and the Managing Director Geoff Bell. I also acknowledge Glen McGrath who is the ambassador and Her Excellency the Governor-General Quentin Bryce. This is a year to join together to celebrate the Australian Year of the Farmer. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp> (Bass) (18:40):</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LYONS</name>
    <name.id>M38</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise tonight to support the motion of the member for Maranoa, Bruce Scott, in recognising the vital contribution that farmers around Australia make to our society, to our economy and to our way of life. To celebrate Australian farmers for the 2012 calendar year is testament to the valuable contribution that farmers make. Without farmers, Australia would not experience the wonderful standard of living with quality, fresh locally-grown produce that we enjoy. Farmers provide us with so many quality items: fresh vegetables, meat, dairy, grain, wool, eggs, fish, cotton and timber items. I feel that all too often people consume their meals without a thought for those tireless workers—the farmers—who work the land to grow and harvest the wonderful produce that we find on supermarket shelves, in fruit and vegetable shops and in the butcher shops.</para>
<para>I recently had the pleasure of welcoming the federal Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Senator the Hon. Joe Ludwig, the Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and member for Braddon, Sid Sidebottom, and the Chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture, Resources, Fisheries and Forestry and member for Lyons, the Hon. Dick Adams, to my electorate for a tour of the north-east region of the state. This area is prime farmland, home to numerous dairies and cropping farms. The group toured the north-east, visiting the Headquarters Road Dam, the Razz Rhubarb farm and Bridestowe lavender farm.</para>
<para>The fantastic potential of the north-east of Tasmania is largely due to, and certainly to be improved on, the four irrigation projects that we discussed—one being the finished Headquarters Road dam and another that is near completion. Another topic of discussion was the Scottsdale DSTO joining the CSIRO and the University of Tasmania to value-add to the products being produced in the north-east. I was particularly impressed to see the joint venture between Razz Rhubarb and Bridestowe Lavender Estate to produce lavender and rhubarb jam—an example of the innovation and creativity of the farming region. Razz Rhubarb is run by Jerrod Nichols, the son of Maureen, former manager of North East Soldiers Memorial Hospital in Scottsdale. He is an impressive, innovative representative of farming in my electorate of Bass. Jerrod farms rhubarb along with other products, including squash, poppies, potatoes and pyrethrum. He has wonderful fresh products and by working with the Bridestowe lavender farm is creating other avenues for using rhubarb, including lavender and rhubarb jam.</para>
<para>Another product produced in the north-east is Rhu Bru, the most refreshing of drinks. If you have not had Rhu Bru you are really missing out. It is a great drink—fantastic. You should go to Scottsdale and buy some Rhu Bru. Jerrod is keen to promote quality Tasmanian products not only to the nation but also to export markets. He has a great vision and one that needs to be further encouraged to promote the great Tasmanian produce. He places great emphasis on the importance of fresh produce, not cheaply imported canned or frozen products. I was pleased to bring the minister, the parliamentary secretary and the chair of the committee to this electorate for them to witness firsthand the high level of innovation and potential that the region has. With good soils, reliable rainfall and available water, there is great potential for further development in this region. Farmers have always been innovators and adaptors of new technology and have had to, and are willing to continue to, endure the harsh and unpredictable elements that Mother Nature throws at them. Farmers endure all of the elements—droughts, floods and fires—and more of these elements can result in bumper crops or massive heartbreaking devastation. But farming life goes on, and it is at times like these, when you see the farming communities rally together to beat adversity, that you note the terrific community spirit in these communities that pulls them together. It is a terrific example of the mateship that is so often referred to as being an important element of Australian society. It is a pity that manufacturing and processing of produce is now almost exclusively controlled internationally, resulting in farmers becoming price takers with little bargaining power in the selling of their produce. This does not lead to efficiency, nor does it allow for improved quality of products. The trouble is that the international processors tend to go for price rather than quality, which can affect farmers and put them in a difficult economic position.</para>
<para>To help rectify this and to support Aussie farmers, I encourage all Australians to buy locally, to buy Australian products, because if we do not there will not be Australian farmers of our fresh local produce that we all enjoy so very much. We are beginning to see too many cheap vegetable imports. Australians need to ensure that when they are purchasing items from their supermarket they are purchasing Australian-grown products, not those from our overseas counterparts. Even though they may be cheaper in price, we do need to buy locally and we do need to encourage others to buy locally.</para>
<para>We need to educate our children about farmers and their vital role in society. With 2012 being the Australian Year of the Farmer, there is no better time for this to happen. I have heard stories about children not understanding where milk actually comes from. It is important that they do know and they understand what farmers do and contribute to society. Let us start educating our children and educating our communities to support farmers and recognise exactly what they do for our nation. They provide fresh produce and products for everyone to enjoy. There is no better way to enjoy vegetables than to eat them fresh, straight from the farm to your plate.</para>
<para>Farming is a special way of life for so many around Australia. Some farms are handed down over generations. Other people have bought into farming. As a nation we need to encourage new people into farming. The exciting career options for young people in the agricultural sector need to be constantly highlighted to ensure that our farming communities remain strong and resilient into the future. We need to support our farmers into the future, to support local projects, to buy Australian produce, thus supporting our Aussie farmers. Our farmers are the providers and without them we would not have the fantastic fresh produce that we have today. I encourage members of this House, all electorates and all Australians to recognise, as the member for Maranoa has said, the 'vital role that Australian farming families and their industries play in keeping our nation fed, clothed and sheltered' and the wonderful contribution of all farmers in our great country, to make our economy great in this, the Year of the Farmer.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOHN COBB</name>
    <name.id>00AN1</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak about the Australian Year of the Farmer and I take great pleasure and honour from commending my colleague Bruce Scott for introducing this motion, which I support. Bruce, like me, comes from a region which has a long history and is a very agricultural area. Calare is actually far older than Maranoa. The electorate of Calare is the first place that Wentworth, Lawson and Blaxland found when they headed over the hills from Sydney. It is probably the oldest place where mining and agriculture began in a serious way in Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Adams</name>
    <name.id>BV5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Tasmania!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOHN COBB</name>
    <name.id>00AN1</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Tasmania got other things that we will not talk about right now. This is not only some of the most magnificent country in Australia but also one of the earliest places of European settlement in Australia—the oldest place outside the Sydney basin. It has some of the most magnificent farming land in Australia, be it broadacre, horticulture, fruit and vegetables, cropping or, particularly, sheep and cattle. It is the most magnificent grazing country I think I have ever seen in our fair land.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Adams</name>
    <name.id>BV5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Have you been to Tasmania?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOHN COBB</name>
    <name.id>00AN1</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I love Tasmania—after Calare. It is high time that farming had its year. While I know Australia loves its farmers and understands that without them there would be nothing to eat and far less to wear, few appreciate what is involved in creating those products. Farmers often deal with mother nature—we deal with her wrath. We think of that in terms of drought but, as we have seen in the last couple of years, mother nature can be pretty savage at the end of a great season and bring frost, hail or too much of a good thing at a time when we are about to strip.</para>
<para>Farmers deal with these issues, whether drought or the absolute devastation of seeing something that you have waited years to grow come to grief. They understand and face the challenges that their industry offers. The last thing agriculture needs is a myriad of totally impractical regulations from local, state and federal governments—particularly from governments which are mistakenly of the belief that they are going to solve the environmental problems of the world. Often these things are going to do little to improve the environment. Having had to travel to Brazil and the US at the time of the BSE crisis, I can tell you that farmers in Australia, Brazil and the USA—and I suspect in most parts of the world—are far more worried about a government's reaction to environmental issues, whether climate change or anything else, than they are about the issues themselves.</para>
<para>Emissions are an example. Climate change scientists and politicians love pointing at agriculture. They see it as the scapegoat and also as the solution, while ignoring the fact that the worst pollution is produced in the world's major cities. A classic example of this is Labor's carbon tax. In their wisdom, the government imposed a threshold. The inclusion of business-size triggers in the carbon tax essentially penalise the largest emitters. However, agriculture's largest emitters such as dairy factories and abattoirs have already scaled up production and made efficiencies in their use of energy, whether gas or electricity, which means that they have already lowered their emissions per tonne of beef processed or whatever probably as much as they reasonably can. The government's legislation means that businesses will now have a disincentive to increase efficiencies. They will simply move to smaller operations and greater emissions per unit of production, with the net result actually being higher. This government is creating a cliff face. Once businesses hit 25,000 tonnes of emissions they are suddenly hit with a kind of tax none of us ever dreamt of. Anyone around that figure, or maybe even up to 30 per cent, is going to say, 'I think maybe we will take a day off a fortnight or a day off a week. It won't be in the interests of lowering carbon emissions but it will certainly save us a heck of a lot of money'.</para>
<para>Another example of ludicrous government policy—and I mention this because agriculture has enough to deal with without bureaucracies and governments making it harder—is that, while heavy road vehicles have an exemption from the carbon tax, rail freight does not. This will be a $20 million impost on the rail industry, forcing more freight such as grain onto country roads and decimating them. The fallout from this ridiculous government policy is enormous but Labor does not seem to get it.</para>
<para>Farming, like most businesses, is increasingly based on large production with small and variable margins. For the last 50 years, broadacre farming in particular has kept its head above water by increased productivity, but this has flattened out. The coalition is continuing to push the government to increase its contribution to agricultural research and development to revitalise the industry, to give it every advantage and improve productivity. However, Labor most definitely has not given up but has simply never faced up to it, with the agriculture minister recently telling Japan that Australia has little chance of increasing agricultural productivity. I cannot believe an agriculture minister in Australia would say that. For my whole life I have heard that the world's increasing population will make farmers more prosperous. Recently, the emergence of Asia has heightened this expectation—by recently, we mean in the last 30 years or so. The truth is that the emerging middle class in Asia is certainly having an incremental effect. But despite the hype, farmers recognise there is no overnight transformation.</para>
<para>There will always be challenges for the sector, particularly from global trends. However, poor government policy seen throughout 2011—the carbon tax, the way live exports were dealt with, the basin plan, inadequate biosecurity, foreign ownership and food labelling arrangements—continued to put agriculture on the back foot. The shortage of graduates and skilled workers in the agriculture sector is a function of this Labor government's failure to stand up for this sector. Productivity and innovation are central to profitability. Unless we continually get renewal in the sector and keen, fresh new minds applying new ideas, we will not keep up that productivity which has kept Australian agriculture where it is. This needs to be supported by a government willing to stand up for it. The malaise is so bad in the current government that the agriculture department has removed agriculture from its primary mission statement, and is now:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We work to sustain the way of life and prosperity for all Australians.</para></quote>
<para>That should be a government mission statement, not a specific department within it. Labor's indifference to agriculture is trashing the agricultural brand, undermining the industry, and is our nation's biggest threat to food security.</para>
<para>The 2012 Year of the Farmer is a chance for the agricultural sector to explain the need for government to help with research and development, to educate researchers, agronomists and rural scientists towards increasing efficiency and productivity, and to have people with the ability to look after Australia's biosecurity and quarantine. We absolutely must have those people.</para>
<para>In 2012, we the coalition will continue to support policies that give better outcomes, such as reviewing the competition and consumer laws. We also plan to finalise the development of our policies on coal seam gas, food labelling and foreign ownership to make sure our farming communities indeed get a fair go. Let us hope that all Australians urge every level of government to realise the need for practical solutions in agriculture. However, at this point in time only the Gillard government can remove its blind spot on agriculture and take the lead by using 2012—the Year of the Farmer—to be proactive and adopt policies that support rather than hinder our farmers. During the global financial crisis, it was not mining but our farming economy that at the end of the day stopped us going into an official recession.</para>
<para>Agricultural production in this country drives $155 billion a year in economic production. That is still, in this day and age, over 12 per cent of GDP. There are over 1.6 million jobs involved, and exports in agricultural are $32 billion plus a year. I believe the Australian Year of the Farmer can be a rallying point to explain to mainstream Australia the realities confronting their— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ADAMS</name>
    <name.id>BV5</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Doom and gloom is not what we should be doing in the Year of the Farmer. We should be positive. We should not be talking about being ruined. We should be talking about positive things that farming is doing in Australia and the future of farming, and not talking it down like we just got from the last speech. I welcome this discussion on the Australian Year of the Farmer, for 2012, which was brought to this place by the member for Maranoa. I thank him for giving me the opportunity to tell some of the good news stories, especially in my state of Tasmania. I believe this is a very important time to recognise the role that farmers play in our economy.</para>
<para>There are quite a few changes taking place in the agriculture industry, as there always has been, but they are getting faster. It is an area where jobs are growing and we need to encourage more young people to see that there is a future in the farming industry working on farms, working in growing and in owning farms.</para>
<para>Recently I had the opportunity with some of my Tasmanian colleagues to show the federal minister, Joe Ludwig, around our electorates to show what was happening there. We visited three electorates and covered some of the major areas of enterprise in agriculture and forestry, starting with Kelly's Sawmill, down at Dunalley—he is also a farmer—where we inspected new processes of timber engineering using smaller and thinner pieces of wood to make structural timber, which of course is one of the futures for the timber industry.</para>
<para>We also met the Dalys, a farming family who grow potatoes. They are now growing and marketing new species of potatoes and undertaking research into the best products and species for niche markets and also for the major supermarkets in Sydney and Melbourne—the best high-product potatoes anywhere in the world, I would think.</para>
<para>The last enterprise I visited in Lyons with the minister was Tasmanian Alkaloids, in Westbury, who process poppies. This is a highly successful industry that is still working on the edge of their markets exploring new directions for their industry. That, of course, goes out to the world. This industry employs more scientists than any other rural industry. It is in the forefront of our economy. There are many fantastic enterprises that now exist and will be part of the future of Tasmania.</para>
<para>They certainly value our farmers in my state of Tasmania. Part of the success story is in fact because Tasmania has taken up the challenge of drought-proofing Tasmania, probably starting with David Llewellyn, a past state member for Lyons, who was the minister for primary industry. He saw that we needed to get irrigation schemes up and running if we were going to compete in the food market. In fact, Tasmania has 10 per cent of the rainfall that falls on Australia, and we have around 1.5 per cent of the land mass. This gives us a natural advantage over the rest of Australia. We must take up that challenge and that advantage.</para>
<para>Tasmania is now building irrigation schemes in public-private partnerships. The public contribution to the construction cost of the schemes comes from a pool of $220 million allocated for this purpose by the Tasmanian government and the Australian government. The private contribution comes from primary producers through the purchase of tradeable water entitlements and, of course, from putting the infrastructure in on their own farms—buying the pivots et cetera. The public contribution recognises that these water developments are beyond the resources of farmers alone and that in addition to benefiting individual farming enterprises it will benefit regional communities wherever possible. The public support relates not only to the capital construction but also considerable commitment to ensure that Tasmania has a good future in agriculture, as do our farmers.</para>
<para>We now have to deal with the fact that, while we have good, rich soils, a good climate and a sustainable water supply, we lack and must have skilled workers. This is something that has been addressed recently with the announcement of $4.5 million to build the Agritas Trade College in Smithton in Tasmania. This will allow many young people to train in Tasmania and to study in an environment in which they can get work in the future. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MARINO</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Agriculture in Australia is a $155 billion a year industry that underpins over 12 per cent of our nation's GDP, with the majority of that being exported. Of this about $640 million worth is produced in my electorate of Forrest. The industry directly employs 318,000 and also underpins the jobs of millions of Australians in food delivery and service. There are 136,000 farms throughout Australia that produce 93 per cent of the food we eat.</para>
<para>I take this opportunity to thank the farmers for their hard work in keeping our plates full of quality food whilst helping our economy. We know that it was the ag exports that kept Australia out of recession. It is important for this parliament to recognise the value of Australian farmers and food producers—something that the Labor government has repeatedly failed to do. Australian farmers have not been supported; in fact, they have been assaulted. I ask this government and this parliament: do we want to keep agriculture, food production and manufacturing strong in Australia or will we continue to allow it to be undermined and undersupported?</para>
<para>I understand the need to provide Australian families with high-quality, safe food and I understand the economic pressures on family budgets that mean families need that high-quality, safe food to be as affordable as possible. Australian farmers have a worldwide reputation for producing safe and high-quality food products. In the report on food safety entitled <inline font-style="italic">Food safety performance world ranking 2008</inline>, Australia was one of the top-five-performing OECD countries for food safety standards, all of which were rated as superior. Australian farmers are also amongst the most efficient in the world, quick to embrace new technology and improved farming practices.</para>
<para>As a farmer, I understand that Australian farmers can only continue in their business if they can achieve commercial returns that allow them to maintain their own families and businesses. Australian farmers have been subjected to a cycle of diminishing returns. According to the Western Australian department of agriculture, the broadacre region of WA averaged a rate of return to capital of around two per cent over the period 1989 to 2002-03. In comparison, the non-ag business world usually works on a minimum acceptable rate of return or hurdle rate of 12 per cent.</para>
<para>The number of Australian farming families on the equivalent of welfare incomes, despite working long and hard hours, is of significant and pressing concern for this parliament. And the number of Australian farming families with a negative income is a national disgrace. The reasons range from vertical integration, market concentration and market power to issues to do with the supply and value chains, all leading to poor returns on investment driving the current generation of farmers out of considering food production and keeping the next generation away.</para>
<para>We constantly get the government and the ACCC seeming to suggest that farmers have no right to make a profit. Farmers are the cannon fodder who become collateral damage in the supermarket war for profits and market share, with no support from either the ACCC or the government in this place. On top of this, Australian farmers have had to deal with the Labor Party's dreadful mismanagement of the live export trade. The bungling of this government on the question of live exports to Indonesia has done great damage to our international reputation and great damage to the farm sector, particularly in Western Australia.</para>
<para>I commend the member for Maranoa for his motion and I really do want to congratulate and thank Australian farmers for the job they do. There are some people in this place who understand how hard you work, how well you do your job and what a great job you do in feeding our nation. I simply hope that in the Year of the Farmer this government might actually stop being a part of the problem faced by farmers and start acting to assist them.</para>
<para>In that time is left to me I want to mention that I am seriously concerned about the Public Health Association of Australia's report suggesting it might be environmentally less wasteful of energy and water for some products such as dairy to be imported from New Zealand rather than produced locally. I am glad that Jock Laurie said that showed a lack of understanding and that Australian farmers are much more environmentally responsible, with a focus on water use, reduced carbon footprints and long-term sustainability. The PHAA fail to recognise this and, in my view, clearly have no respect at all for the job that our farmers do. I would say: shame on them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>While not a farmer myself, I have lived my whole life in a region that is renowned for its rich agricultural diversity. Blair is a regional and rural seat located in South-East Queensland. It is full of areas that are familiar to people these days, some notorious like the Wivenhoe Dam, the Somerset Dam, the Lockyer Creek, the Bremer River and the Brisbane River. It is a beautiful but often dangerous place in South-East Queensland.</para>
<para>Towns such as Toogoolawah are known for producing the nation's best beef. The saleyards are legendary in the Brisbane Valley in South-East Queensland. The meatworks in my electorate at Kilcoy, Dinmore, Churchill and Coominya employ thousands of people and are integral to the success of farming regions west of Ipswich. Around Esk, there is dairy and beef farming. In the lower Brisbane Valley, around Minden, Patrick Estate and Coominya, horticulture is keen. Jimna was built around the forest industry. Coolana and Kilcoy produce gourmet-quality cheeses and olives, while the regions around Marburg and southern rural Ipswich produce wines. This is an area proud of its history of farming, with strong agricultural values.</para>
<para>Our farmers continue to contribute to the economic lifeblood of our region. We have generational farmers in the Ipswich and Somerset regions—families who have helped to build the area and make it what it is today. You can see that from historical documents. You can find located at state schools like Haigslea the names of families that continue down through the generations. Doing mobile offices at agricultural shows in my electorate at Ipswich, Marburg, Rosewood, Lowood, Esk, Kilcoy and Toogoolawah, I can see the pride on farmers' faces when they display their beef cattle or honey and other produce that they have grown on the land. It is a great testimony to their courage and commitment. Many of these farmers have been to hell and back in the last 12 months, with 279 agribusinesses flood affected in the Somerset region.</para>
<para>The export from Australia's farming community, particularly in South-East Queensland in my electorate, is considerable. It contributes to the national wealth of our country and employs literally thousands of people. I was instrumental in securing a $100,000 grant to the Somerset Region Business Alliance to provide advisory services to primary producers and small businesses impacted by the flood. A business expo was successfully run by the SRBA to assist local farmers and small business operators. Thousands of people attended it over a number of days. This was a very successful enterprise and it goes to show the initiative of a federal Labor government committed to the farming and rural sectors. The funding was made possible under the Small Business Advisory Services-National Disaster Assistance program.</para>
<para>The Somerset Region Business Alliance has worked hard to promote local businesspeople, particularly those who work on the land. This is a very challenging time. The high dollar makes it even more difficult. I want to acknowledge the great work of people like Paul Heymans and Deb Ribinskas and others who worked tirelessly to help local businesses in these farming communities remain connected, informed and skilled. The Ipswich Business Enterprise Centre also received $100,000 to help small businesses throughout the Ipswich and West Moreton region. The centre has been providing assistance to businesses from Goodna to Grandchester through to Grantham. Our farmers require training, innovation and skills so that they can deal with the challenges they face—challenges of climate change, food security and global food shortage. I used to represent the Lockyer Valley, so I met with many farmers who were flood affected during my time as their member. I know the challenges they face from the floods that impacted on the Lockyer Valley.</para>
<para>I am proud to see this federal Labor government investing in quality education. One of the great initiatives in my electorate was that undertaken by the Kilcoy State High School, which ensured that science and technology had real relevance to the agricultural industries around it. Last year, I proudly opened the Kilcoy State High School's $1.6 million science centre. You might ask: 'A science centre? Kilcoy is a rural community.' I picked up Kilcoy in the redistribution, and the funding to the school was made possible by a federal Labor government under Building the Education Revolution—opposed by those opposite, sadly. The science centre takes technology out of the classroom and onto the farm. I have been there to see what they grow and produce.</para>
<para>The school's new facility connects the rural areas to the science and technology areas. This school is directly training tomorrow's farmers, offering them Certificate II in Rural Operations, and year 10 students went on an agribusiness excursion last year to the Mackay-Whitsunday region. This is a school blessed by the BER, which was opposed by those opposite, and it is tailoring its needs in a rural setting, equipping students for agricultural careers in the future. For too long the famers and landholders of Ipswich and Somerset were neglected by the coalition, who took their votes and their money and their support for granted. I am proud to be part of a federal Labor government that is investing in regional education and training. People who study in the regions tend to stay in the regions. While developing farmers for the future it is important to make sure that they stay in those regions and contribute to those regions.</para>
<para>It is encouraging to see our universities embedding localism by offering educational opportunities that connect the skills of the local communities in regional and rural areas. Universities in and around my region have developed strong partnerships with local rural communities. This federal Labor government has increased the total regional loading for universities to $249.4 million to help these campuses continue operating. We have committed $265 million to provide 20,500 students in regional areas greater access to the youth allowance to make it easier for them to go to university. I have seen the benefit of that in my area. In the Somerset region, we have dozens and dozens of kids getting youth allowance for the first time. We have invested $176 million in building trade training centres, which help rural as well as urban people. This investment makes a difference to the students in Blair, many of whom travel into Ipswich to get training at wonderful trade training centres, like the trade training centre at St Edmunds in conjunction with Ipswich Grammar School and Ipswich Girls Grammar School, and Woodcrest State College in conjunction with Redbank Plains State High School. The Ipswich Region Trade Training Centre, which will be established in Ipswich itself at Ipswich State High, will have people coming from regional and rural areas. It will have students from Lowood State High, Rosewood State High, Bremer State High and Bundamba State Secondary College. Kids from urban backgrounds and kids from rural backgrounds will be getting training in mechanics, in plumbing and in other skills, and there will be training in rural industries as well.</para>
<para>The Riverview Springfield Trade Training Centre will provide opportunities for students of St Peter Claver College and St Augustine's College at Augustine Heights. It is important to note that kids from rural areas come into Ipswich because that is where they get their secondary education. We are determined to make sure the kids who come from rural backgrounds get quality education. That is why we are investing such an amount of money in universities like the University of Queensland Ipswich campus and the University of Southern Queensland. I note my good friend the member for Oxley and I secured about $49 million for a campus right on the border. The member for Oxley and I lobbied very hard to make sure that that funding came to the University of Southern Queensland. We provided it because we know that kids from rural backgrounds go to that university. We are providing the funding for their tertiary study and we are providing the funding for their secondary study. I want to ensure that kids from farming backgrounds get access to the biggest marketplace in human history, and education is the key.</para>
<para>Our Australian farmers in rural and regional areas will benefit from the kind of assistance we are providing. The NBN is warmly welcomed. I know it has been trialled in parts of my electorate, in the Brisbane Valley. I have seen it being trialled in places, for example at the computer business of Paul Heymans. Our investment in the Ipswich Motorway and the Blacksoil Interchange are critical for farmers in the western corridor as well. I cannot wait for the carbon farming initiative that will benefit people in my electorate. I have spoken to many farmers who are looking forward to having another source of income, and sadly those opposite should hang their heads in shame because once again they are opposing help for farmers.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr STONE</name>
    <name.id>EM6</name.id>
    <electorate>Murray</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We are told it is the Australian Year of the Farmer. Many people in rural Australia really wonder if this is a sick joke, as they stare at their overdrafts and listen to the banks hammering on their door saying, 'Won't you sell your water? You owe us $1 million, your farm cannot be sold. But the government has just put out another tender in the Murray-Darling Basin and if you sell your water, sure, that means the end of your dairying but you can pay down some of your debt to us.' Those same farmers go to the supermarket. If people from the government had gone to the Coles supermarket in Kialla, which is in my area, they would have seen magnificent Australian plums selling for 50c a kilo. No-one can grow plums for 50c a kilo. You cannot grow them, pick them, pack them, prune them, store them, refrigerate them and put the sticky labels on them—that is, they simply cannot be produced—for 50c a kilo. Yet Coles is skiting about its 'down, down, down' 50 per cent cheaper prices for fruit and vegetables. You might ask, 'Why are the farmers selling their product at a loss?' The answer is that Coles and Woolworths between them own 80 per cent of the supermarkets in Australia, so the farmers have no choice. They cannot sneak off to a grocery ombudsman—or, as some have asked for, a supermarket ombudsman—and talk about the unconscionable use of market power by Coles and Woolworths. Where else would they go to sell their product? Fifty cents a kilo is below the cost of production, but at least the fruit does not fall on the ground. Also, they have a conscience: they know that a lot of pensioners can probably buy fruit for the first time at that price. The farmers are going broke, but someone is going to get a beautiful plum to take home.</para>
<para>The carbon tax, which was mentioned by the previous speaker, is a joke. How many business enterprises in Australia other than the farmers would be made to comply with an act which required a covenant on their business for 100 years? But that is what Labor's carbon sequestration initiatives are all about. In addition, farms are going to be hit by the increased cost of utilities and the extra cost of wages with the new industrial laws about after-hours work. All that is a real problem. It makes farming less viable every day, yet here we are talking about the Australian Year of the Farmer and the need to celebrate it!</para>
<para>We should celebrate the fact that the farmers of Australia on the 136,000 farms in this country are producing $405 billion worth of enterprise each year. They are not only producing that value at the farm gate but also generating jobs in transport, in food manufacturing, in retailing and in marketing. They generate export earnings which come back into the country. They do a magnificent job. In the course of their day-to-day activity of growing food and fibre in this country, the farmers also perform environmental services—that is, they produce the fresh air, the decent soils and the water quality, and they kill the feral animals and destroy the weeds. No-one else in the Australian economy does that. There are not enough public servants to go around, and no-one is paying public servants in the states or the Commonwealth to perform those environmental protection services anymore. The farmers do that work, but they cannot do it when they are near to being broke, and so many of our farmers—particularly those in the eastern arc of Australia—are doubly in debt as a result of 10 years of drought and then floods.</para>
<para>We have to celebrate the extraordinary resilience of farm families, who battle on in the face of blow after blow, many of which are delivered through bad government policy. Think about the current exchange rate—the $1.06 and $1.07 exchange rate of the Australian dollar against the US dollar. Why isn't this government managing the dollar down when it is rendering not just farming export activity but also the activity of all our manufacturers less competitive in global markets? By the time the dollar comes down, if and when it does come down, we will already have lost so much of our manufacturing in Australia—and, quite frankly, you do not get it back. The country will be deskilled, and we will not make anything anymore.</para>
<para>On the subject of deskilling, I point out that—contrary to what the previous speaker, the member for Blair, tried to claim—there has been an enormous decrease in the number of agricultural science and agribusiness graduates. This means that there is an enormous shortage each year of skilled people entering agribusiness. They ask themselves: 'Why would I? My father was a farmer, and his father was a farmer. Why would I suffer too? The risks are too great, and the returns are too small.' I am a sixth generation farmer myself, besides many other things. My brother and sister are farmers, and my only son is a farmer. I see what they do every day to try to produce good food and fibre for this country. Enough is enough—they deserve a decent set of policies in this country and a decent break. What they do should be respected. Let us celebrate the farmers. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LIVERMORE</name>
    <name.id>83A</name.id>
    <electorate>Capricornia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am very pleased to join members in the debate on this motion to recognise the Australian Year of the Farmer. I note it was put on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline> by the member for Maranoa, Bruce Scott. The member for Maranoa and I have shared the duty of representing many farmers in the central western parts of Queensland in this place. So I am happy to support him in this motion. He states in the first point of his motion:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the Australian Year of the Farmer 2012 provides an opportunity to celebrate such achievements and to further strengthen the connections between rural and urban Australia …</para></quote>
<para>I am very proud to inform the House that coming up in Rockhampton in just a few months time is the Beef Australia Expo, a proud supporter of the 2012 Year of the Farmer initiative and a feature event of the Year of the Farmer Queensland Road Show. This will be the ninth Beef Expo—so the ninth time that Rockhampton has welcomed beef producers from around the world to our triennial Beef Expo. There are some new members here, so in case you have not heard me say this before, Rockhampton is the beef capital of Australia, a tag that we wear very proudly and never so proudly as when we do host that world's beef producers and researchers to our Beef Expo. This year we are expecting more than 70,000 people to go through the gates at Beef Australia in that week 7 May to 12 May. The theme of Beef Australia 2012 is innovation, collaboration, inspiration and celebration. When you look at the program for the week you can see just what a high-quality event this is, and what a truly international event it is. It really does celebrate and recognise and promote the full breadth of what the beef industry is all about. This is a very high-tech industry, it is a very innovative industry, and I am pleased to say that in Central Queensland it is a very strong and growing industry.</para>
<para>To highlight the very international nature of the event, the proceedings will kick off with the Bayer and Bioniche International Beef Cattle Genetics Conference. That is a very important focus of the event, and it has grown as the beef expos have evolved over the years to focus on the full spectrum of the industry. I am pleased to say that the federal government is supporting the expo this year—once again supporting it very strongly—to the tune of over $2 million. I am hoping that the agriculture minister is able to make it along to the Brisbane launch of the expo next Thursday evening because he will get to hear first hand from the chairman, Geoff Murphy, and the CEO, Roger Desailly, just how progress is being made and how the $2 million is being spent to ensure that this year's expo is one to remember and continues the tradition of beef expos in the past, which are getting bigger and better every single time.</para>
<para>I would like to tell the House that the good news for the agricultural sector in my electorate does not start and end with the beef industry. I was in Mackay last week and had the opportunity to meet, as I do regularly, with the chair and CEO of Mackay Sugar, which is the company that runs three of the sugar mills in Mackay. They told me that they are making terrific progress on the very exciting cogeneration project that they embarked upon a couple of years ago. They are putting in a $100 million investment to the Racecourse Mill, which will use the waste product from sugar cane milling, the gas, to produce the equivalent of one-third of Mackay's electricity. They are able to do that thanks to the renewable energy target which this government increased by way of legislation a couple of years ago. They will be ready to generate and sell electricity—they have already got the offtake agreement signed—very shortly. So, well done to Mackay Sugar. I look forward to seeing you grow and prosper. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Apology to the Stolen Generation</title>
          <page.no>1948</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SAFFIN</name>
    <name.id>HVY</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak to this motion. I thank the honourable members who will also speak on it. It is a little bit after the event, but not too far after it. When it was listed it was appropriate to have it on the record. This motion is in recognition of the fourth anniversary of the apology to stolen generations on 13 February 2012. The apology was a milestone in reconciliation and healing in Australia. The apology to stolen generations was the right thing to do and it was long overdue.</para>
<para>I remember the debate in the community and how, after it was done, people felt good. That was true right across Australia and even beyond our shores. The notice taken of it internationally and regionally took a lot of people by surprise. That feedback came to all of us and it reflected well on Australia. The impact of the apology to stolen generations has been significant. It is significant symbolically. People often have a debate about symbolism and what is practical. Symbolism is important. It is a key feature of our society and of communities. We recognise, celebrate and commemorate through symbolism in every walk of life. It is no different for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. I sometimes get a bit annoyed about the debate, because we have to recognise there is a place for all. Symbolism and putting things right are important, as is healing. Recognition of a wrong done is a way to help the healing. Goodness knows there needed to be healing.</para>
<para>Symbolism is something the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists raised in talking about constitutional change, as my colleague the member for Hasluck would know because we were on the expert panel. The college talked about constitutional change in relation to the impact that it would have on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The college said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It would have a positive effect on self esteem and improve mental health. We all know that if our self esteem and our mental health improve, there are good practical, individual and societal outcomes as well.</para></quote>
<para>I am linking doing something that is symbolic to the impact that it can have on people and communities, and the flow-through of that is practical. It is important that we remember that.</para>
<para>On the fourth anniversary, on 13 February 2012, a few initiatives were undertaken. It was the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and the Minister for Disability Reform, Jenny Macklin, who launched on that day the documents that will be kept as a repository. She talked about how those documents will reflect our history and the ongoing journey we are taking to continue the process of healing. Yes, there is healing, but I would rather talk about reconciliation, because reconciliation is important. What the minister said on the day was that these documents represent a story of courage and determination—a determination to provoke the public consciousness of our nation and get recognition— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CRAIG KELLY</name>
    <name.id>99931</name.id>
    <electorate>Hughes</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise tonight to speak on the motion moved by the member for Page concerning the fourth anniversary of the apology to the stolen generation. The apology to the stolen generation was a very important landmark in our nation's history—for our history records that, since early last century, an estimated 50,000 children, most of them children of mixed Aboriginal and European relationships, were forcibly removed from their mothers and put in orphanages or given to European families. Although those engaged in this policy thought that they were doing the right thing and were acting in the best interests of child welfare at the time, we now understand that this was a great wrong that caused untold harm to those forcibly taken from their families and to the mothers who were left with no knowledge of their children's whereabouts.</para>
<para>Although an apology of behalf of the government and this parliament will never ever take away the pain and heartache suffered by those families, this was an important step in addressing the appalling gap between the living standards of Indigenous Australians and the rest of our nation. Although we must learn from these mistakes of the past, we must also recognise that there will always be times when a government is required to intervene to protect children, as we have seen with the bipartisan intervention in the Northern Territory. However, removing a child from their mother must be the very last resort, only undertaken in the most extreme circumstances.</para>
<para>Although we must confront the past, we must deal with the issues that we face today—namely, that on average Indigenous Australians remain socially and economically disadvantaged compared to the Australian community as a whole. In seeking to close that gap, our goal must be to lift Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders' life expectancy, educational achievement, health and social wellbeing. But most of all we must lift their economic opportunities.</para>
<para>Therefore, while motions like this are well intended, we must be very careful not to perpetuate a culture of 'sorry'. If we are going to close the gap, we are not going to do it with welfare handouts and ongoing 'sorry' motions but by providing economic opportunity and celebrating the success of our Indigenous community when and wherever it occurs. Therefore, to lift Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders' economic opportunity, we should be using our time in this place to highlight areas where the Aboriginal community is succeeding on the international stage, such as in the art and fashion worlds, as they are today, for today Aboriginal art is internationally renowned. It helps promote Australia to international audiences and it provides an invaluable addition to our tourist sector. It is estimated that Aboriginal art contributes $500 million per year to the Australian economy and is one of our leading export industries. Aboriginal art not only creates real wealth; it brings economic prosperity, provides meaningful employment opportunities to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and reinforces their identity and traditions, and has aided the maintenance of social cohesion.</para>
<para>The creativity of Aboriginal art adds economic value. The evidence is that, prior to 2007, the record at auction for an Indigenous art work was $778,000, paid in 2003 for a Rover Thomas painting, <inline font-style="italic">All that Big Rain Coming from Top Side</inline>. In 2007 we had the first single Aboriginal artwork break the magic million-dollar mark, when a work by Emily Kngwarreye, measuring three metres tall and six metres wide and bursting with colour, called <inline font-style="italic">Earth's Creation</inline>, sold for $1.056 million. That record was eclipsed only a few months later when, in 2007, Clifford Possum's epic work, <inline font-style="italic">Warlugulong</inline>, was purchased for $2.4 million by the National Gallery.</para>
<para>It is not just Aboriginal paintings that are setting the trend; it is also Aboriginal fabric design. Today I am wearing a tie designed by Maureen Nampijinpa Hudson, a well-respected and accomplished Indigenous artist, titled <inline font-style="italic">Crow</inline><inline font-style="italic"> Wome</inline><inline font-style="italic">n Dreaming</inline>. Hudson began her artistic career in 1981 and her works are now highly sought after by collectors around the world. I encourage all members to show their support for the masterful creativity of our Aboriginal art by wearing ties and scarves designed by Indigenous artists when making speeches in this parliament. The commercial success of our Aboriginal art is one avenue that brings respect and dignity to Aboriginal communities, and it assists in providing economic development and opportunity, thereby assisting to build new relationships between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr OAKESHOTT</name>
    <name.id>IYS</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Page for putting this stolen generations motion before the parliament and I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this debate. I hope it does say something that there are two members speaking from the North Coast of New South Wales, an area quite often forgotten in debate around Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples when looking at demographics and where people live. More than 50 per cent of Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders live in a corridor on the coast between Sydney and roughly Rockhampton. The very large Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities of the East Coast are an important part of the story of Australia. I am very pleased to once again make that point to the House. I hope to see more work done in public policy on the east coast of Australia.</para>
<para>I was not in the parliament when the sorry speech took place. I was travelling through Sydney airport the day after. It was really noticeable that there were many people travelling home from that speech. People were 10 feet tall. Walking through the airport, I saw some very proud individuals on the back of the sorry speech and the sorry day and the significance of that to their lives. That really drove home to me the message about how important that moment was, not just for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders but for all Australians as a step on the journey of reconciliation and building the best possible Australia for all of us.</para>
<para>I have heard simple words. I have heard it called symbolism. We just heard some reflections that we do not want to build a culture of sorry. I do not think that is what this was about at all. It was something that should have been done a long time ago and it was long overdue and I am glad it was done. But, on the fourth anniversary, it should not be the only bit of work on the journey of reconciliation. Whilst it was one important step, it is one part of a myriad of work that community and government are doing, and trying to do, in partnership with community.</para>
<para>I often hear people in politics talk about the government doing this, we do that and they—as in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders—should do something else. I hope we all in public policy recognise that some of the best work in recent times has been done not in Canberra and not in public policy but in the hearts and minds of many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, who understand their history better than any of us and are determined through a whole number of ways to build a generation of change. I think that is some of the most exciting work being done within all our communities. It really does not involve us much at all. It is a determination by a community that for a long time has been marginalised for a whole number of reasons by the Crown but, despite that, shows incredible resilience as individuals and as a community and as a culture. So whilst sorry and the sorry message were incredibly important I would hope the resilience of the world's longest-standing culture is remembered above all, and I am very confident that we live in a generation where it is going to shine and, hopefully, we in public policy can keep up with community delivering a standard that Australians should celebrate, not feel in any way guilty about at all.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WYATT</name>
    <name.id>M3A</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to acknowledge the words of my three parliamentary colleagues in speaking on this motion. I think one of the most important things that should always be remembered is that when the Hon. Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister delivered the apology it served as a catalyst for the change that occurred within the immediacy of that apology—and that was the healing process. It was a bringing together of so many Australians who have walked together for some time, building relationships and forging change. But I think the more important element to this was the reform work that commenced after that, and that reform work was the COAG reform agenda, because out of that came a number of initiatives. There were seven agreements under financial relationships with the states and territories, but more importantly there were 26 national partnership agreements. All of them have measures that are both tangible, that have reality to them and that go to the core of the delivery of government services.</para>
<para>I also believe that Sorry Day now should be a celebration of the jewels in the crown of achievement that is occurring across this nation. I think, importantly, there are many things that are now working, driven in partnership or driven exclusively by people whose passion to make a difference is transforming the mindset that prevailed for a long time.</para>
<para>The other important thing in all of this is that the long-term thinking and beneficial gain that will be made through the initiatives implemented by the government will have a long-term consequence in that they are enabling young Aboriginal Australians to walk a pathway that many of us of my age fought for. In that journey what they will achieve in closing the gap will be much more significant because they have helped shape it as well.</para>
<para>One of the greatest things we can do is to look at all of the agreements and at the national partnership agreements and then measure the success of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders against all of those measures, not just the Indigenous ones. When we measure against the societal measures for each of the NPAs and each of the agreements and we have gap-closure in those fields then I believe we can truly say that we are closing the gap.</para>
<para>As one of my colleagues referred to, 75 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people live within urban populations. In many senses when you look at the NPAs they are targeted and focused on rural and remote regions. I have no problem nor challenge with that, but if we are to address the urban context then the application of the seven agreements and the national partnership agreements will certainly see us close those gaps. But we have to change our thinking in respect to it. We should not talk about mainstream services, because mainstream services really are government services; it is how we access Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people into that whole gamut and that whole range of services that states and territories and Commonwealth governments provide through the agencies.</para>
<para>I would rather see at the end of 10 years that we can tick that off in the national partnership agreements and we can honestly say as a nation, 'We have made substantial gain and progress.' Because when we say that and we can tick off on that it means we have achieved the closing of the gap based on merit and not based on the fact that we have had to pour more money into targeted national Indigenous agreement arrangements. They should complement the work we do for broader society. Certainly the discussions we had at different times when the expert panel was meeting was on one of the other elements that I think is absolutely critical, and I made some comments this morning in the chamber—that is, we have to have Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as equal partners at any table at which we negotiate new arrangements, the delivery of services, policy development and the things that will make a difference to their lives. I hope that in 20 years time we have Australians looking for an Indigenous family heritage linkage and they can proudly say, 'We have Aboriginal heritage within our family.' (<inline font-style="italic">Time expired</inline>)</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians</title>
          <page.no>1953</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr OAKESHOTT</name>
    <name.id>IYS</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>With your indulgence, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, I would like to hang a T-shirt over the front here, which I am sure other members participating in this debate may also like to do. It is the education campaign that is a part of trying to get constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It is the You Me Unity campaign and people can go to the website to engage.</para>
<para>The Australian Constitution is more than 100 years old and has provided a durable framework for the governments of the nation. On the town green in my hometown, Port Macquarie, sits a bronze statue of Edmund Barton, who was the state member for the area at the time of the formation of the Commonwealth, and Australia's first Prime Minister. So I live in a community that recognises the place of the Australian Constitution and its importance to the development of Australia as a whole. However, I do think it is reflective of the time and the interests of the men who drafted it but, since the 1967 referendum, it still makes no reference to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people whatsoever. It was drafted at a time when the legal status of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people was in question, so much so that some references suggest that the legal status of an Aboriginal person was no more than that of flora or fauna.</para>
<para>I would hope that we in Australia today can do better. We in Australia today have an opportunity to make some small changes to our Constitution and to do some unfinished business. This is not about three per cent of Australia's population making a claim on our crown document. This is about 100 per cent of Australia finding a path where we recognise our stories of the past, for good and for bad, and finding a way to form a partnership for the future. Our lead document should refer to our unique and oldest culture in the world. It should celebrate some of the extraordinary parts of that culture, whether that is Aboriginal languages, culture and heritage or whether that is, by inference, Dreaming, connection to land or connection to place. These are all part of the Australian story, not just the Aboriginal and Torres Islander story. So, again, I look for celebration through this process of You Me Unity trying to get a referendum question put to the Australian people and for a majority vote in support of the question put.</para>
<para>I was humbled to participate in the expert panel. The work was outstanding. The panel was co-chaired by Mark Leibler and Pat Dodson, both excellent men doing excellent work, and I thank them for the work they did. I thank all panel members for their considerations and reflections and for looking at the bigger picture when at times it would have been very easy to get lost in some of the personality clashes in a room of 22 people or in some of the conflicts over detail in what is a complex issue to try to resolve. Between May and October last year over 200 consultations were held throughout Australia in 80 locations. The panel received about 2,500 submissions. The consultation was extensive.</para>
<para>I take this opportunity to reaffirm to the House that this is not some elitist push; it is not some left-wing latte-drinking waste of time and money; it is a groundswell in Australia that wants this issue dealt with. Ordinary people want this issue dealt with. Communities in regional areas with quite large Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations want this issue dealt with. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people themselves want this issue dealt with. I hope we respect that and I hope we as public policy makers do what we can to put a referendum to the people and do what we can to get a majority yes vote. It matters.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Having the first Australians recognised as part of the Constitution is coalition policy going back many years. The coalition has a proud history of support for constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. A move to have something meaningful and worthwhile included in the Constitution preamble was seen as a good starting point. Making constitutional change is a difficult process. To date, 44 referenda have been held, of which only eight have been carried. To ensure that a referendum including Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders passes and, for that matter, one recognising local government would require taking the people along with the spirit of why change is considered necessary. This would not have been easy in the past, nor will it be a smooth passage if and when constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders is put to all Australian voters in the future.</para>
<para>The preamble of the Constitution is not subject to interpretation by the courts, and that is an important factor when this issue is being debated and decided. That is why there was a move to push for suitable recognition within the preamble wording. In 1999, however, the coalition's referendum proposing a preamble inclusive of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders was defeated. Further proposals for constitutional recognition were taken by the coalition to the 2007 election. However, Labor under Kevin Rudd won office.</para>
<para>A 300-page report was released on 19 January 2012 by an expert panel of 19 people. If adopted, it would seek to place recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Australia's history by appropriate words being included in the Constitution and to remove all provisions of the Constitution which are plainly of a racially discriminatory character. The suggestion is to include, as proposed section 51A, words effectively recognising that Australia was first occupied by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders; acknowledging their continuing relationship with traditional lands and waters; respecting their continuing cultures, languages and heritage; and acknowledging the need to secure their advancement. These are admirable sentiments—words which go to the heart of what most fair-minded Australians would agree to and uphold. Proposed section 116A, prohibiting racial discrimination, and proposed section 127A, recognising their language, are also on the surface reasonable and timely.</para>
<para>As an aside, but important in the context when talking about Aboriginal language, I must praise the extraordinary work of authors and compilers of <inline font-style="italic">A New Dictionary of Wiradjuri</inline>, Stan Grant and John Rudder, both from my region. They have been diligently working together since 1997 to see Wiradjuri language learned and spoken again.</para>
<para>Stan also works with youth who are getting their lives together at Tirkandi Inaburra, near Coleambally, a community-run development and educational centre offering Aboriginal boys aged 12 to 15 a residential program aimed at reducing future contact with the criminal justice system by strengthening cultural identity, self-esteem and resilience. The centre is having a positive impact on the lives of those who have been mentored there.</para>
<para>Indeed, the shadow minister for Indigenous affairs, Nigel Scullion, who visited Tirkandi Inaburra on 2 December last year, believes the concept ought to be replicated right across Australia. On the matter before us of constitutional recognition, Senator Scullion is on the record as saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… special clauses about discrimination will lead to a much wider debate about multiculturalism and I think the debate will really ambush the process.</para></quote>
<para>He is right, of course.</para>
<para>As to the recent announcement of the expert panel's report, the Leader of the Opposition said, 'My aim is to achieve unity.' The slogan on the T-shirt just displayed by the member for Lyne reads: 'YouMeUnity.' We all want unity. Importantly, all Australians want to see respectful and adequate recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.</para>
<para>As I said in my inaugural speech:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Nationally we need to do more for Aboriginal health to increase the life expectancy and standard of living of our first nation people.</para></quote>
<para>Help needs to go where it is most needed. Words are one thing—spoken, as in saying sorry, or in a document such as the Constitution—but genuine, urgently needed actions, such as better health, more affordable housing and greater job prospects for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in rural and remote areas, are of critical importance if we as a nation are to truly achieve unity and harmony. The money is there to achieve such goals; it just needs to be apportioned to where it is most needed.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SAFFIN</name>
    <name.id>HVY</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to thank the honourable member for Lyne for putting this motion before the parliament so we can speak to it. I am very familiar with the content of the motion because it is the recommendations from the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians. I served on that panel with the honourable member for Lyne, the honourable member for Hasluck and Senator the Hon. Rachel Siewert, from Western Australia. I would like to read some of the things I said about it in a statement I made at home, in my local community. I was asked, 'What does all this mean and where do we go to now?' I would also like to talk briefly about the grassroots campaign that is starting with Reconciliation Australia.</para>
<para>In December 2010 I received a telephone call from Minister Jenny Macklin asking me on behalf of the Prime Minister whether I would serve on the expert panel. I said yes, feeling excited to be given an historic opportunity to be part of a process that could be of both symbolic and practical significance to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and all Australians and that could also contribute to reconciliation and healing. As a long-term member of the Australian Labor Party, the apology and constitutional recognition are two of the policy positions that we have debated, discussed, come to and promoted for a long time, so I felt quite privileged and quite pleased. Constitutional recognition had the support of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, the Independents, the Greens and everyone else in the parliament at the time, so we started from a good base, particularly with the two major parties supporting it. That was a really good basis to go into the expert panel with. Of course the debate was always going to be, and always will be, around what form that takes, which is as it should be.</para>
<para>There were 22 members across a spectrum on that panel. I said earlier today in another debate in this place that it was challenging. It was wonderful and it was challenging to be part of a group of such strong minded people, all with views, who have all made a great contribution to Australian life. Some of them are known and some are not so known. The co-chairs, Mark Leiber and Patrick Dodson, did a wonderful job keeping us focused on recommendations which were meaningful and which would gel with Australians but never losing sight of what we had to do, which was give meaningful recognition in the Constitution to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The four principles that we adopted were that whatever we came up with had to be legally and technically sound; had to be of benefit to and in accord with the wishes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people; had to be capable of being supported by an overwhelming majority of Australians from across the political and social spectrums; and had to contribute to a more unified and reconciled nation.</para>
<para>It was no easy task to sit around and come up with something that was meaningful. There were 200 public consultations across 84 communities. Two were held in Grafton and Lismore. The honourable member for Lyne and I conducted the one in Lismore. Like anything, we started off at the time saying we wanted Rolls-Royce, which is normal, whatever it may be. But people would say, 'Look, we do want this recognition and we don't want this to fail. We want this to get through. So we want you in the parliament and you the parties to do something that actually gets through. We want this. This is the time to do it.' That was agreed by everybody in all of the consultations that we had. To achieve this, there was absolute agreement all across Australia to remove section 25. Most people do not know it, but when they do get to know it of course they say that this is something that just has to go.</para>
<para>I would like to commend, You Me Unity—yes, I have the t-shirts, yes I have the badges, yes I have all of those things for the great— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHRISTENSEN</name>
    <name.id>230485</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As a member of the federal parliamentary National Party, I want to put on record that the Nationals hold the strong belief that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples should be held in high respect by the community for the special and unique contribution that they have made to the nation, not only in its ancient history but in its current identity and its future prosperity.</para>
<para>The Nationals believe that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, like all Australian citizens, are entitled to self-determination to pursue economic prosperity and social cohesion free from constraints and without prejudice. In that vein, we believe that the Australian Constitution should make reference to Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and we encourage the government, the parliament and all political parties, for that matter, to foster public discussion on changing the preamble to reflect the importance of the place that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people actually hold in this nation.</para>
<para>But at the same time we recognise there is a need for a shift in policy direction; a shift from the old government-knows-best approach to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people being able to take responsibility for themselves and their families. When I talk to people of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander descent in the Mackay region and right throughout the Dawson electorate, they say to me that this is what they mean by self-determination. So while I strongly support the recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians in our Constitution and strongly support the repeal of any sections based on race or race powers—section 25, section 51 and subsection 25—I do not support their replacement with another clause that will simply perpetuate discrimination.</para>
<para>What they should be replaced with is a clause banning the federal government from actually making laws based on race. There have been many success stories in improving the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people when they were able to gain access to the same services as many others in our society. We see our nation's first people establishing long-term employment and conducting happy family lives without the need for anything further from government when we can get them into the mainstream. I believe we have to ensure that mainstream government services are delivered in an culturally appropriate manner according to the clientele, of course. But we should begin that move to providing services in a mainstream delivery fashion rather than by the multiple specifically Indigenous assistance programs which are out there.</para>
<para>This will not be the outcome if we have a clause placed in the Constitution which allows governments to continue with discrimination, whether it is positive or otherwise, toward Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Keeping these separate systems in place is really just creating a silo for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues instead of addressing the needs of them with all other Australians, and ensuring that when government policy is directed at improving the lives of all Australians that that includes Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.</para>
<para>This view is partially shared—not fully I have to say—by Noel Pearson, who does say that if that section of the Constitution is to be removed and an antiracial discrimination clause is not included, then Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people will go backwards. Another respected Aboriginal Australian, Warren Mundine, goes further in his opposition to proposals to make laws for the advancement of Aboriginal people. He fears that that would lead to protection for predatory traditional customs such as child brides. He calls it a Pandora's box.</para>
<para>Before this got to this parliament, people were talking about it in the Samuel Griffith Society which I was associated with in the past. Lawyer and former Dean of the Melbourne Law School, Colin Howard, put that these sections of the Constitution should be pulled. He said that it is high time that laws based on race be recognised for the irrational nonsense that they are. In saying that while there is a lot of good, he pointed out that race as a basis for making rational law is self-contradictory, because there is only one race and that is the human race. I agree with Dr Howard that we need to erase racism and discrimination from our Constitution even if it is reverse racism. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>General Motors Holden Plant, Elizabeth, South Australia</title>
          <page.no>1958</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In moving the motion that stands in my name, the House will note that there are four parts to it. In the course of my remarks on this matter, I will try to touch on each one of those four parts. The first notes that the General Motors Holden plant in Elizabeth is an iconic South Australian industry that directly employs around 2,500 people. In recent times, there has been considerable public debate about the economy and jobs in Australia—rightly so, because the two are linked. A strong economy means more jobs, and if people are working it is a sign of a strong economy. A strong economy and jobs mean security for Australian families. Long-term jobs and economic security are important not only to Australian families but to whole communities and the country as a whole.</para>
<para>The notion that we are debating goes to the heart of jobs and economic security for tens of thousands of people not only in South Australia but right around the country. If General Motors Holden's operations in Australia were to cease or even be scaled back there would be a cascading effect through other employment sectors and, in turn, through communities across the country. The Gillard government well understands that. The South Australian government well understands that. The only political party that does not seem to understand that is the coalition, both here in federal politics and at state level in South Australia. These coalition parties do not understand the importance of the automotive industry to South Australia and to the nation as a whole. That is why earlier this year the Minister for Manufacturing Senator Kim Carr and South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill travelled to Detroit in the USA to speak to executives of GM and Ford in order to secure a long-term future for GM and Ford operations in Australia.</para>
<para>Senator Carr and Premier Weatherill should be commended for doing so, and that is part of my motion. They should be commended because their trip to the USA sent a very clear message to all about the importance of the car industry to Australia. It is important as an industry sector and it is important to the lives of tens of thousands of people who directly depend on it. Their visit to Detroit and the USA sent a very clear message to the people that work in that industry gave them hope for the future, knowing full well that around the world the automotive sector is finding it very difficult right now. If ever there was a time when political leadership was needed, securing the long-term future of the Australian automotive industry was such a time. I commend Senator Carr and Premier Weatherill for making the time to go and speak directly with the heads of the automotive sector in the USA. Those who argue that we should stop supporting the auto industry take a simplistic, narrow-minded view of its importance to our economy, to the creation of jobs and to the lives of workers within that industry. The GMH plant at Elizabeth effectively started off in 1958, and it has been critical to the economy of Adelaide's northern region for nearly 50 years now. Today, as I said earlier, the plant employs about 2,500 employees. It makes about 90,000 cars a year, and I recall that only a few years ago the figure was almost double that. In the last decade alone, it has generated hundreds of millions of dollars of investment in the new automotive supply industries in Edinburgh Parks, located adjacent to the GMH plant and providing GMH components on a just-in-time production system. I am very familiar with that because it happened during the time that I was mayor of the city of Salisbury and I know how important it was not only to GMH but to the region as a whole and to so many other industries that are reliant on those businesses that have established themselves at Edinburgh Parks. It truly is a multihundred-million dollar investment, which today generates and creates thousands of jobs.</para>
<para>Each of those businesses there not only today support the automotive industry but industries around the country. So the importance of those industries extends much further than just the region within which they are located. The direct and indirect jobs created would, as I have said, run into tens of thousands. But there is a broader effect on the region when jobs are lost, as we have seen in other communities around the country. I am sure that the member for Riverina would understand the impact of what happens to communities when jobs are lost because, apart from the jobs being lost, what we also then start seeing are higher social costs—people defaulting on their mortgages, health costs rising and the like. That would certainly happen in the region that I represent if GMH was not there or started to scale down its operations.</para>
<para>When members opposite criticise the government assistance to the automotive industry, consider what the alternative social costs would be if we do not support that industry and it collapses. Even doing a very basic calculation of income tax lost in one year alone if the plant were to close, you would soon find that the amount of income tax revenue lost to the government would probably be far, far greater than the assistance that is being talked about. That is without looking at unemployment payments, training packages and losses in other industry, and that is simply from that plant alone. Yes, it is true that some employees might find alternative work in the long term, but that will not happen straight away. Even if it does happen, they will need reskilling, because the employees we have at GMH at Elizabeth are very highly skilled employees but they are skilled for the job that they were doing. Their skilling was part and parcel of their training over the years as part of their employment with GMH. It would be an absolute shame to lose those skills altogether.</para>
<para>I have talked about the indirect job losses that would also flow as a result of the GMH plant closing because the automotive industry in this country underpins much of our engineering and advanced manufacturing expertise. The skills and know-how that emanate from the GMH plant flow through to other industries. That would all be lost. But, of course, there are other implications and I just want to quickly talk about a couple of them. One of them is this: if that plant closes, the exports from that plant close. The sales of Australian made cars in Australia also decrease, and that means more imports. So we reduce our exports and we increase our imports. That affects our balance of trade and then there is a flow-on effect in other economic impacts. The automotive industry in this country employs some 46,000 people directly and around 200,000 or more indirectly. Then if you put on top of that all the manufacturing jobs that are somewhat associated with the automotive industry, it is a huge base that is entirely reliant on it. When we talk about support by the government for the automotive industry in this country, it is important that we put it into perspective by comparing it with what is happening in other countries. I am sure my colleague here the member for Wakefield, who has spoken on this issue on many occasions, will talk about that comparison. It is clear to me from the figures that I have seen that when we put on the table what this government is putting on the table in terms of taxpayers' dollars—which equates to around $18 per person in Australia—and we compare that with what is happening overseas—with figures of up to $265 per person in the USA—we start to understand that the money that is being requested is not unreasonable. Furthermore, whatever the government puts on the table is usually matched three or four to one. So, again, what it is really doing is bringing money into this country.</para>
<para>The last point I want to make refers to the condemnation of the coalition for their particular position on it. The automotive industry does not operate on a year-to-year basis. They need a five-year forward plan program in place. They need to know today what is going to happen in five years time in order to make the necessary changes and investment. For the coalition to say that they are going to cut $500 million out of the government's support program for the automotive sector in this country is to create uncertainty for the whole of the community and uncertainty for the industry.</para>
<para>Let me assure members of the coalition that the people I speak to understand that. The communities that I speak to understand that, the journalists who have written about this story understand that and, certainly, the workers at GMH understand that. The coalition should be condemned for creating the uncertainty they have in the minds and the lives of those families living in the region I represent and which the member for Wakefield represents because of their intention to cut $500 million from government assistance to the automotive industry in this country. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Certainly, the General Motors Holden plant in Elizabeth is an iconic South Australian industry. It is an important manufacturing base, the vibrancy and wellbeing of which is the very pulse of this nation's manufacturing heartbeat. The fact that GMH directly employs around 2½ thousand people is proof enough of just how vital it is to the Australian economy.</para>
<para>The indirect benefits that GMH brings to its home state and to the country generally are enormous. It is one of the most trusted automotive brands worldwide. The fact that Australians can drive a product built right here with care and precision, using Australian standards and Australian workers, instils a deep sense of deep achievement and pride in all of us.</para>
<para>The January 2012 visit to Detroit in the United States of America by the Minister for Manufacturing, Senator Kim Carr, and the South Australian Premier, Jay Weatherill, seeking to secure the long-term future of the General Motors Holden Elizabeth plant, was essential. It was the very least these important players in the whole equation could have done. They did what would be expected of them. They need to do anything and everything to support the jobs, direct and indirect, of thousands of South Australians. I agree with the member for Makin, who said that when jobs are lost there are high social costs to a community; people, unfortunately, end up defaulting on mortgages. Unfortunately, when jobs are lost our Prime Minister describes them, passes them off and dismisses them as 'growing pains'—a very unfortunate thing to say.</para>
<para>I believe the member for Makin when he says that the automotive industry underpins much of Australia's engineering and manufacturing expertise. He is right; he is so correct. As he pointed out, quite correctly, fewer homemade cars means more imports. This affects, as he correctly pointed out, our balance-of-trade figures.</para>
<para>But one of the greatest threats looming large over the Australian manufacturing sector is the carbon tax. To take effect from 1 July, the carbon tax will hit manufacturing hard, including the automotive industry. It will send many Australian jobs offshore. As a nation, we neither can afford nor need a carbon tax. The timing of it simply could not be worse. With European economies in meltdown and the United States of America facing such fiscal uncertainty it is simply unfathomable why this Labor government is pushing ahead with its carbon tax, which will hurt Australian families, which will hurt Australian manufacturing and which will hurt car makers such as GMH at Elizabeth.</para>
<para>The national divisional secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union vehicle division, Ian Jones, put it bluntly yet accurately when he said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the Prime Minister does not understand manufacturing's importance to the economy.</para></quote>
<para>This Labor-Greens Alliance does not understand the importance of manufacturing. It has let the Prime Minister forge ahead with the carbon tax in order to stay in power. It is a tax which will affect all industries and do nothing to help the environment.</para>
<para>The Federation of Automotive Products Manufacturers chief executive officer, Richard Reilly, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We are going to be impacted by a carbon tax, and our competitors won't.</para></quote>
<para>This government will impose a $460 million carbon tax on the automotive industry at a time when we should be bunkering down against the global downturn and doing everything we can to sustain and even to boost local manufacturing. In the 2010 election the coalition was upfront and honest with the Australian public about a $278 million cut from the Green Car Innovation Fund. Labor, however, slashed $885 million from the fund only months after the 2010 election—yet another example of a broken promise from a broken government.</para>
<para>Labor has broken $1.4 billion in promises to the car industry. It has jacked up luxury car taxes and made changes to the fringe benefits tax. In my electorate of Riverina the Wagga Motors dealership is seeing up to $15,000 dropped from the drive-away price of luxury imported cars as the standard model now includes all elements that were previously added extras. Wagga Motors dealership principal Scott Braid said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We have to rely on turnover now (to make significant revenue), not up-selling to better packages. The Aussie dollar pressure is pressure on the manufacturer's margin and also our own.</para></quote>
<para>The last thing Wagga Motors and other regional dealers whose margins are already under pressure need is for GMH in South Australia to be hit hard. The last thing regional motor dealerships need is for families to feel the full brunt of an unnecessary and unaffordable carbon tax to make buying that next vehicle an unrealistic option.</para>
<para>The Automotive Transformation Scheme is the biggest fund from which assistance is given to the auto industry, and it is a retrospective scheme. Certain parameters need to be achieved: production outcomes, investment in research and development and investment in plant and equipment. At Senate estimates this month it was revealed that at least $34 million may have been paid out in breach of Labor's own car industry funding legislation. In the words of the shadow minister for industry, innovation and science, the member for Indi, reacting to the Senate estimates leak, the government were saying: 'It's okay; you don't have to comply with any of these requirements for funding. If there is money left over in the fund, well, it is up to us. If you're nice to us we might give it to you.'</para>
<para>This government is borrowing $10 0 million a day. How can it make these promises? The coalition has provided generous support to the car industry when in government in the past. A plan was put together by the Howard government that was to run from 2002 to 2015, with a Productivity Commission review in 2008, underpinned by set parameters and guidelines with transparency, as with all things that administration undertook, being a hallmark. However, former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd abolished the plan in 2007 and in doing so stripped $1.4 billion from the car industry. On 23 January 2012 Toyota announced it would be axing 350 jobs at its Altona North factory. That is one in 10 jobs by mid April—literally a decimation. On 2 February 2012 another 100 jobs were lost at Holden. These are jobs that Australian families can ill afford to lose—families who pay taxes, families who have kids at school, families who just want job security for the future.</para>
<para>The manufacturing minister's stewardship of his portfolio, both in opposition and in government, has been underwhelming. He has been found to be wanting. He, along with the Prime Minister, said he wanted to be a minister in a country that still made things. That is a view all of us in this place should share. But, given what is happening and what this Labor government has in store, it is going to be a bumpy road ahead. In recent times, 75,000 workers have lost their jobs while being promised job security in the manufacturing sector, and the Prime Minister brushes this aside as 'growing pains'. On 3AW radio station earlier the minister himself said about manufacturing jobs, 'I wouldn't say anyone's job was safe.' Months later, the union movement itself was telling us that the manufacturing sector is in crisis. That was courtesy of the Australian Workers Union.</para>
<para>So we have a sector in which no job is safe, according to the minister, and sector that is in crisis, according to Labor's own union movement. This is not an ideal time to be foisting a carbon tax on the manufacturing industry and the largely unsuspecting people of Australia. I say 'unsuspecting' because just prior to the 2010 election the Prime Minister said, 'There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.' And we all know that the government, in order to keep faith with the Greens and to keep faith with the regional Independents and to keep in office, has now turned around and imposed a carbon tax on an unsuspecting Australian people. The Prime Minister's words on the future of the car industry and business innovation at her so-called major speech on 1 February this year are hollow, because they lack credibility. The Prime Minister raised the role of sovereign risk in current global instability, but she failed to mention her own broken promises to the car industry, which have sparked that very reality here in Australia.</para>
<para>On 27 June 2011 GM Holden's chairman and managing director, Mike Devereux, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We cut a deal with the Prime Minister back in 2008 and then, mid-way through, the rules of the game changed.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">… it certainly worries a multi-national parent when sovereign risk begins to be something that is bandied about in terms of doing business in Australia.</para></quote>
<para>How true those words still ring today.</para>
<para>If the Prime Minister had a genuine interest in the car industry, in manufacturing or in innovation she never would have broken her promise not to introduce a carbon tax, which will be a $460 million burden on the industry. She would not have broken $1.4 billion of car industry promises. She would not have dumped manufacturing from cabinet. She would not have crippled government support for business research and development and she would not have completely failed to stem the worst rate of manufacturing job losses in Australia's history. This is also a Prime Minister who has such a poor understanding of the car industry that she ridiculously claimed Cash for Clunkers was a groundbreaking program and that it would have changed the way we live. Both of these programs have since been axed as part of the trashing of an amazing $1.4 billion of Labor broken promises to car makers.</para>
<para>Manufacturing jobs in the automotive industry are important and we should do everything we can to help them. But, unfortunately, the Labor government is not.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHAMPION</name>
    <name.id>HW9</name.id>
    <electorate>Wakefield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We just heard a rather interesting speech from the member for Riverina. It was more about ranting about the carbon tax. It was a strange combination between a broken record and a parrot banging on about the carbon tax. I do not know what you are going to do come 1 July. I do not know what you are going to talk about.</para>
<para>This motion has very ably been presented to the Federation Chamber by the member for Makin, who is a great champion of the car industry—if you will allow me the pun. He has been, for a very long time, a bit of an icon in his own right in the northern suburbs. As mayor of Salisbury—I was fortunate enough to live in Salisbury for a while—he was a great mayor and a great defender of jobs and the culture in the northern suburbs. He was a great defender of the northern suburbs against some in the media. So it is understandable that he is in here defending the issue of Australians having a choice of Australian cars. When you get to the bottom of this whole debate it is about whether or not Australian consumers are going to have an Australian choice when they go to the car yard to buy a car. Those opposite want to buy BMWs and Mercedes, let's be honest about it. They want Australians to be buying Hyundais and Great Walls. That is their future vision for Australian manufacturing. You only have to listen to the member for Mayo, and others, who talk about being played for fools by Detroit. What they really want to do is eliminate the Australian option. This is despite the great success story that is the Australian car industry.</para>
<para>In the middle of the global financial crisis we got a second model at Holden's Elizabeth plant, the Holden Cruze. And everywhere you look Australians are buying this fantastic small car. And you still see the Commodore and the Holden Commodore ute. People want to buy them. They want that choice.</para>
<para>The member for Makin talked about the sorts of extreme subsidies paid in other countries and the sorts of tariff arrangements in other countries. This is not a level playing field. It is a distorted market and we must compete in the real world, not in some fantasy world of a level playing field invented by pointy-headed economists and those opposite. It is a fiction.</para>
<para>We must compete and we must provide assistance—co-assistance and co-investment—to ensure that we get the next model Commodore and Cruze and from this plant, which is worth two per cent of South Australia's gross state product and which employs 2,500 directly and thousands more in my state. Most importantly, you cannot imagine the town of Elizabeth without car manufacturing. Elizabeth is the town where I was born and I do not live too far from there now; I live in the city of Salisbury. But it is impossible to imagine Elizabeth without car manufacturing, it is impossible to imagine the South Australian economy without car manufacturing, and it is impossible to imagine this nation not manufacturing cars—just impossible.</para>
<para>This is about patriotism. It is about an Australian consumer having the right to own and drive around in an Australian car built by Australian workers. Those opposite want us driving around in BMWs—well, I should correct myself: they want to drive around in BMWs. They want workers to be driving around in some garbage—some of the cheap imports coming in are poorly made rubbish in the main—and they want to outsource our car industry. That is what their plan is for this industry: they want to send it on a slow boat to China.</para>
<para>This government intends to make sure that we keep building cars in this country, and that is why we will oppose the coalition's $500 million cut, which is just the beginning because as of 2015, and they have made this quite clear, it is a billion dollar cut. It is a billion dollar cut to send Australian jobs on a slow boat to China. Make no mistake about it, that is their policy. That is their intention. That is their commitment and that is what they will do if they are elected to office. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr STONE</name>
    <name.id>EM6</name.id>
    <electorate>Murray</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I agree with the mover of this motion that the General Motors Holden plant in Elizabeth is an iconic South Australian industry directly employing around 2,500 people. I acknowledge the important contribution the General Motors Holden Elizabeth plant makes to the South Australian economy and the broader Australian manufacturing industry. But, at that point, I depart from simply acknowledging those facts in relation to the automotive industry. I want to draw the mover of the motion's attention to another iconic Australia industry that is being absolutely ignored by this government. I think we need to consider that other industry in the light of the support that is being given to automotive, because the problems of these two sectors are very similar.</para>
<para>What are these problems? One of them is the costs of doing business in Australia, particularly the impending carbon tax, which will mean that any industry that is export exposed and energy intensive, like the car industry, is going to be looking at incredibly increased costs and loss of competitiveness. Then there is the daily increasing inflexibility of the Australian workforce. There are high labour costs in Australia, but in the past our productivity has made up for that. Unfortunately, with our productivity stalling and the inflexible workforce with the amazing union dominated conditions that now prevail in any workplace, the automotive industry is suffering. There is the surging dollar, and this government is refusing to pay attention to the incredible difficulties any exporter has with this unmanaged surging dollar. We have got skills shortages in this country and then we have a lack of local demand for local automotives compared to some other products being imported into Australia at much more competitive prices.</para>
<para>What other sector has similar constraints and problems but is, in fact, much bigger than the iconic automotive industry in the value it delivers and the numbers it employs? Let us look at Australian agriculture. Let us look at food manufacturing. Australian farmers and allied sectors generate $133 billion a year in production, equating to 12.1 per cent of GDP. The gross value of Australian farm production at farm gate totals $41.8 billion a year. Australian farm exports earned the country $32.1 billion in 2008-09, representing 11.9 per cent of total exports and 14.7 per cent of all Australian merchandise exports—and that was in drought years.</para>
<para>Australian agriculture is an Australian icon, just like automotive. It supports the jobs of 359,900 other Australians. These jobs are in farming and related industries across our cities and our regions. Like the automotive industry, agriculture is a real job multiplier. Farmers occupy and manage 54 per cent of Australia's land mass and they are on the frontline of delivering environmental outcomes on behalf of the broader community. Australian farmers spent $3 billion on natural resource management over 2006-07. They manage weeds and look after the soil and the land mass, native vegetation and so on. Australian primary industries have led the nation in reducing greenhouse gas emissions by a massive 40 per cent between 1990 and 2006. So what I am saying to the mover of this motion is how come automotive is getting this beaut helping hand from the Australian government—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Georganas</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Because it provides jobs.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr STONE</name>
    <name.id>EM6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I think I just identified how many jobs are provided by agriculture. You cannot compare the two. If agriculture, like the iconic South Australian General Motors Holden plant, is also creating jobs and battling to stay competitive with the high cost of wages, high energy costs, the high dollar and the difficulties with workplace relations right now, I just ask for a level playing field. I just say hang on, take the blinkers off. I know not many rural people vote Labor—in fact very few—but that should not be the governing principle behind who identifies where the needs are and who does not. Of course the South Australian General Motors Holden industry is an icon—most people who are more than half a century old have had a Holden at some stage during their lifetime. But we also have agriculture and we want to eat Australian food in the future, so I ask this government to get a life, look beyond South Australian marginal seats and understand that there are other icons that deserve some attention.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Hindmarsh</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am absolutely amazed by the member for Murray's speech, indicating that she does not support the automotive industry. We know that when agriculture has droughts and floods and when there are important issues facing the agriculture industry, governments of all persuasions always provide assistance. We know that for a fact—it happened in the floods last year and it has happened in droughts—so it is absolutely absurd for the member for Murray to talk about providing assistance to the automotive industry, which provides jobs for blue-collar workers who live in the cities, who cannot afford to buy land and who cannot go out and start an agricultural business.</para>
<para>This industry provides jobs for thousands of people in my electorate, in the electorate of the member for Makin, in the electorate of the member for Chifley and in the electorate of the member for La Trobe. These jobs provide income for people to pay their mortgages, to send their children to school and to ensure that they have the ability to progress themselves in life. We know that farmers do produce a lot of our trade, and they have my support. But to turn around and say that the automotive industry does not require support—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Stone</name>
    <name.id>EM6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I didn't say that.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Murray used the example of the two industries and asked why was it that the agriculture industry did not get support—but they do get support. In bad times, like in droughts and floods, all governments, Liberal and Labor, provide funding to assist agricultural industries.</para>
<para>I speak in favour of the Australian automotive industry, including the iconic brands and the models that have been produced in South Australia by Holden over many years. I say this because I have first-hand experience. The first-hand experience I have is that my father migrated to this country in 1954. He came off a ship in Port Melbourne and on the second day of his arrival he went to Fishermans Bend and landed a job with General Motors-Holden's. He stayed there until 1979. He was able to earn a living and ensure that his family was looked after. He worked on a production line in very bad conditions in those days. Regardless of what the conditions were like, it provided a living for many thousands of people in this country.</para>
<para>The Australian automotive industry continues to employ thousands of Australians in our electorates all over the country. These jobs are required in all facets of car production, from design right through to the production line and exporting, benefiting the livelihoods of many tens of thousands of Australians across the country. I speak in favour of the proud role of this government, our Labor government, and that of previous Labor governments that recognised the importance of this industry—and it is an important industry. It employs thousands of people across the country in every single seat, even in rural seats. This industry has invested in making itself a success story over many, many years and has a strong prospect of continuing the wealth generation of this country for years to come.</para>
<para>I just gave you a brief example of my own connection to the automotive industry. It is said that there are some 46,000 Australians employed in car manufacturing around the nation today and another 200,000 Australians that are reliant on this industry continuing in Australia. Within South Australia, where General Motors Holden has its Elizabeth plant, there are some 2,700 people directly employed at this site, supporting over 5½ thousand other jobs—and I am being very conservative in those figures—in the manufacturing of the components used by Holden in the building of cars on that site.</para>
<para>This is not an insubstantial industry, this is not an insubstantial workforce, but it is a highly competitive industry which many countries find difficult to sustain. Australia is only one of 13 nations across the globe which has all the skills that are required in manufacturing a motor vehicle. It has all the roles, all the jobs here to produce 21st century automobiles. This is a skill set that we value on this side of the parliament. This is a strategic position that Labor sees as important for Australia to defend and to maintain, unlike those on the other side—and we heard the vitriol from the member opposite earlier. Towards this end Labor governments will continue to assist this industry, and I am very proud that this industry will be assisted by this Labor government. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUSIC</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
    <electorate>Chifley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in favour of the motion moved by my colleague the member for Makin—not, obviously, as a South Australian MP but recognising that we share an interest, as a number of us do on this side, in the future of manufacturing in this country. The electorate of Chifley relies more on the manufacturing sector to provide jobs for local residents than many other electorates around Australia, and just as many as my colleagues here. The latest available census statistics show that over 10,000 people who live in Chifley are employed in manufacturing, accounting for about 16 per cent of total employment. That is considerably higher than the 10.6 per cent average across Australia.</para>
<para>As the Australian economy grows it must do so in a way that includes and supports a vibrant manufacturing sector. Holden—and for that matter Ford and Toyota—are crucial to sustaining manufacturing in this country. The sector itself, as has been reflected on, employs around 46,000 people and another 200,000 people in related manufacturing and service sectors. It consumes—and this is a staggering amount—$1.3 billion in locally manufactured iron and steel, $440 million in polymer products and $157 million in chemicals. And while much has been made of the extent of government assistance to the sector, automotive manufacturing contributes significantly to the overall economy. Holden employs almost 5,000 people, each of whom contributes to the economy through their own taxation and spending. Holden itself estimates that it pays more than $40 million a year in income tax, $2.1 million in fringe benefits tax, $17½ million in payroll tax and $2.1 million a year in property tax. This is a sizeable contribution by this firm.</para>
<para>Australia is only one of 13 countries in the world capable of producing a car from design through R&D to assembly. It is imperative that we hang on to that capability, because it is inherently linked to our ability to innovate. Labor invests in the car industry through programs aimed at improving productivity, global competitiveness and clean technology. During the height of the GFC Labor kept the automotive industry afloat through the $5.4 billion New Car Plan for a Greener Future. It is something that I am proud of; it is something a lot of government members are proud of. Compare that with what the member for Warringah, the Leader of the Opposition, would do. He would cut $1.5 billion in future support from the industry when it needs it most. What does that do to confidence in future policy settings? This policy is not universally accepted in coalition ranks. I understand that there are many members opposite who voice their concerns about what the coalition is proposing to do. The opposition's policy will make it impossible to attract new investment in vehicle models and will put an end to the process of R&D and capital acquisition, the development and adoption of new technologies and the creation of more jobs in the industry. The Prime Minister has given the assurance that, while ever Labor is here, we will be making cars in Australia.</para>
<para>Those opposite make a big deal about the level of industry assistance we are providing, but I would remind them that this is a global industry and we do need to look at what other governments around the world are doing to support their sectors. Australia has a five per cent tariff imposed on passenger motor vehicles and parts, and that is the third lowest in the auto-producing world. Tariffs in the EU and the UK stand at 10 per cent, compared with our level; in China, 25 per cent; and in India, 60 per cent. Research by the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries has found that Aussie car makers are receiving less than $20 per person in government support. In the UK it is $25 per person; in the US, $250 per person; and in Sweden, as much as $350 per person.</para>
<para>That is a huge difference, as reflected on by my colleague the member for Hindmarsh. When Holden's parent company, General Motors, filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2009, the United States government purchased a 60 per cent stake in the new GM company. During this time, GM Holden continued to stand on its own two feet, without any support from its parent company, and that is a sign of its economic health. The local automotive industry is facing some significant challenges at present, which will exist for some time. On the face of those challenges, such as the high dollar, the rising cost of input materials and the collapse of consumer sales in major export markets hit by the GFC, the last thing we need to do is remove support and say to the 46,000 workers in this sector that they are not valued.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>GRIEVANCE DEBATE</title>
        <page.no>1968</page.no>
        <type>GRIEVANCE DEBATE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>1968</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>20:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>McMillan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Industrial relations policy that is fair, bound by the rule of law, free to allow business innovation and free from the excesses of government intervention has been the cornerstone of more than half a century of Liberal thinking by prime ministers Menzies, Holt, Gorton, McMahon, Fraser and Howard. Menzies best set out the Liberal Party's philosophical genesis on this in his reflections in <inline font-style="italic">Afternoon Light</inline>. He made the following points:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Socialism means high costs, inefficiency, the constant intrusion of political considerations, the damping down of enterprise, the overlordship of routine. None of these elements can produce progress, and without progress security will turn out to be a delusion. These views did not represent a belief that private enterprise should have an 'open go'.</para></quote>
<para>Menzies recognised the responsibilities of the state to provide social and economic safeguards. Through the prime ministerships of six Liberal leaders these principles have remained consistent while being appropriate in their flexibility to allow for the contemporary time and history those prime ministers governed.</para>
<para>Today, I want to outline the following areas where I believe Australia desperately needs industrial relations reform. These reforms are essential to productivity, international competitiveness and the Australian concept of a fair go. Whilst in the midst of an unprecedented moment in the political history of this nation, we still face daily challenges that demand our immediate attention. To not redress the inadequacies of current policies is to hold Australia back for longer and prevent us from fulfilling our potential as a nation sooner.</para>
<para>In 2010, the coalition put out the call to business to speak up and voice their concerns on Labor's IR laws. My colleague the member for North Sydney said he thought it was hugely important that members of the business community engage more directly in the policy debates that will shape Australia's economic future. Mr Hockey said in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline>:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The squeaky voice will get the oil in this parliament and we need advocates for mainstream change to balance against sectorial interests.</para></quote>
<para>He also made a point of backing the right of his coalition colleagues to debate changes to Labor's work laws to boost productivity. He said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">People are entitled to their views and I would be disappointed if colleagues were afraid to debate significant policy issues.</para></quote>
<para>Well, the squeaky wheel has spoken. It spoke up in the same article, with comments by Michael Chaney as Chairman of the National Australia Bank and Woodside Petroleum. It has since spoken up, with the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry and other peak industry groups representing their members' businesses and every day since it has pleaded, with phone calls, letters and emails from small business operators nationwide, imploring federal members of parliament on all sides of this House to stand up and do something on behalf of people who do the right thing by the law and by their employees in this country and who ask only for a fair go in return. Australian industrial relations reform is stuck in a stagnant policy quagmire on both sides of politics. The government have been derelict in their duty to present responsible legislation.</para>
<para>Instead, the Gillard government has been so regressive in its arcane attitude towards a modern-day, globally responsive and flexible Australian workplace. The attitudes of the Hawke and Keating governments towards necessary reform would be a welcome breath of fresh air in today's parliament.</para>
<para>It is essential that, as a matter of priority, the Liberal Party articulate a clear policy position on industrial relations. People are crying out with ears primed and bated breath for an alternative that takes account of global and modern times, that is forward thinking and outward looking and that, in essence, is fair and reasonable.</para>
<para>Australians have seen what they do not want. They are now desperately waiting to hear something that our nation does need. Among a number of truly concerning actions brought to and decided by Fair Work Australia, we only need to glance back several short months to the recent action brought against Qantas. Like so many disputes under the current Labor regime the issue was the cause of the dispute, not the quick solution that eventually came at the end of that notorious weekend at Fair Work Australia.</para>
<para>The government fairly quickly claimed credit for praise it was not due at the conclusion of that dispute. It had</para>
<para>asked Fair Work to intervene, knowing that irrespective of whether the outcome was to reject Qantas's action or suspend it, there would be a 21-day period for a resolution, after which Fair Work could mandate a solution.</para>
<para>This incident just about brought the nation, via stranded passengers, a national carrier in turmoil and the rest of Australian business and industry at the whim of the Transport Workers Union, to its knees. It would be in this dark shadow that the coalition should be basing its response for a fair, workable and modern approach to workplace relations fairly, clearly and unbowed by the regressive union reactionaries, desperate to maintain the control they have wrested since 2010.</para>
<para>While the government branded Qantas's behaviour during this time as 'militant and extreme' and threw about lines such as 'industrial terrorism', it was Qantas that gained widespread but ginger support from business and industry for its last-resort action.</para>
<para>Australian industry empathised with Qantas because they were hamstrung by the same IR laws that Qantas had shackled around its neck, as well. Australian industry are desperate for an Australian government that understands the modern Australian workplace, that is moderate and empathetic with both employees and employers, and is not afraid to make hard decisions amid Labor hysteria where it is in the Australian national interest.</para>
<para>Paul Kelly noted in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> during this dispute that the Fair Work legislation had shifted industrial relations in three ways in this country. 'First, the statutory power is now with unions, not the employer, and individual contracts are banned. Second, the new law means bargaining is more about rights and disputes are longer. Even Qantas held this line publically during its dispute—it was out there every day affirming the point that the dispute was not about money; rather it was about management control between Qantas and the unions. Three, the law stifles productivity gains in a globalised market, especially for a company like Qantas, which is competing against international companies who have more flexibility to run more efficient business models.'</para>
<para>With the Qantas case looming as a foreboding reason for why change is needed, I want to set out the areas in which I believe change is most warranted. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has undertaken significant policy work in this area because it recognises the costs at stake. Industry groups like ACCI are at the coalface of small and large businesses approaching them on a daily basis, desperate to seek a better answer than what the current government is providing, but unsure about what the alternatives provide.</para>
<para>ACCI and other industry representatives have been clear about their concern on the current set of problems besetting industrial relations policy in this country. I share their concern. I want to lay out the following areas that demand redress.</para>
<para>Despite significant reforms under the previous and current governments, Australia still has excessive award regulation. This includes the transition to modern awards. The federal government deserves recognition for reducing the number of awards but should not be complacent about the fact that problems remain—for example, the traditional hours of nine to five for the services industry do not address their modern-day working requirements. Penalty rates, particularly for sectors with most of their busy periods falling on weekends, are not being addressed sufficiently by government. I heard Martin Ferguson speak on exactly the same thing a few weeks ago. There is also huge frustration from small and medium businesses about labour cost rises flowing from</para>
<para>modern awards. The government has reneged on its 2007 promise not to increase these costs. The impact has been exacerbated by the fact that the penalty rates rise was due to a reorganisation of regulation and not because of a merit based review of penalty rates in the services industry by Fair Work Australia. I again call upon the government to commit to merit based hearings. The government has been preoccupied with assuming that a one-size-fits-all approach is a workable situation for business, regardless of whether they are a mum-and-dad corner milk bar or a listed Australian company like Telstra. The fact is that this is not a tenable situation and small business is crying out for recourse. Flexibility and employer discretion are two concepts missing from the government's existing framework of Fair Work Australia, and this is something that has come to the fore in the Qantas depute as well as from bodies like ACCI. ACCI notes that the collective bargaining emphasis on the fair work laws is out of step with the workforce in the private sector, which is only 14 per cent unionised—and it is hard to argue with the facts on that.</para>
<para>Being practical for a moment, collective bargaining for small and medium-size employers is just not reasonable, and most of their workforce either has a tiny proportion of unionised members or, more commonly, none at all. These employers do not deal with staff employment in a collective manner anyway. In my own small business, we dealt with our staff fairly and on an individual basis, and they in turn appreciated being recognised and rewarded for the unique skills and enthusiasm they brought to their work.</para>
<para>In the limited time I have tonight I want to implore all sides of this place to revisit the following areas which desperately require our better efforts: one, we should recognise the failure of the individual flexible agreements to provide an effective alternative to industry wide rules. Again, the application of this assumes that the mum-and-dad milk bar has the same workplace structure as an ASX listed corporation; and, two, we must have regard for the fact that individual agreements need to work in practice, not just theory. This requires two ingredients. Agreements should contain a no-disadvantage clause. I will repeat that: agreements should contain a no-disadvantage clause.</para>
<para>I am completely committed to ensuring that employees are no worse off during any revisiting of this or other IR issues. Individual agreements are not a magic bullet; they are one part of a broader approach to helping to improve reward for effort and fairness for employees and employers alike in a modern global economy. It is no secret that collective bargaining is too bogged down in a process-intensive framework that is not delivering results for employees or employers.</para>
<para>Businesses are knocking our doors down to make the point that protective industrial action is no longer seen as a last-resort option and is instead now seen by unions as just one tool in a kit box of bargaining options. We need only look at any number of current disputes to see this. Instead, the concept of genuinely trying to reach an agreement should mean just that. The framework is not really promoting good bargaining and agreement making outcomes. It is just increasing an already adversarial contest with more weapons drawn. There is a real concern among business about the size of wage outcomes, especially when linked to productivity gains that lag significantly behind. The example of the increase in the wages of the— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gillard Government</title>
          <page.no>1972</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms OWENS</name>
    <name.id>E09</name.id>
    <electorate>Parramatta</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>One of the frustrating things about being part of the current government—one that has so many achievements in an electorate like mine where there is very little local media—is actually telling the story of some of the more complex tasks that the government has undertaken, the ones that do not translate well to short grabs or small flyers. I am going to talk about just some of the things that we have delivered in the last four years, particularly in relation to my electorate.</para>
<para>When we came to government in 2007 university enrolments in Parramatta were lagging behind the rest of Sydney. People in Western Sydney enrolled in university at around three per cent of the population, compared to 5.2 per cent Sydney wide. That clearly was not good enough, but what was particularly distressing about those figures was that in the 10 years previous to us winning government in 2007 the enrolment rates for people from disadvantaged communities and Indigenous communities actually dropped, and the gap between Sydney and Western Sydney actually broadened over that decade.</para>
<para>When we came to government in 2007 we made a commitment that by 2020 the government would have 20 per cent of undergraduate enrolments from people from low-socioeconomic-status backgrounds, and we set about trying to achieve that. We are providing $749 million to improve access to undergraduate courses for people from low-socioeconomic-status backgrounds as well as improving the retention and completion rates for those students. Universities and schools in my community have been setting about trying to improve those numbers, and I am pleased to say that since 2009 the number of university enrolments by disadvantaged students has increased by nearly 13 per cent—again, a great achievement that gets very little coverage.</para>
<para>We also had a big improvement in high school attainments. The high school retention rate grew from about 30 per cent in the eighties to reach the high 70s by about 2001, but it largely stagnated there. That is not good enough, considering the need for highly skilled workers in our community and the disadvantage that a person faces if they do not graduate from high school.</para>
<para>When we came to office nearly 25 per cent of people in Western Sydney were not graduating from high school, so we made a commitment with COAG that 90 per cent of young people aged 20 to 24 will have a year 12 or equivalent qualification by 2015. Nationally, participation in education and training increased by 5.6 per cent between 2008 and 2010, and we currently sit at around 85 per cent attainment—again, a great improvement.</para>
<para>As far as the health system is concerned, it could only be described as a hotchpotch of policies when we were elected in 2007. Huge tracts of the country could not get adequate services, and poor distribution of services was literally costing lives. It was a shocking fact that, with some cancers, you were three times more likely to die if you were diagnosed in a regional or remote area than if you were diagnosed in a city. That is a shocking fact that should not have been acceptable to any government. Your chances of surviving cancer depended as much on your postcode as anything else. The further away you were from a capital city, the worse your prognosis was.</para>
<para>So we decided the best solution was to radically improve treatment options for patients. We decided to build an Australia wide network of regional cancer centres, announced in the 2010-11 budgets. Today, 24 projects are in planning or under construction across the country. These centres will serve a catchment area of well over seven million people. They will provide 7,600 additional radiotherapy treatments and over 127,000 additional chemotherapy treatments each year, along with 180 accommodation beds.</para>
<para>Western Sydney has some of the largest and busiest hospitals in the country. Westmead Hospital, in my electorate, is the largest medical campus in the Southern Hemisphere. But, when we came to government in 2007, there was an urgent need for more beds and increased funding for elective surgery and emergency departments. We have delivered 232 new subacute beds, of which 152 are already operational, and $20 million in additional funding for surgery and emergency departments.</para>
<para>When we came to government there were widespread shortages of doctors across the country, but particularly in Western Sydney. Last year the Prime Minister opened the University of Western Sydney Blacktown/Mt Druitt Clinical School, which benefited from over $20 million of Commonwealth funding. Six years ago there were no medical students in Blacktown or Mt Druitt; next year there will be 150. There will also be a second clinical school, at Nepean, next year, so Western Sydney will have two medical clinical schools, just a few short years after Labor came to office.</para>
<para>The number of GP training places in Western Sydney has increased by 50 per cent. There are now 65 GP registrars, 38 junior doctors in general practice, and 14 additional Commonwealth funded specialists in training in my area. The number of Commonwealth funded medical specialist training posts in Western Sydney has increased by 62 per cent. There are extra nursing places, with 290 more nurses in training at the University of Western Sydney in 2010 than there were three years prior. We are also delivering infrastructure, with $189 million going into hospital infrastructure, including in Nepean and Liverpool.</para>
<para>In the area of skills generally, there were widespread skill shortages across the country and in my area when we came to office. There had been rapid growth in some areas, and a lack of response by the previous government had left significant shortages. There were many warnings by the Reserve Bank and by businesses both big and small about the need to address this. We immediately made record investment in training to build a high-skilled workforce and boost productivity, with more than $11.1 billion in total skills funding in the three years from 2008 to 2011. That is an increase of almost 55 per cent compared to the former government's investment over an equivalent period.</para>
<para>We also put more young people into training. Apprenticeship and traineeship numbers have soared. The number was up to 460,000 in March last year, the highest level ever recorded. We have also given more people the opportunity to gain qualifications than ever before, with a 23 per cent increase in numbers since 2007. For higher level qualifications, the increase was greater—the number was 27 per cent greater in 2009 than in 2007. In 2010, almost 140,000 students who already had degree-level qualifications were in VET. That number is up 38 per cent since 2007. We have also given better access to education for diverse groups. In 2010, there were 83,000 VET students who identified as Indigenous—up 17 per cent from 2007. There are 110,00 students who identify as having a disability—an increase of eight per cent. And there are 271,000 students from non-English-speaking backgrounds—an increase of 17.6 per cent. Again, we have not ignored our regional friends. We have invested in education and skills with $500 million from the Education Investment Fund for regional universities and TAFEs and an extra $110 million to recognise the additional costs incurred by regional universities.</para>
<para>On the issue of families with children who were struggling to find child care, you might remember that between 2004 and 2007 there was an acute shortage in child care. The percentage of family income spent on childcare fees was a whopping 13 per cent in 2004, and rebates came not at the end of the year that you were in but at the end of the next tax year. Through substantial reform we have managed to reduce the percentage of family income spent on child care from 13 per cent to 7.5 per cent over the four years that we have governed so far. So $14.9 billion—that is nearly $15 billion—now goes into the pockets of families through the childcare benefit and the childcare rebate. We did that by increasing the rebate from 30 to 50 per cent for out-of-pocket expenses and by increasing the limit from $4,354 to $7,000. That has helped 735,000 Australian families since 1 July 2008. Parents can now have the rebate paid fortnightly if they choose, which helps them with their fortnightly bills. We have also provided additional assistance to 640,000 low- and middle-income families each year through the childcare benefit. A low-income family using full-time child care now has around 80 per cent of their childcare fees covered.</para>
<para>I am also particularly pleased that we acted very early on for parents with children with disabilities. The $147 million Better Start for Children with Disability initiative allows children to access a range of early intervention services, including speech pathologists, audiologists, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, orthoptists and psychologists. We all knew when we came to government that we needed to do much more for people with disabilities. I am pleased to say that focusing initially on early intervention where most of the difference would be made has over four years impacted on around 9,000 young people with cerebral palsy, Down syndrome, fragile X syndrome and moderate or severe hearing impairments. These are all extraordinary achievements that get very little coverage—but achievements of which I am very proud. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superannuation</title>
          <page.no>1974</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have spoken previously in this place about the cosy relationship between the union movement and a certain class of superannuation funds, particularly industry funds and public sector funds. I rise tonight to speak more specifically about the Energy Industries Superannuation Scheme, a public sector scheme in New South Wales, and the cluster of business entities associated with EISS.</para>
<para>EISS is the retirement scheme for people working in the electricity sector in New South Wales and it manages assets worth approximately $3 billion. The assets of EISS include a one-third stake in a company called Chifley Financial Services Ltd and full ownership of another company called FuturePlus Financial Services Pty Ltd. The trustee company of EISS has eight directors. These are the people who exercise control of EISS and its assets. These directors include a range of New South Wales ALP and union movement royalty: Mr Bernie Riordan, secretary of the New South Wales Electrical Trades Union and a former president of the ALP in New South Wales; Mr John Whelan, a former president of Unions NSW; Mr Mick Doust of the ETU; Mr Ian Tarrant of the United Services Union. Mr Riordan and Mr Whelan are also directors of FuturePlus Financial Services and were until recently also directors of Chifley Financial Services.</para>
<para>The <inline font-style="italic">Sunday Telegraph</inline> reported last year that Mr Riordan was at that point receiving directors' fees from the three entities—EISS, Chifley and FuturePlus—totalling around $155,000 a year. A statement of claim filed in the Federal Court last year alleged Mr Riordan had received $1,807,884 in fees since 1998 from sitting on the boards of EISS, FuturePlus Financial Services, Chifley Financial Services and Mert Ltd. The statement was filed by Dean Mighell, secretary of the Victorian branch of the ETU.</para>
<para>Chifley Financial Services, according to its website, was established by Unions NSW in 1991. This was at the time compulsory superannuation arrangements were first commencing and presumably Unions NSW saw a way to obtain an advantage from these arrangements. In 2010, Unions NSW owned one-third of Chifley, EISS another third, and the last third was held by the Local Government Superannuation Scheme. In that year Chifley paid a total dividend exceeding $5 million split three ways between Unions NSW, EISS and the Local Government Superannuation Scheme.</para>
<para>Subsequently, there have been changes in the ownership of Chifley and one-third of the company is now owned by the Australian Workers Union. Chifley is the trustee of a public office superannuation fund called FuturePlus Super. There are complex arrangements between EISS, Chifley, FuturePlus Financial Services and FuturePlus Super. FuturePlus Super paid Chifley a fee of $3.5 million in the most recent reported year for acting as trustee.</para>
<para>These arrangements in my view raise a number of important questions. Firstly, what is the basis on which those charged with carriage of EISS—the directors including Mr Riordan and Mr Whelan—have decided that FuturePlus Financial Services is an appropriate asset to be owned by EISS? Remember that the assets of EISS are there for the sole purpose of providing benefits to members of the fund on their retirement and certain related and ancillary purposes under section 62 of the Superannuation Industry Supervision Act. Therefore, the initial decision to invest in FuturePlus must meet this test, so must the decision recently taken by directors to acquire from the Local Government Superannuation Scheme a further 50 per cent interest in FuturePlus so that EISS now holds 100 per cent of FuturePlus. In considering whether this is a good investment, it is relevant to note that FuturePlus's 2011 annual financial statements show a loss of $1.6 million and contain a warning that says: 'A significant volume of the company's revenues arise from administration serviced through superannuation funds.' In other words, the customer base is far from diversified exposing the company to risk if it loses a customer.</para>
<para>Secondly, what do the directors of EISS intend to do in response to last year's finding by the NSW Attorney-General that said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Energy Industries Superannuation Scheme is exposed to significant risk resulting from major changes to its administrator, FuturePlus.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">EISS may need to provide funding to FuturePlus to support infrastructure investments to comply with the proposed Stronger Super regulatory reform</para></quote>
<para>Thirdly, what is the basis on which the directors of EISS decided that Chifley Financial Services was an appropriate company to invest in? Its website says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Because of our unique history and ownership, Chifley’s primary business driver is not profit, but respect for the needs of all our clients.</para></quote>
<para>That is all very well, but the job of the directors of EISS is to maximise the retirement benefits of members of the scheme. EISS members might reasonably wonder whether EISS should not exit its investment in Chifley and reinvest the money in a company which is focused on profit.</para>
<para>Fourthly, what was basis on which EISS first chose to acquire a stake in Chifley following its original 100 per cent ownership by Unions NSW? Was this decision influenced by the close ties of at least some of the directors with Unions NSW, given that it presumably involved a cash payment to Unions NSW using money, but beneficially belonging to the members of the EISS?</para>
<para>Fifthly, the FuturePlus Super fund, of which Chifley is the trustee, had $428 million of gross assets at 30 June 2010. The fund paid Chifley fees of almost $3.3 million in that year. In turn, most of these assets are invested in another entity—Chifley Investment Fund. The responsible end of that fund is Chifley Financial Services Pty Ltd and it charged that fund an annual fee in 2010 of almost $1.6 million. Why has this complex multilayered structure been chosen and, as a result, are the total effective fees being charged to members of FuturePlus Super higher than they need to be?</para>
<para>Sixthly, in view of the rhetoric appearing on the Chifley website, is it possible that members of FuturePlus may think they are members of an industry fund rather than a fund operating effectively on a for-profit basis?</para>
<para>Seventhly, were the arrangements under which Chifley was appointed as trustee of FuturePlus Super, and FuturePlus Financial Services was appointed to provide administration services to EISS, subject to a competitive market process to test whether the members of these funds were getting the best possible value? Given the potential for conflict of interest, was this process conducted at arm's length and did directors with the potential conflict absent themselves from decision making or at the very least declare their interest. The issue of conflict of interest was raised by the recent Cooper review into superannuation, which said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The identification and management of conflicts of interests and of duties are a particular priority.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">… … …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">it is clear from the Review’s analysis that there is a need for greater clarity of what is required of superannuation fund trustees and trustee‐directors in this regard.</para></quote>
<para>Eighthly, what is the basis on which directors appointed by EISS vote on decisions facing the boards of Chifley and FuturePlus given the general law as to the directors' duties is clear that a director must act in the best interests of the company of which he or she is a director, not in the best interests of the company which appointed him or her?</para>
<para>Ninthly, can members of EISS be satisfied that their directors have appropriate skills and qualifications to manage a $2 billion-plus investment portfolio?</para>
<para>How does a background as a union official equip somebody to carry out this specialised and critical function? This issue is rife throughout public sector and industry superannuation funds, where directors are typically appointed by sponsor organisations. Evidently, in the case of the EISS the sponsor organisation was the New South Wales ALP. This issue too was raised by the Cooper review:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Contemporary best practice in corporate governance for listed companies includes the presence of independent directors on the board. The panel believes that a minimum number of non-associated trustee directors such that they can genuinely influence the decisions of those boards should be required on all superannuation trustee boards.</para></quote>
<para>Unfortunately, as Assistant Treasurer, Bill Shorten did very little in response. Why is the government hastening so slowly on this issue? Why has it not been included in the present Productivity Commission inquiry into the My Super arrangements? Is it because it suits the union movement very well that industry and public sector superannuation funds typically involve large number of well-paid directorships divvied up amongst the union mates, whether or not they trouser the director fees personally or pay them into the union coffers? Is it because the AWU, of which Minister Shorten is a former national secretary, has a strong vested issue in this industry, not least as the one-third owner of Chifley Financial Services?</para>
<para>The arrangement here is one which is not unusual amongst public sector and industry superannuation funds, particularly in the use of assets of the fund beneficially owned by the fund members to acquire or establish companies delivering specific financial, administrative or other services to members of the fund or other superannuation funds. Superannuation funds are supposed to have the sole purpose of being a vehicle to accumulate and disperse the retirement savings of members. They are not supposed to be a vehicle used by a board heavy with union and ALP officials to build up a cluster of investments in firms offering financial planning, funds administration and other services, which in term become, firstly, a means to generate profits and stream them through to unions and union peak bodies and, secondly, a means to create additional boards in multilevel structures, allowing those officials to maximise their opportunities to collect directors fees.</para>
<para>I call upon the minister, Bill Shorten, and the regulator, APRA, to look carefully at these arrangements to satisfy themselves and, in turn, the Australian people that the sole purpose test in the superannuation legislation is being met and that investment decisions concerning the EISS assets are being taken for the sole purpose of delivering retirement and incidental benefits to EISS members and not for the purpose of increasing the economic power and financial wellbeing of union officials and the unions they control.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Central Queensland University</title>
          <page.no>1977</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LIVERMORE</name>
    <name.id>83A</name.id>
    <electorate>Capricornia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to use the first part of my grievance debate speech not to grieve but to praise. I want to praise my local university, Central Queensland University, for the leadership role it has assumed in our region in recent times and the fact that it has matched that leadership and vision with an impressive record of investment that will create a legacy for generations of Central Queenslanders. The commitment of the university to our region and its desire to be an active partner in our growth and evolution into an economic powerhouse is best demonstrated by its most far-reaching proposal, and that is to merge with the CQ Institute of TAFE to become a dual sector institution. This proposal comes out of the recognition that Central Queensland, the cities of Gladstone, Rockhampton and Mackay and the communities of the Bowen Basin are experiencing never before seen levels of economic activity in the resources and energy sectors. That of course is creating unique demands for skilled workers across a staggering range of disciplines and occupations. Education and training in Central Queensland needs to meet that challenge, and CQ University wants to seize that opportunity.</para>
<para>Now for the grievance. Late last year, a major precondition to the merger of CQ University and CQ Institute of TAFE, the creation of Queensland's first dual sector institution and a landmark for our region, fell into place. After a lot of hard work on the part of the university and lobbying from me, the university secured $73.8 million from the government's structural adjustment fund to make the dual sector dream a reality. The funding will go towards a state-of-the-art engineering precinct at the uni's Mackay campus, together with an upgrade of the existing TAFE facility in the centre of Mackay. It includes an allied health clinic in Rockhampton and a number of other vital projects to bring about the effective integration of the two institutions into one. In a ringing endorsement of the dual sector proposal and in recognition of the significance to our region of this bold reform, the Commonwealth government allocated to our local university an incredible one-fifth of the total funding available—that is, $73.8 million from a total fund of $377 million. That is not a bad effort and one that CQU can be proud of. This is now at risk, thanks to the dithering of the LNP in Queensland and of its leader, Campbell Newman. Running in parallel to the Commonwealth's funding process, the university has been engaged for some time with the state government to satisfy its due diligence requirements ahead of the merger. This is a process at arm's length from the political sphere that is being carried out by the relevant state government departments. Not surprisingly, the university has been closely involved, providing information to the bureaucracy to assist with that study. It is my understanding that the finishing touches are being put on the due diligence review and that its findings are expected to be available to the incoming state government sometime before the end of April. The conclusions of that due diligence review need to be put to the Queensland cabinet for consideration and sign-off before the merger can proceed any further, which means before any of the Commonwealth's $73.8 million can be released.</para>
<para>Timing is everything here. This issue needs to be the first order of cabinet business for whoever leads Queensland after 24 March. Campbell must commit now to this project, or we risk losing $73.8 million in Commonwealth funding for our Central Queensland University. Central Queensland students and businesses will miss out unless Labor is re-elected or Mr Newman comes to his senses. I am working as hard as I can to keep the federal minister informed of the situation and to find a way through, but there is no getting away from the fact that the Commonwealth funding is there to bring together two institutions, one of which is a state government entity. The attitude of the Queensland government is fundamental to this merger, to this potential powerhouse of learning, research and skills development, getting off the ground. The outcome of the coming state election is shaping as crucial to this important initiative, which I believe will define our region in years to come. I say that because we have two parties competing for leadership of our state which, apparently, have two very different attitudes to this project.</para>
<para>On the one hand, we have the Labor Party led by Anna Bligh, who has left the people of Central Queensland in no doubt that she sees the creation of Queensland's first dual sector university as a step forward for our region, one that she wants to be part of. The merger will produce an institution capable of providing opportunities for local people to get the educational foothold they need to be part of our region's growth and prosperity. She also recognises that it will meet the demands of industry right across the board, filling the shortages that threaten to hold us back, whether it be in mining, LNG, agriculture or health, business or IT. Anna Bligh has embraced this project and pledged her full support for it should she become Premier after 24 March. We can be confident that she will move heaven and earth to have the due diligence report before cabinet as a matter of priority, which is what is needed for milestones to be met and for federal government funds to flow.</para>
<para>On the other hand, we have the LNP and its leader, Campbell Newman, showing a disturbing lack of commitment to the merger. I do not think anyone can get Campbell Newman to even talk about the project, and the shadow minister he has sent out to comment on the issue has everyone who cares about education and training and the future of Central Queensland terrified, frankly, by his stumbling response to questions. In one article he was quoted as saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I am not signing an open cheque book for them.</para></quote>
<para>That is the point everyone is making. We are not asking Ted Malone to sign a cheque for anyone. We are begging him not to throw away $74 million that has already been offered. Here is something that the university and TAFE have been working on for at least two years. It has the backing of the federal government, the current Premier and community and business leaders across Central Queensland. We can all see the enormous value and potential of this project. Sadly, we can also see it slipping away, together with $74 million of investment by the Commonwealth government, because Campbell Newman wants to stay a small target and slide his way into power without having to reveal what that really means for Queensland.</para>
<para>I have spent too long backing CQU on this project, fought too hard to get that money in a very competitive process, as I am sure members here would appreciate, to let Campbell Newman get away with treating CQU like that and treating Central Queensland like that. Campbell Newman has to commit to this project and he has to do it now. His shadow minister, Ted Malone, told the people of Rockhampton in Saturday's <inline font-style="italic">Morning Bulletin</inline> that there are no guarantees with this. Well, what are they waiting for? The shadow minister is hiding behind vague cop-outs like the need for further investigation into TAFE and needing to know where we are going with TAFE. What has the shadow minister been doing for the last three years? We are now two weeks into the election. Hasn't he developed some policy on TAFE and training? Wouldn't he have already taken some passing interest in the merger of CQU and CQ TAFE—a major reform that has been under active consideration and development for most of his term on the front bench, and, I might say, a reform that has a direct bearing on his electorate? He says the LNP need to know where they are going with TAFE. Well, aren't the people of Queensland entitled to know, two weeks into an election, where the LNP are going on TAFE? And aren't the people of Central Queensland entitled to know where the LNP is going on this important project after CQ University and CQ Institute of TAFE?</para>
<para>Mr Newman has to do better than that if he is going to convince the people of our part of Queensland and other regional areas that he can be more than the mayor of Brisbane. For the LNP to be so disinterested and reckless about a project of such significance to our region says to me that Campbell Newman does not even know we exist. We have the commitment from Anna Bligh that dealing with the due diligence report on this project will be a first-order priority for a Labor government if re-elected. The people of Central Queensland expect and deserve no less from Campbell Newman, and he should commit now.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australia Post</title>
          <page.no>1979</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to speak about an important issue that is of concern to residents and businesses in the Robina area. That is the unilateral decision by Australia Post to close the mail delivery centre adjacent to Robina Village and relocate over 1,000 post office boxes approximately four kilometres to Robina Town Centre.</para>
<para>Australia Post has already closed one retail post office on the southern Gold Coast, the local post office at Palm Beach. Australia Post took this action despite an outcry from local businesses and residents, many of whom were older citizens and/or had a disability. Australia Post plans to close the Robina delivery centre and relocate post offices over the weekend of 2 and 3 June this year. Post office box holders were advised of this plan on 14 July this year via a customer notice placed into their post office boxes by Australia Post. I was subsequently advised by Australia Post officially the following day, 15 February, by letter, after my office had contacted Australia Post after being alerted to the pending closure by a local shop owner. Local businesses in the area had heard rumours for some time that changes were to be made, but I understand that there was no advice from Australia Post until 14 February. As you can imagine, this was very unsettling for local businesses and post office box holders as they were dependent on rumour to try and make decisions about mail delivery and services.</para>
<para>There will be approximately 727 customers who will be directly affected by the relocation of the post office boxes. However, there are over 1,000 postboxes in total that will be relocated. Australia Post has indicated that the proposed new location of these post office boxes is 2.5 kilometres away from the current location. That may be so as the crow flies, but if you are driving or walking the distance is more like four kilometres.</para>
<para>The closure of the Robina delivery centre and relocation of post office boxes will affect the local community in three significant ways. Firstly, it will mean post office box holders will most likely have to travel a greater distance to pick up their mail, including seniors who prefer the current convenient location of the boxes. Secondly, people who receive larger mail items and parcels will have to pick these up from another delivery centre. I am advised that this will be at Bundall, which is almost 10 kilometres from the current location. Thirdly, there will be flow-on effects to local businesses in the Robina Village Shopping Centre area. Seven hundred-plus people who collected their mail from the delivery centre will now be going to a different location, a different shopping centre, to clear their postboxes. They will no longer be picking up a newspaper or a coffee at the Robina Village shops.</para>
<para>Last week, on 21 February, Gold Coast City Council Division 11 Councillor Jan Grew and I met with local small businesses to discuss their concerns about Australia Post's planned closure of the Robina delivery centre. Businesses in the nearby Robina Village Shopping Centre fear the closure will reduce the number of shoppers at the village, and clearly it will. This is yet another direct hit to small businesses which have already been hit by the economic downturn. In fact one of the small businesses notified me of this closure before Australia Post even informed me of their decision.</para>
<para>Tony Keilar, the owner of the nearby newsagency, is very concerned about how this closure will affect his business as well as the other businesses in the Robina Village area. Mr Keilar has owned the Robina Village newsagency for 7½ years. His newsagency currently sells stamps and overnight postal packages which he obtains from Australia Post on a commission basis. He would happily extend the service and would welcome the opportunity to discuss this with Australia Post. Unfortunately, Australia Post is proceeding to implement its closure decision without consultation and without giving affected residents the opportunity to offer alternatives. Mr Keilar believes there should be a full postal service in the village. He voiced concerns to me about the inconvenience of having to go to Bundall for the collection of parcels and mail from a postbox at Robina Town Centre.</para>
<para>I am very supportive of Robina Town Centre, which has recently undergone a very major refurbishment. I shop at the town centre regularly—in most weeks, in fact. Parking is terrific when you go to the centre to shop, but it is not easy to park close to the post office if you just need to pop in and pick up your mail. A two-minute stop at the current delivery centre at Robina Village could easily become a 10- to 15-minute stop at Robina Town Centre. For a business, 10 minutes to pick up your mail per week has just blown out to the best part of an hour—maybe longer. If it is necessary to drive to Bundall to pick up a parcel, then, depending on traffic, that could be another 40 minutes. All of this just adds to the burden of a small business and is a significant inconvenience to residents.</para>
<para>As a potential solution, local newsagent Tony Keilar has suggested that an arrangement could be reached between his newsagency and Australia Post. Mr Keilar is willing to establish a retail post office in conjunction with his newsagency, at his expense. It remains to be seen whether this is an option Australia Post is willing to accept; however, it demonstrates a business which is attempting to come up with an alternative solution to the one currently proposed by Australia Post. The Robina Village newsagency is one of many local businesses which do not want this service to leave the area. Rhonda Fosbeary and Leanne Nunnick, who work at Robina Village shops, were also very vocal in their opposition to the closure. They made it clear that they want proper consultation to take place and a solution to be found.</para>
<para>I am disappointed that there has been very little consultation by Australia Post with the post-office box holders and the local community. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that Australia Post has not adequately consulted and has chosen to ignore the community. A number of years ago, Australia Post ignored the community and local businesses and closed the local post office that used to be in the same area, leaving only a mail distribution centre and post-office boxes. Some of the businesses and locals advise me that, when this retail post office closed, there was a decline in business at the stores in the village. It is because they have seen what happens when a postal service is removed that the local community is so concerned about what will happen if the entire postal service is removed from the area. Having seen firsthand what happened when the entire postal facility was removed from Palm Beach, I know that the community will be hurt.</para>
<para>I believe post offices are the lifeblood of local shopping centres. They attract customers and provide the necessary community service. As I said earlier, I have seen firsthand what happens to a community of people and businesses who have their local post-office outlet closed, as was the case in Palm Beach. The Palm Beach post office may have been a retail shop, while this issue relates to a delivery centre and post-office boxes. However, postal services of all kinds provide a necessary community service. Australia Post should be mindful of the needs of the community as they make business decisions for the future. Their actions may well result in a further downturn of their own business as people look for alternatives to postal services, including scanning and emailing letters and using couriers for parcel delivery, which is already competitive and becoming even more so. Australia Post need to start listening to the community that they are supposed to service.</para>
<para>I mentioned earlier that Australia Post abruptly closed the Palm Beach post office at the end of 2010. When this occurred, there were other interested parties, including local residents and businesses, who were unable to properly pursue opportunities in the short time frame provided by Australia Post. Now Australia Post has the opportunity to consult with the community and key stakeholders, as is being suggested by Mr Keilar. I hope they do.</para>
<para>Along with Councillor Grew, I will seek further discussions with Australia Post with a view to at least keeping the post office boxes at Robina Village. I have already briefly visited many of the businesses in the Robina Village shopping centre. I have encouraged these businesses to contact me and my office with details outlining their concerns about the mail distribution centre closure and post office box relocations. My office contact details have also been given to these businesses to pass on to their customers and local residents, who also share concerns about this issue.</para>
<para>I will continue to lobby Australia Post to ensure that local Robina residents and surrounding businesses have appropriate access to a delivery centre and post office boxes. I am very concerned about the impact that the decisions that Australia Post is making—many times in isolation from the community and businesses—have on our local community, and I would like the opportunity to discuss this fully with Australia Post in conjunction with the affected residents and businesses.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pacific Highway</title>
          <page.no>1982</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>21:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr OAKESHOTT</name>
    <name.id>IYS</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to talk about the importance of the Pacific Highway in this year's federal and state budgets and of the four-year forward estimates to show the full funding for the completion of the dual carriageway works on it between Hexham and the Queensland border. This has been promised by both federal and state governments of different political persuasions. Both have committed to 2016 being possible as the completion date and therefore, with budgets working on four-year forward estimates, this is the year when the money has to start to show. This is a big challenge, I respect, for both governments. As shown in Senate estimates last week, to complete the Pacific Highway works by 2016, $7 billion is going to be needed from the combined efforts of both the state and federal governments.</para>
<para>There is currently a funding dispute going on between the two parties. The state government seems to be requesting an 80-20 split on that $7 billion, whereas the federal government is requesting a fifty-fifty split on that funding over the next four years. Either way, at my end and for most residents on the North Coast, we want the job done. We want the funding to be secured by whatever means possible so that the promises made are not what has been seen too many times previously from both the state and federal governments. Promises turn into broken promises pretty quickly.</para>
<para>To put it into context, this is a road that has had 809 deaths on it over the past two decades. It is a dangerous stretch of road. It has between 10,000 and 20,000 traffic movements a day, depending on what part of the highway you are actually monitoring. It is the main truck route between Sydney and Brisbane, and so the conflict between local traffic and interstate road transport is a pretty dangerous mix. To date, since the program began in the early nineties with two horrific bus crashes, around 50 per cent of the highway has been built. In nearly 15 years we have had about 50 per cent of the highway finished. It is therefore a huge challenge, which both the state and federal governments have committed to, to get the remaining 45 to 50 per cent done in just four years. But that is the promise made by both, and I will do what I can to keep both committed to that promise.</para>
<para>I note some of the politics of the moment around the funding dispute, which we certainly want to see resolved. I have some quotes from members of this chamber, such as the member for Cowper who, on 26 October 2009, when he was in opposition and not trying to defend a government, said the following:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The federal government has let the New South Wales government off the hook in only requiring a contribution of some $500 million up to 2014. This compares to a federal contribution of $3.1 billion. We should be demanding dollar-for-dollar funding from the New South Wales state government and increasing the federal contribution to the road project if it is to be completed within a realistic timeframe.</para></quote>
<para>That was the member for Cowper's position only three years ago, which I understand as of today has changed. He seems to be now indicating, because there is a change in the New South Wales government, that he is an advocate for the 80-20 model where the federal government picks up 80 per cent of the tab and New South Wales picks up only 20 per cent. That is in complete contrast to what he said three years ago.</para>
<para>Likewise, a very strong public advocate for the Pacific Highway upgrade in a state seat just north of my electorate, Andrew Fraser, on 21 October 2009 said, when he was in opposition:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Pacific Highway is a state road that effectively causes the loss of one life a week. The state government should pour the money in.</para></quote>
<para>Again, three years later I would hope that is what Mr Fraser continues to think. However, unfortunately, I think the position has changed and again I think he is now an advocate for the 80-20 split rather than an acknowledgement that it is a state road that at the very least should be funded by the state government on a 50-50 basis.</para>
<para>This is important for the North Coast. This is the backbone of life on the North Coast of New South Wales and there is enormous frustration that this is a project that continues to linger on and on and on. It is rubbed in that various politicians of all political persuasions make bold promises. I think we are now through at least two dates that were promised and have now been broken. It would be incredibly disappointing for the North Coast communities if the 2016 deadline was not met. Last week, thankfully, a work schedule was released by the minister for transport for this road. Sadly, that was lost a bit in the machinations of this place over the last week, but it was an important release of a work schedule which did demonstrate that over the next four years in a construction sense the 2016 deadline can be met. The only issue, therefore, is for the Commonwealth and the state to reach a funding agreement and resolve this dispute as to whether it is an 80-20 funding model or a 50-50 funding model. Certainly the federal government will push for 50-50. If you look at the words of members in this place, even from the National Party, they were three years ago arguing for a 50-50 split. But in the end, from my perspective and on behalf of residents up and down the North Coast, I think this is something that is of little interest in regards to how the funding is achieved and more about just getting the job done.</para>
<para>There was a horrific truck accident over January, where a young boy went to bed in a house on the side of the highway at Urunga and died as a consequence of an accident with a ute with some drivers who were five times over the limit running into a truck and then the truck going off the road and killing the boy. These stories change communities and change families. There must be the funding in the state and federal budget and there must not be some grand broken promise by the two in an effort to protect budgets at the expense of getting the job done. We are about 52 per cent of the way into a dual carriageway now. By mid 2014, with the current work schedule, we would be about 70 per cent. With all I have I call on the minister for transport to resolve the dispute, to make sure that he can win the fight within the Expenditure Review Committee federally and to reach an agreement with the state National Party roads minister, Duncan Gay, to make sure that funding comes. I call on him to make sure that faith in politicians, in political parties and in public policy is restored on the North Coast and that we get this job done as committed to by all as they went into the election.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>83S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time for grievances has concluded.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 21:51</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </maincomm.xscript>
  <answers.to.questions>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS IN WRITING</title>
        <page.no>1985</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS IN WRITING</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superclinics (Question No. 615)</title>
          <page.no>1985</page.no>
          <id.no>615</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Southcott</name>
    <name.id>TK6</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Health and Ageing, in writing, on 20 September 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In respect of the GP Super Clinics Program, how many clinics (a) are operational, (b) are providing early services, (c) are at an advanced stage of construction, and (d) have opened ahead of schedule.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Plibersek</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member's question asked of the former Minister for Health and Ageing is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(a) to (d)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">As at end January 2012, there were 34 sites either operational, under construction and/or providing early services. This includes twenty two operational sites, seven providing early services and ten sites (including five of those providing early services) under construction.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Of the eleven sites under construction, four are past their mid-point of construction.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superclinics (Question No. 616)</title>
          <page.no>1985</page.no>
          <id.no>616</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Southcott</name>
    <name.id>TK6</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Health and Ageing, in writing, on 20 September 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For each of the 64 GP Super Clinics, (a) on what date (i) was the funding agreement signed, (ii) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with evidence of tenure, (iii) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with the preliminary project and plan, (iv) did the organisation notify the Commonwealth that it was ready to seek development approval, (v) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with a construction-ready project plan and budget, (vi) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with a copy of the development approval, (vii) did the organisation notify the Commonwealth of the details of the selected building contractor, (viii) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with a copy of the building permit or certificate to commence, (ix) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with notification that construction has commenced, (x) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with certification that the midpoint of construction has been achieved, (xi) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with the operational plan and communication strategy, (xii) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with the commencement of services and formal launch timeline, (xiii) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with the certification of practical completion, and (xiv) did the organisation provide the Commonwealth with the construction phase final report, and (b) how many (i) services and implementation assessment reports, and (ii) financial acquittals, have been submitted.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Plibersek</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member ' s question asked of the former Minister for Health and Ageing is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(a) (i) As at end September 2011, for the 48 Funding Agreements that have been executed for the 2007-08 and 2010-11 GP Super Clinics Program, the dates of execution are as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) to (xiv) and (b) The Department does not have the information sought in a readily available form. The task of compiling all the information sought is a major task, the undertaking of which would unreasonably and substantially divert the resources of the Department from its other operations. Moreover, the information requested relates to the business affairs of the organisation and its provision as a response to the question would be likely to damage the commercial interests of individuals or the organization, or prejudice relations between the Commonwealth and the States. Accordingly, answers to each of the individual questions relating to each of the 64 Super Clinics is not provided.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Commonwealth Subordinate Legislation (Question Nos 666 to 687)</title>
          <page.no>1987</page.no>
          <id.no>666 to 687</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Prime Minister, Treasurer, Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Minister for Defence, Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Minister for Health and Ageing, Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Minister representing the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth, Minister representing the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, the Attorney-General, Minister representing the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Minister for Resources and Energy, Minister for Tourism, Minister for Trade, Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency Minister representing the Minister for Jobs and Workplace Relations, Minister for Tertiary Education and Skills, in writing, on the 13 October:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In respect of the Pre-2008 Review of Subordinate Legislation, will the Minister (a) provide a summary of the subordinate legislation within his/her portfolio areas (including the portfolios of his/her junior ministers and parliamentary secretaries) that were identified in the review as redundant and therefore in need of repeal, (b) describe the processes established to repeal this subordinate legislation, including estimated timeframes for repeal, and (c) indicate progress against these processes, including the subordinate legislation that has been repealed to date.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Swan</name>
    <name.id>2V5</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Minister for Finance and Deregulation has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question:</para>
<quote><para class="block">A review of Commonwealth subordinate legislation created before January 2008 conducted by the Department of Finance and Deregulation on behalf of the Government identified redundant and potentially redundant subordinate legislation. Attachment A provides details of the advice I have received from portfolio Ministers regarding progress by agencies in reviewing subordinate legislation that was identified by the review as potentially redundant and the repeal of redundant instruments. Attachment A:</para></quote>
<para> </para>
<quote><para class="block">Attachment A</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Irregular Maritime Arrivals (Question No. 698)</title>
          <page.no>2015</page.no>
          <id.no>698</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Morrison</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, in writing, on 31 October 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">How many Irregular Maritime Arrivals (IMAs) indicated that they resided in a country different to their country of birth/origin for more than six weeks prior to arriving in Australia, and for each of these IMAs, (a) what was his/her country of birth/origin, and (b) in which country had he/she resided prior to arriving in Australia, and for what length of time.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Bowen</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member's question is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Departmental systems do not record this level of detail and the preparation of this answer would involve interrogation of information provided by each client. This would be a significant diversion of departmental resources and it is not considered that the additional work can be justified.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Clean Energy Future Plan (Question No. 710)</title>
          <page.no>2015</page.no>
          <id.no>710</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Ramsey</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, in writing, 3 November 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Is it a fact that under the Climate Change Plan, refrigerant gas which currently attracts a levy of $165 per tonne to reduce chlorofluorocarbon emissions, is to be replaced by a levy of $30065 per tonne to reduce carbon dioxide emissions; if so, has Treasury conducted modelling on the likely impact of this levy on the retail industry and households; if so, will he provide information on this.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) What alternative refrigeration exists for the retail industry that would not attract these levies, and how does it compare with traditional refrigeration in terms of energy efficiency.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Combet</name>
    <name.id>YW6</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Under the Australian Government's Clean Energy Future Plan, an equivalent carbon price will apply to synthetic greenhouse gases from 1 July 2012. This will be implemented through the Ozone and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas Management Act 1989.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The existing cost recovery levy of $165 per tonne on refrigerant gas will continue to apply to all importers of these gases (in bulk or contained in products and equipment) and is not being replaced by a flat levy of $30,065 per tonne, as suggested in the question. However, the total levy payable will be proportional to the global warming potential (GWP) of the relevant refrigerant gas.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">An analysis conducted by the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency shows that the impact of the new arrangement on consumers is expected to be low as the amount of these gases in consumer products is generally small, making the refrigerant gas content only a small part of the overall cost of the product. For example, the price of a domestic refrigerator would increase by around $4 and the price of a new car would increase by around $18 due to the refrigerant gas contained in the air conditioner (if the full amount of the equivalent carbon price is passed on to consumers).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Government's household assistance package takes these impacts into account and ensures that two in three households will get tax cuts or increased payments that cover their expected average price impact of both this measure and the other elements of the carbon price.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) It is important to note that there is a range of equipment in Australia using a variety of refrigerants other than synthetic gases such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) which are banned under the Montreal Protocol, hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). The alternative refrigerants include carbon dioxide, ammonia and hydrocarbons which are known as natural refrigerants. Available also is HFO-1234yf, which is a new synthetic refrigerant with a low GWP of 4, highly comparable to the hydrocarbons. Uptake of lower GWP refrigerant gases is what the new policy is designed to achieve.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">According to the United Nations Environmental Program, equipment using low-GWP alternatives can achieve equal or superior energy efficiency in a number of sectors, such as domestic refrigeration, commercial refrigeration and some types of air conditioning systems. In the case of industrial refrigeration, for example, hydrocarbon and ammonia systems are typically 10 to 30 per cent more energy efficient than conventional high-GWP HFC systems.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Preventive Health (Question No.716)</title>
          <page.no>2016</page.no>
          <id.no>Question No.716</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Dutton</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Health and Ageing, in writing, on 3 November 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In respect of programs (a) 1.1 Prevention, early detection and service improvement:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) 1.3 Drug strategy, (c) 1.6 Public health, and (d) Australian National Preventive Health Agency's 1.1 Preventive Health, what is the (i) projected departmental and administered expenditure for each initiative, measure or activity within each program over the forward estimates, and (ii) objective of each initiative, measure or activity within each program.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Plibersek</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member's question asked of the former Minister for Health and Ageing is as follows:</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Asylum Seekers (Question No. 729)</title>
          <page.no>2024</page.no>
          <id.no>729</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Morrison</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, in writing, on 17 November 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) In the calendar years (a) 2008, (b) 2009, (c) 2010, and (d) 2011 (to date), how many asylum seekers have arrived annually by (i) sea, and (ii) conventional means including air.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) For the same period, how many asylum seekers who arrived annually by (a) sea, and (b) conventional means including air, have been approved as refugees and from which source countries have they come; and by origin, how many (i) have been refused at primary level, (ii) have been refused at review, (iii) are in the court system, (iv) have been rejected at all levels of appeal, (v) have been removed from Australia, (vi) remain in detention, and (vii) have been released on visas, and which visas have they been given.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Bowen</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Program year statistics for Irregular Maritime Arrivals (IMA) and non-IMA asylum seekers are collated and published annually and quarterly. Calendar year information may be derived from the tables in the quarterly publication.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The publications contain:</para></quote>
<list>in answer to question (1), the number of requests for protection by IMA and non-IMA asylum seekers separately; and</list>
<list>in answer to question (2), the number of Protection visas granted, the number refusals at the primary stage, outcomes at merits review, and the number of final refusals (primary and review processes completed) in total and by country of citizenship for IMA and non-IMA asylum seekers separately.</list>
<quote><para class="block">The publications are available on the DIAC website at:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/statistics/asylum/</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/statistics/asylum/_files/asylum-trends-aus-annual-2010-11.pdf</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The answers to the other elements of question (2) are set out below.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Judicial Review</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">According to the Department's Legal Information System (LIS) database the numbers of IMA and non-IMA asylum seekers who sought judicial review during the past three program years are:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">IMA asylum seekers who sought judicial review</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">* Nationality is as recorded at the time an application for judicial review was created and may differ from citizenship as currently recorded in departmental systems.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Non-IMA asylum seekers who sought judicial review</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">* Nationality is as recorded at the time an application for judicial review was created and may differ from citizenship as currently recorded in departmental systems.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Asylum figures (non-IMA) for particular citizenships or nationalities that total less than five are not released.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Removals</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The numbers of IMA and non-IMA asylum seekers (i.e. excluding those who were screened out of a refugee status determination process) who were removed, voluntarily and involuntarily, during the past three program years are:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">IMA asylum seekers who were removed</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: DIAC Systems</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Non-IMA asylum seekers who were removed after final determination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: DIAC Systems.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Detention</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The numbers of IMA and non-IMA asylum seekers who were in detention, including in community detention arrangements, at the end of each of the past three program years are:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">IMA asylum seekers who were in detention</para></quote>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: DIAC Systems</inline></para>
<para>Non-IMA asylum seekers who were in detention</para>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: DIAC Systems.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Asylum figures (non-IMA) for particular citizenships or nationalities that total less than five are not released.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In process — visa classes</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The numbers of IMA and non-IMA asylum seekers in process and not in detention at the end of each of the past three program years by visa sub-class are:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">IMA asylum seekers in process and not in detention</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: DIAC Systems</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">* No data available for 30 June 2009 or 30 June 2010</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Non-IMA asylum seekers in process and not in detention</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In general, non-IMA asylum seekers are not detained but are placed on bridging visas if their substantive visa has expired.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The tables below set out non-IMA asylum seekers by class of visa and processing stage and by citizenship at the end of the program years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Non-IMA asylum seekers whose application had not been finally determined at the end of 2008-09 by Protection visa status and visa</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: ICSE data extracted 3 July 2009</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Non-IMA asylum seekers whose application had not been finally determined at the end of 2009-10 by Protection visa status and visa</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: ICSE data extracted 2 July 2010</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Non-IMA asylum seekers whose application had not been finally determined at the end of 2010-11 by Protection visa status and visa</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: ICSE data extracted 1 July 2011</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Non-IMA asylum seekers whose application had not been finally determined at the end of each program year by citizenship</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Source: ICSE data extracted 3 July 2009, 2 July 2010 and 1 July 2011</inline></para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wannon Electorate: Superclinic (Question No. 730)</title>
          <page.no>2029</page.no>
          <id.no>730</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Health and Ageing, in writing, on 17 November 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In respect of the GP Super Clinic being constructed in Portland, Victoria, (a) Does the clinic have the support of GPs in Portland; (b) What was the original budget and Government funding allocation; (c) What is the: (i) Current, and (ii) Estimated final expenditure; and (d) What is the expected opening date.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Plibersek</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member's question asked of the former Minister for Health and Ageing is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In respect of the GP Super Clinic being constructed in Portland, Victoria:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) The Otway Division of General Practice, which represents local general practitioners, has been an active participant in the development of the Portland GP Super Clinic.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) The Government's funding allocation for the Portland GP Super Clinic is $4.9 million (GST exclusive). Any information provided by Portland District Health (the organisation) in relation to the funding allocation for the Portland GP Super Clinic relates to the business affairs of that organisation and its provision would be likely to damage the commercial interests of individuals or the organisation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) (i) to (ii) The current expenditure information requested relates to the business affairs of the organisation and its provision would be likely to damage the commercial interests of individuals or the organisation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) The Portland GP Super Clinic is expected to open around early 2012.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Federal Police: Gold Coast (Question No.756)</title>
          <page.no>2030</page.no>
          <id.no>Question No.756</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Robert</name>
    <name.id>HWT</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Home Affairs, in writing, on 23 November 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) How many AFP are currently stationed at the Gold Coast.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) What is the average number of AFP stationed in the Gold Coast since 1 December 2010.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) What are the precise locations where the AFP operate in the Gold Coast area, and what tasks do they perform.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Clare</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Currently there are 72 AFP staff (including 5 paid seconded state police) stationed at the Gold Coast. This includes both Gold Coast Airport and Robina Office.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Since 1 December 2010 there has been an average of 81.5 AFP staff (including an average of 12 paid seconded state police) stationed at the Gold Coast. This comprises an average of 55.4 at the Gold Coast Airport and an average of 26.1 at the Robina Office.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Robina Office staff perform a range of investigative duties for Robina Office. At the Gold Coast International Airport the role of AFP members is to deliver a sustainable, efficient and effective law enforcement capability focused on deterring and responding to acts of terrorism, the provision of uniformed policing and investigation of serious and organised crime in the aviation stream.</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs: Corporate Credit Cards (Question No. 767)</title>
          <page.no>2030</page.no>
          <id.no>767</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Briggs</name>
    <name.id>IYU</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, in writing, on 24 November 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In (a) 2007-08, (b) 2008-09, and (c) 2009-10, (i) how many corporate credit cards were issued to departmental staff, and (ii) what was the total cost of all transactions made on these corporate credit cards.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Macklin</name>
    <name.id>PG6</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The number of corporate credit cards issued to departmental staff varies from day-to-day due to staff movements, machinery of government changes, cards no longer being required and new cards being issued on a business needs basis. Changes in numbers are also occasioned throughout the year by the issue of replacement cards on expiration date. To provide an accurate comparison across financial years, 30 June was used as a point in time to determine the number of active corporate credit cards and the financial year expenditure.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) As at 30 June 2008, my Department had 951 active credit cards.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) As at 30 June 2009, my Department had 1012 active credit cards.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) As at 30 June 2010, my Department had 1078 active credit cards.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) All corporate credit cards were issued to departmental staff.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) The total cost of all transactions made on these corporate credit cards as at 30 June was:</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Superclinics (Question No. 784)</title>
          <page.no>2031</page.no>
          <id.no>784</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Southcott</name>
    <name.id>TK6</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>asked the Minister for Health and Ageing, in writing, on 24 November 2011:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Out of the 64 original GP Super Clinics that have signed a funding agreement, what was the (a) original indicative date of practical completion, and (b) actual date of practical completion.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Plibersek</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The answer to the honourable member ' s question asked of the former Minister for Health and Ageing is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In respect of the GP Super Clinic sites with executed Funding Agreements (as at 30 January 2012):</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) and (b) The original indicative date of practical completion information requested relates to the business affairs of an organisation and its provision would be likely to damage the commercial interests of individuals or the organisation.</para></quote>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </answers.to.questions>
</hansard>