2015-08-20 44 1 7 House of Reps 0 1

Thursday, 20 August 2015

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

PETITIONS 1 PETITIONS Marriage 1 09:01 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck by leave—I present the Uluru Bark Petition, which has been approved by the Standing Committee on Petitions. The petition read as follows— To the Honourable The Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives From the Aboriginal People of Australia and being undersigned by members of the Argan, Arrernte, Bidjara, Biripi, Bundjalung, Bunuba, Dainggatti, Erub, Gidja, Githabul, Gooniyandi, Gumbainggir, Juggera, Jaru, Juru, Kabi-Kabi-Waka-Waka, Kamilaroi, Karajarri, Kaylagal, Koara, Kooma, Luritja, Mamu, Mangala, Mantjintjarra, Mara, Meriam Mir, Munjunjarli, Ngaanyatjarra, Noongar, Nyawaygi, Nyigina, Pitjantjatjara, Wadi-Wadi, Wagilak, Walawurru, Walmatjarri, Wangkumara, Wiradjuri, Wongatha, Wooroora, Wuthathi, Yankuntjatjara, Yidingi-Mbabaram, Yidingi-Mullen-Barra, Balardung people groups and tribes, representing the Aboriginal People of Australia, hereby declare: The Aboriginal People of Australia are the original inhabitants and the first Nation people of this great southern land Australia. Our continuing cultures and traditions are l,000s of years old and are recognised as the oldest on Earth. Although Aboriginal People come together as one nation through many different self-governing language and kinship groups with unique cultures and traditions, the sanctity of marriage between man and woman continues to be held in honour among all. Our Fathers and Mothers are also honoured and form the foundation of our families, clans and systems, and pass down our teachings, our culture, our traditions, from generation to generation. It is therefore an affront to the Aboriginal People of Australia to suggest another definition of marriage. The Aboriginal people of Australia recognise the House of Representatives as a governing body and strongly calls upon the House to reject any attempt to redefine the institution of marriage, and in doing so, honour the sanctity of both the tradition of marriage and the spiritual implication of this sacred union. from 40 citizens Petition received. Mr WYATT M3A On indulgence: I was approached by the leaders of 70 different cultural groups to present the Uluru Bark Petition on their behalf and to make a very short statement on the purpose of the petition. It is a petition to be presented to you, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to make that statement. Leave granted. Mr WYATT M3A The statement that the elders would like me to read and pass to Peter Walker is: Over 70 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, including senior Elders, travelled from various regions including the Kimberleys, Western Australia and Far North Queensland, to gather at Parliament House to raise a united Indigenous voice on the 'same-Sex marriage issue.' …   …   … The heart of the Petition states that marriage between a man and woman is, and has always been, sacred to the oldest living culture on earth. The Petition adds that fathers and mothers—who are deeply honoured in Aboriginal culture—also form the "foundation of our families, clans and systems, and pass down our teachings, our culture, our traditions, from generation to generation." BILLS 1 BILLS Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 1

Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Legislation Amendment Bill 2015

First Reading 1 Second Reading 1 09:03 Mr HOCKEY DK6 North Sydney I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Today I am introducing legislation to strengthen Australia's foreign investment framework. This legislative package shall ensure Australia maintains a welcoming environment for investment—but one that ensures that the investment is not contrary to our national interest. These reforms shall ensure that from 1 December 2015, Australia's foreign investment framework is more modern, simple and effective. Importantly, it will add integrity to the system, so that everybody plays by the rules. With integrity comes compliance. By granting new compliance powers to the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), and additional powers to the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB), the government is ensuring that Australians can have confidence that our foreign investment framework will be effectively enforced. Australians expect our foreign investment rules to be strong, effective and enforceable. Our foreign investment rules have not been significantly revised since introduction in 1975, 40 years ago, and they have not kept pace with the changes in global investment. The government recognises the changing landscape and has already taken active steps to enforce the existing rules and act decisively on foreign investment breaches. One such step is to encourage those who are in breach to come forward and self-report. In so doing, we have announced a reduced penalty period for foreign investors who come forward and self-report noncompliance before 30 November 2015. Already, I have issued the first divestment order in about 10 years. Since then, I have ordered the divestment of a further six illegally held properties under the reduced penalty period. While the government has increased enforcement activities, further strengthening of the framework is still required to ensure foreign investment in Australia can be appropriately monitored and the rules enforced for the benefit of all Australians. With this package of bills, the government is implementing its commitment to increase scrutiny and transparency around foreign investment in agriculture. The government is also responding to concerns raised by the House Economics Committee, which was at the time led by my parliamentary secretary. That committee looked at the issue of a lack of compliance and enforcement of residential real estate rules and determined that that lack of enforcement was undermining the overall integrity of the foreign investment framework. The package delivers a robust and enforceable regulatory framework and provides a predictable and welcoming environment for investors. The Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 makes essential changes to simplify the system, strengthen the framework and ensure the rules are enforced. Consistent with the recommendations of the House Economics Committee, the bill introduces a range of new and stricter penalties that are commensurate with the severity of the breach and ensure that those who break the rules do not profit by their actions. Criminal penalties will be increased from $90,000 to $135,000 for individuals and will be supplemented by civil pecuniary penalties and infringement notices for less serious breaches of the residential real estate rules. Third parties such as real estate agents, migration agents, conveyancers and lawyers who knowingly assist a foreign investor to breach the rules will also now be subject to both civil and criminal penalties. The government has provided $47.5 million over four years to the Australian Taxation Office to improve compliance and enforcement of the rules. The ATO has the capacity to cover more than 600 million transactions annually through its sophisticated data matching programs. The bill also implements the government's commitment to lower the screening thresholds for investments in Australian agriculture. Since 1 March 2015, the screening threshold for foreign purchases of agricultural land has been lowered from $252 million to $15 million based on the cumulative value of agricultural land owned by that investor. The government is also introducing a $55 million threshold for direct interests in agribusinesses from 1 December 2015. Australians can have confidence that investments in agriculture will be scrutinised to ensure that they are not contrary to the national interest. The government is committed to deregulation and ensuring that we create an investment environment that is open for business. The bill includes a package of long overdue amendments that will reduce red tape by removing routine cases and better aligning the foreign investment framework with other corporate legislation. For example, the substantial interest threshold will be raised from 15 per cent to 20 per cent to better align the foreign investment rules with the takeover rules in the Corporations Act 2001, which I introduced into this place. This means investors acquiring a stake of less than 20 per cent will no longer need foreign investment approval. The bill will also provide greater certainty for investors and the Australian community by bringing foreign government investors within the legislative framework. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Bill 2015 3

Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Bill 2015

First Reading 3 Second Reading 3 09:10 Mr HOCKEY DK6 North Sydney I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The second bill in the package is the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Bill 2015. The imposition bill introduces fees on foreign investment applications to ensure Australian taxpayers are no longer required to fund the costs of the administration and enforcement of the foreign investment regime. For residential and agricultural properties valued at $1 million or less, foreign investors will pay a fee of $5,000. Higher fees apply to more expensive residential and agricultural properties as well as commercial real estate and business applications. Debate adjourned. Register of Foreign Ownership of Agricultural Land Bill 2015 3

Register of Foreign Ownership of Agricultural Land Bill 2015

First Reading 3 Second Reading 3 09:11 Mr HOCKEY DK6 North Sydney I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The last bill in the package is the Register of Foreign Ownership of Agricultural Land Bill 2015. The register bill complements the lower agricultural screening thresholds that the government has put in place to deliver better scrutiny and transparency around foreign investment into Australia's agricultural sector. On 1 July 2015 the government established a register of foreign ownership of agricultural land operated by the Australian Taxation Office. All existing holdings must be registered with the Australian Taxation Office by 31 December 2015 and any new interests registered within 30 days. The ATO is collecting information such as the location and size of the property and size of the interest acquired. The government is also working with the states and territories to use their land titles data to expand the register in the future. For the first time, the land register will provide a clear picture on the actual levels of foreign ownership of agricultural land in Australia. This package of legislation ensures that we continue to welcome foreign investment while having the capacity to monitor activity and ensure compliance. In doing so, these measures will ensure that continued foreign investment in Australia will benefit all Australians and our future generations. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Standing) Bill 2015 3

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Standing) Bill 2015

First Reading 3 Second Reading 4 09:14 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) is Australia's national environmental law and is amongst the most stringent in the world. It provides a legal framework to facilitate sustainable development, while protecting nationally and internationally important flora, fauna, ecological communities, migratory birds, heritage places and water resources. Over fifteen years, the act has provided certainty for projects and ensured protection of the environment. Since coming to government we have undertaken a careful reform process through: 1. Establishing a one-stop shop for environmental assessments with all states and territories. 2. Approval of projects with a construction or resource value of over $1 trillion. Many of these projects and much of this value was the result of clearing the backlog of projects in some way deferred or delayed by the previous government. 3. Reduced approval times by up to 50 per cent. This has meant that not only do we have world-class environmental standards, we have world-class administration. Our reforms are about protecting the integrity of the EPBC Act. However, a major threat to the administration of the EPBC Act has emerged recently. This is the direct Americanisation through the use of litigation to 'disrupt and delay key projects and infrastructure' within Australia and to directly 'increase investor risk'. This is an unprecedented new development in Australia, drawing the worst features of the American litigation industry into Australia. Currently we see actions in state courts against three major Galilee Basin projects, amongst others, which the Queensland government is now defending. The intention and reality is that major resource projects and infrastructure are similarly subject to challenge under federal law. I refer to the following quote from a former Labor Treasurer, Keith De Lacy, in today's Brisbane Courier Mail: … green activism had increased the costs of developing a mine by up to 10 times. … a development that took just over a year in 2008 would now take up to five years as companies get weighed down by litigation. I agree with everything the Federal Government is doing. Contrary to the intentions of the EPBC Act, the federal law is now being used to 'disrupt and delay' infrastructure. The strategy is almost completely disconnected from concerns which were the intended purpose of the EPBC Act. In 2011 a number of organisations produced a document expressly setting out a plan to disrupt and delay key projects and infrastructure. It expressly sets the goal of 'increasing investor risk' in Australia. The groups who helped develop the document included Greenpeace, the New South Wales and Queensland environment defenders office, Lock the Gate, Beyond Zero Emissions, GetUp, the Mackay Conservation Group and the Australia Institute among others. Interestingly, the trade union United Voice was also involved in the document's production. The document's strategy was simple—as outlined on page 3: … to 'disrupt and delay' key projects and infrastructure while gradually eroding public and political support for the industry. After outlining the six elements of the strategy which focused on increasing investor risk and costs, section 4.1 discussed litigation. Legal challenges can stop projects outright, or it can delay them in order to buy time to build a much stronger movement and powerful public campaigns. They can also expose the impacts, increase costs, raise investor uncertainty, and create a powerful platform for public campaigning. The express objectives include: 1. Mount legal challenges to the approval of several key ports, mines and rail lines. 2. Run legal challenges that delay, limit or stop all of the major infrastructure projects (mines, rail and ports) that have been identified as a high priority in the strategy. This is undoubtedly contrary to the intent of the EPBC Act which was to create certainty based on stringent environmental assessments. Indeed the EPBC Act was created to provide certainty for the environment and for project proponents. It is very clear that the EPBC Act was not intended to be used to 'disrupt and delay key projects and infrastructure'. The document then outlines in detail how tactics can be imported from the United States. Page 11 clearly states: Traditionally, environmental organizations have tended to employ "projects officers" with a research, policy and advocacy focus or campaigners who design and lead campaigns themselves. This is in stark contrast to the organizing model widely (and successfully) in the US where "community Organizers" support grassroots leaderships and Organize communities to build and express their own power. The objective is clear—it is to design a community organisational model that adapts the 'US organising techniques to an Australian context'. Let us be clear about what this represents. This is not some community based grassroots campaign. This is a US style top-down litigation approach which expressly seeks to use third-party involvement in US style litigation to 'disrupt and delay key projects and infrastructure'. What we have seen to date is a well-funded and coordinated strategy to frustrate the careful consideration of the EPBC Act approval process which is by any measure one of the most stringent in the world. This is the explicit Americanisation of environmental campaigning with its focus on tying up projects in legal challenges where the goal is not to win, but to disrupt and delay. Therefore we are seeking to bring the EPBC Act standing provisions in line with the broad Commonwealth standing provisions so as to ensure that it is those with a genuine and direct interest in a matter, such as farmers and landowners, who have the right to standing and to protect their interests under section 5 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (ADJR Act). The need to normalise the EPBC Act Section 487 of the EPBC Act sets out an extended standing far beyond the Commonwealth ADJR Act provisions. In particular, the section enables individuals, organisations or associations who have, at any time in the two years immediately prior to the decision in question, engaged in a series of activities in Australia or an external territory for protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment, to commence proceedings for judicial review under the ADJR Act. This provision of the EPBC Act was well intentioned; however it has now become the basis for the Americanisation of the Australian justice system. It allows virtually any person or group to bring a lawsuit, regardless of whether they are adversely affected or even near a project. This is out of step with Commonwealth law and has provided a legal loophole for activists to exploit. Lawsuits that are designed purely to delay a project, increase costs and increase uncertainty for investors, and create a platform for campaigning, undermine the intention of the EPBC Act to provide a process with both high standards and certainty for assessing proposals. It is informative to note that Dr Moss Cass, minister for the environment in the Whitlam government, oversaw the introduction of the legislation which preceded the EPBC Act. In this legislation, there was no special treatment for environmental groups. When passing that legislation, Dr Cass stated in his second reading speech that the government had decided not to have wide standing provisions. He noted difficulties in the United States arising from its environmental impact assessment due to 'too frequent a resort to the courts'. Twenty years later, the then government in good faith gave environmental groups greater rights to intervene. This provision has now been distorted by bringing and threatening lawsuits designed only to delay and frustrate proponents. We now need to reinforce the purpose and intention of the EPBC Act, while preserving legitimate rights for farmers, landholders and other genuinely interested parties. Section 5 of the ADJR Act sets the standard definition for Commonwealth law regarding who can make an application for judicial review as an aggrieved person. An aggrieved person includes a person whose interests are adversely affected by the decision, such as a farmer or adjacent landholder. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Standing) Bill 2015 (the bill) will repeal section 487 to normalise the EPBC Act in line with the standing provisions of the ADJR Act. This is exactly the same standing as the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002. Exactly the same standing as the Biosecurity Act 2015. Exactly the same standing as the Australian Energy Market Act 2004, I am advised. The EPBC Act standing provisions were always intended to allow the genuine interests of an aggrieved person whose interests are adversely affected to be preserved. This will continue to be the case. The EPBC Act standing provisions were never intended to be extended and distorted for political purposes as is now occurring with the US style litigation campaign to 'disrupt and delay key projects and infrastructure' and 'increase investor risk'. Changing the EPBC Act will not prevent those who may be affected from seeking judicial review. It will maintain and protect their rights. However, it will prevent those with no connection to the project, other than a political ambition to stop development, from using the courts to disrupt and delay key infrastructure where it has been appropriately considered under the EPBC Act. Conclusion Since coming into government we have applied the highest environmental standards. We have halved the time for environmental approvals and cleared the backlog of projects left by Labor. We have approved over $1 trillion in projects and established a one-stop shop for environmental assessments. All while maintaining environmental standards. Indeed, the World Heritage Committee not only reversed the direction we inherited of the Great Barrier Reef being on the 'watch list' with a direct path to being placed on the 'in-danger list'; it lifted the Great Barrier Reef back to the highest rank of World Heritage listing and praised Australia as a global role model only seven weeks ago. With this bill we are seeking to restore certainty to the EPBC Act, prevent the Americanisation of Australian trial litigation, while reaffirming the sanctity of EPBC Act processes and the ongoing rights of genuinely concerned farmers, landowners and other similar parties. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Better Targeting the Income Tax Transparency Laws) Bill 2015 6

Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Better Targeting the Income Tax Transparency Laws) Bill 2015

First Reading 6 Second Reading 6 09:28 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Better Targeting of the Income Tax Transparency Laws) Bill 2015 will ensure that the release of information by the Commissioner of Taxation under the income tax public disclosure laws does not jeopardise the privacy, personal security and market environments of Australian owned private companies. The government is committed to combating tax avoidance and we are implementing well-considered and balanced measures. As G20 president in 2014, Australia led the global response to tax avoidance by multinational companies and ensured that it remained at the top of the international agenda. Under Australia's leadership, the first of the OECD/G20's base erosion and profit-shifting recommendations were delivered last year. The budget continued the government's strong international leadership by actioning the 2014 OECD/G20 base erosion and profit-shifting recommendations on country-by-country reporting, anti-hybrid rules, harmful tax practices, and treaty abuse rules. Australia will implement the OECD's country-by-country reporting from 1 January 2016. We are one of the first countries to commit to implementing it. Country-by-country reporting to tax administrations will require large multinationals to report annually for each jurisdiction in which they do business the amount of revenue, profit, income tax and economic activity. For the first time tax administrations will get a global picture of multinationals' operations. This is a significant step in improving transparency for tax administrations. The government has asked the board of tax to commence consultation on the implementation of the OECD's antihybrid rules. Australia has no harmful tax practices, but the ATO has already commenced exchanging information with other tax administrations on preferential tax regimes. This will help the ATO identify secret tax deals provided to multinationals by other countries that may contribute tax avoidance in Australia. On treaty abuse, the government is acting now to incorporate the OECD's recommendations into Australia's treaty practice, so that multinationals do not exploit treaties to avoid tax. The government is also going further and faster than these BEPS recommendations. The government released exposure draft legislation for the new Multinational Anti-Avoidance Law to stop multinationals artificially avoiding a taxable presence in Australia and force them to pay tax in Australia on profits from economic activities undertaken here. The legislation will be introduced shortly. The government will also double penalties for large companies that use tax avoidance and profit-shifting schemes. We will close the tax loophole that currently means digital products and services imported by consumers are not subject to GST. Foreign providers will now be required to charge GST in the same way as domestic providers. The government has asked the Board of Taxation to work with businesses to develop a voluntary code for greater disclosure by companies of their tax information. I expect that the Board of Taxation will look at ways to provide more information to help inform the public about companies' tax information. The budget also announced that Australia will sign a multilateral international agreement to enable Common Reporting Standard information to be exchanged between tax administrations. This agreement was signed on 3 June. The Common Reporting Standard will combat tax evasion by exposing taxpayers with hidden offshore investments. The government has committed to implementing the Common Reporting Standard from 2017 and signing the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement is a further step towards implementation. These are all well-considered and balanced measures. Labor's income tax public disclosure laws require the Commissioner of Taxation to publish the name and the Australian business number, total income, taxable income and tax payable of companies with total income of $100 million or more. In opposition we opposed Labor's legislation because it got the balance wrong. These laws abrogate the fundamental right to confidentiality. The information to be disclosed, already in the hands of the Australian Taxation Office, will not help the ATO in assessing additional tax. Public disclosure of the information as Labor has legislated will not better inform the public and will not enhance the quality of debate and will provide a confusing picture. Submissions on the measure before it was introduced by Labor highlighted the risk that disclosing the tax affairs of closely held companies will effectively disclose the tax affairs of the companies' owners. They also highlighted the risk of making public, the commercial-in-confidence information of private companies. The concerns about Labor's laws were also raised when this government consulted on exposure draft legislation to carve out Australian owned private companies. The concerns were not heeded by Labor. We have taken them seriously. For closely held Australian owned private companies, the publication of company tax affairs would effectively reveal the owners' private financial affairs. In Japan, public disclosure of corporate tax information was required from 1950 until 2004. This disclosure was abolished in 2005 due to the information: … being utilized in various ways inconsistent with its initial aim, and there are various reports of the disclosure being a factor in causing crimes and harassment … The government will not trivialise or ignore the reputational or personal safety concerns from making public the confidential information of private companies. The government's amendment will continue to ensure that publicly listed companies and foreign owned private companies would continue to have information published, but it will ensure a balanced approach to the public disclosure of companies' tax affairs. Debate adjourned. Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2015 Measures No. 4) Bill 2015 8

Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2015 Measures No. 4) Bill 2015

First Reading 8 Second Reading 8 09:35 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Today I introduce a bill that amends various laws to implement a range of improvements to Australia's tax and superannuation laws. This government is committed to fairness and sustainability in Australia's tax and superannuation systems. The bill I am now introducing demonstrates that commitment by making some important changes to remove unintended consequences in the tax system and protect lost superannuation accounts with low balances until they can be reunited with individuals. It is imperative that everyone pays the right amount of tax. A large part of this is ensuring that our tax laws are robust and cannot be circumvented for an unfair personal or corporate gain. As the times change, so too should our tax system. This bill will make two tax changes that make our tax system fairer and more robust. These changes are important integrity measures that will eliminate unintended consequences to make sure that the right amount of tax is paid. The government is also committed to ensuring that Australians have adequate retirement savings. This bill will make an important amendment to the superannuation law to protect lost superannuation accounts with low balances from being eroded by fees and charges. The first change in this bill will strengthen the integrity of the scrip for scrip tax roll-over, which applies to companies and trusts involved in mergers and acquisitions activity. The scrip for scrip roll-over rules provide tax relief when a company takes over, or merges, with another company. Where shares or interests in one company are exchanged for similar shares or interests in a new company, the tax payable is deferred. This reduces the costs of takeovers, and ensures that tax impediments do not prevent restructures taking place. Special integrity rules apply to ensure that this tax relief will not apply where the same person or group controls both the acquiring company and the company being acquired. In those circumstances, companies could structure their affairs to obtain an inappropriate tax benefit. A court decision has found that these special rules were not operating as intended. A company was able to issue new interests as part of a takeover which prevented the integrity rules from operating. They were also able to use debt as part of their restructure to avoid paying tax. This is outside the policy intent of denying the tax roll-over in these circumstances—and creates a situation where tax could be indefinitely deferred. This schedule resolves this issue, and amends the special rules to ensure they cannot be circumvented, by changing certain definitions, and introducing new, stronger, integrity rules. Similar issues arise with acquisitions or mergers of trusts. The schedule will further amend the scrip for scrip rules to ensure they apply correctly to trusts. This change is an important integrity measure for companies and trusts. Integrity in the tax system is also of high importance for individuals. That is why schedule 2 will amend the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 to remove an income tax exemption for government employees who work overseas for more than 90 days delivering official development assistance. As a general rule, Australian residents are taxed in the Australian personal income tax system on their worldwide income. This income tax exemption was introduced to ensure that Australians who earned income while working overseas were not subject to double taxation—once in the overseas country and then again in Australia. However, over time, this tax exemption has become more of a tax break for certain Australians who travel overseas to work. This has meant that government employees who claim this exemption have not been liable for income tax in either Australia or the overseas jurisdiction. The practical effect is that some government employees are eligible for an income tax exemption on foreign earnings while others are liable to pay income tax. This bill ensures that all government employees who deliver official development assistance overseas are subject to Australian income tax on their pay and allowances. This amendment will take effect from 1 July 2016. This will standardise the tax treatment of government employees who deliver official development assistance overseas. Australian Defence Force and Australian Federal Police personnel, as well as individuals delivering official development assistance for a charity or private sector contracting firm, will maintain eligibility for the exemption. This amendment will result in a gain to revenue of $6.7 million over the forward estimates. The final amendment in this bill I bring forward today, in schedule 3, will increase the account balance threshold below which small lost superannuation accounts must be transferred to the ATO. Firstly, let me explain what lost super is. In general, lost super is a super account where the fund has either lost contact with the member or the account has been idle for more than five years. When we look at how people get into super, we know that around 70 per cent of employees are members of the default fund offered by their employer. Individuals are generally far less engaged with their superannuation than they are with their bank accounts. When many people switch jobs, they often end up with a new super account and fail to consolidate existing accounts. As a result many people end up with more superannuation accounts than they want or need. According to the ATO, 45 per cent of working Australians have more than one super account. In many cases, members are not aware that they have lost super accounts. For super accounts with smaller balances, the cost of fees and charges and insurance premiums can exceed investment returns. This can be particularly problematic for lost super accounts because, in most cases, the members are not aware that they have these accounts and can end up losing money that was meant for their retirement. I have said before that competition in the superannuation system is important. Research by the Grattan Institute in 2014 has found that there is not strong competition based on fees in the super sector. The problem of high fees is exacerbated because many Australians have unnecessary superannuation accounts, which means they could be paying significant amounts in needless fees every year. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority estimates that the median total fee paid by Australians for a low-cost super account is around $532 per year. Transferring lost super accounts with low balances to the ATO will help protect these accounts from fee erosion and preserves their value until they can be reunited with the member. The ATO does not charge any fees for maintaining these accounts. In fact, individuals are able to reclaim their super money from the ATO at any time and are paid interest calculated in accordance with the consumer price index on this money. The process for reclaiming these moneys is quick and simple. Currently, lost member super accounts with less than $2,000 must be transferred from funds to the ATO as unclaimed superannuation money. This bill will increase the $2,000 threshold in two phases—first to $4,000 from 31 December 2015 and then to $6,000 from 31 December 2016. This is different to unclaimed banking where no maximum monetary threshold applies. In the 2015-16 budget the government announced six measures that will reduce red tape for superannuation funds by removing redundant reporting obligations and by streamlining some of the lost and unclaimed superannuation administrative arrangements. These include: updating the definition of 'uncontactable' to account for contemporary forms of member communication, for example on-line communication; supporting eligible rollover funds proactively consolidating lost accounts; and allowing direct payments of lost super held by the ATO to persons with a terminal illness. These changes will make it easier for individuals to be reunited with their lost and unclaimed superannuation. The ATO also plays an important role in assisting individuals to keep track of their super. The ATO has a range of strategies in place to reunite members with lost and unclaimed superannuation accounts and reduce the number of unnecessary and inactive accounts in the superannuation system. The ATO uses its own data as well as data from other sources to maximise the number of super accounts matched to an individual. Individuals can access their super account information online through the government's myGov web service or through SuperSeeker. These services allow individuals to consolidate lost superannuation to their chosen superannuation fund. They also allow individuals to transfer any ATO held superannuation to their superannuation account. In the 2014-15 financial year, over 450,000 accounts worth nearly $2 billion have been consolidated using ATO services. The ATO also proactively works with super funds to ensure that they have updated addresses and contact details for their lost members. I note that this lost super measure was first announced by Labor but was not enacted. In November 2013, the government announced that it would deal with a backlog of tax and superannuation measures that had not been legislated. Consistent with that commitment, the government is introducing this bill to enact the measure. The government recognises that for many Australians their superannuation savings will form a significant part of their retirement income. With this bill, the government will help ensure that Australian's retirement savings are protected from fee erosion. The three measures presented in this bill represent important updates to our tax and superannuation law. The government is committed to seeing all Australians paying their fair share of tax. The two tax changes presented in this bill make our tax system more robust so that companies, trusts and individuals cannot unfairly avoid tax in a way that was never intended. The government is also committed to ensuring that money Australians have saved for their retirement through superannuation is preserved rather than depleted by account fees and charges. These changes represent important updates that are consistent with the government's values of fairness and sustainability, with full details contained in the explanatory memorandum. Debate adjourned. COMMITTEES 10 COMMITTEES Public Works Committee 10 Approval of Work 10 09:46 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: Sir John Monash Centre, Australian National Memorial Villers-Bretonneux, France. As I advised the House when referring this project to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, the Department of Veterans' Affairs proposes to construct the Sir John Monash Centre at the site of the Australian National Memorial at Villers-Bretonneux in France. The Sir John Monash Centre, which will bear the gallant First World War general's name, will provide a lasting legacy of the Anzac Centenary and will ensure that the service and sacrifice Australian diggers made on the Western Front during World War I is not forgotten. The existing Australian National Memorial records the names of more than 10,700 Australians who died in France during the First World War and who have no known grave. The Villers-Bretonneux Military Cemetery, located adjacent to the National Memorial, contains more than 1,500 graves. Seven hundred and thirty-one of them belong to Australians. The Australian National Memorial site at Villers-Bretonneux was recommended by eminent experts and endorsed by the Australian government as the appropriate location for the Sir John Monash Centre. Current visitation routes along the Western Front do not frequently pass near the Australian National Memorial. The establishment of the Sir John Monash Centre on the same site—a drawcard to the area—is expected to change visitation patterns across the Somme. The proposed works will include an interpretive centre building, a fit-out comprising a range of high-quality interactive multimedia interpretive displays, a gallery with a range of highly immersive and interactive multimedia content, and an integrated building control. The centre will tell the story of the extraordinary efforts of the 290,000 Australians who served on the Western Front with courage and distinction. It will include the great victories of 1918 alongside the tragedies at Fromelles and Pozieres in 1916 and at Bullecourt and Passchendaele in 1917, as well as the great offensive of 8 August 1918 at Villers-Bretonneux, which ultimately led to the end of the war. The committee has conducted an inquiry and is of the view that the project signifies value for money for the Commonwealth and constitutes a project that is fit for purpose and expedient to carry out. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee for once again undertaking a timely and rigorous inquiry. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction is expected to begin in January 2016 and be completed for the opening of the centre on 25 April 2018 to commemorate the centenary of the First World War Battles of Villers-Bretonneux. The Sir John Monash Centre will provide a moving experience for all nationalities who visit, honour Australian service and sacrifice in France and Belgium during the First World War and, importantly, bestow a lasting international legacy of the Centenary of Anzac. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Approval of Work 11 09:49 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: Royal Australian Air Force Base Williamtown Redevelopment Stage 2 Project. As I advised the House when referring this project to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, the Department of Defence is proposing to upgrade and replace ageing critical infrastructure and construct new facilities at the Royal Australian Air Force Williamtown Base, New South Wales. The Royal Australian Air Force has been a part of the Hunter since the late 1930s, when the Defence practice area was first designated at Williamtown. The training area became RAAF Station Williamtown in 1941, with the mission to provide protection for the port and steel-manufacturing facilities of the Hunter. It also hosted the Williamtown Flying School. Since the 1940s Williamtown RAAF Base has been Australia's main tactical fighter base, accommodating fighter planes including the Mirage, the Sabre, the Meteor and the FA18 Hornets. RAAF Base Williamtown is the home base for the tactical fighter element of the Air Combat Group and the Airborne Early Warning and Control element of Surveillance and Response Group. Into the future, RAAF Base Williamtown will remain the nation's main fighter pilot training base and will house most of the planned F35 Joint Strike Fighter Lightning aircraft. The proposed project, which has been endorsed by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, will improve the functionality, capability, security and compliance of the facilities at RAAF Base Williamtown. The project includes an upgrade of the base engineering services, relocation of the main base entrance, new and refurbished working accommodation, an auditorium and commercial facilities, and the demolition of dilapidated buildings that are not suitable for adaptive re-use. The committee has conducted an inquiry and is of the view that the project signifies value for money for the Commonwealth and constitutes a project that is fit for purpose and expedient to carry out. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee for once again undertaking a timely inquiry. Subject to parliamentary approval of the project, construction is expected to begin in mid-2016 and to be completed by mid-2021. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. National Capital and External Territories Committee 11 Membership 11 ( The DEPUTY SPEAKER MT4 I have received advice from the Chief Government Whip that he has nominated Mrs BK Bishop to be a member of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories in place of Mrs Griggs. 09:52 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I ask leave of the House to move a motion for the appointment of a member to the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories. Leave granted. Mr McCORMACK 219646 I move: That Mrs Griggs be discharged from the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories and that, in her place, Mrs B. K. Bishop be appointed a member of the committee. Question agreed to. BILLS 12 BILLS Crimes Legislation Amendment (Powers, Offences and Other Measures) Bill 2015 12

Crimes Legislation Amendment (Powers, Offences and Other Measures) Bill 2015

Consideration of Senate Message 12 COMMITTEES 12 COMMITTEES Publications Committee 12 Report 12 09:54 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes I present the report from the Publications Committee sitting in conference with the Publications Committee of the Senate. Copies of the report are being placed on the table. Report—by leave—agreed to. BILLS 12 BILLS Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill 2015 12

Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill 2015

Second Reading 12 09:55 Mr FEENEY I0O Batman I rise to speak on the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill 2015. Labor supports this bill because it represents a modest improvement to entitlements of and services to veterans. The Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill 2015 amends the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, the VEA; the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004, known as the MRCA; and the Defence Act 1903, and it does so in the following respects. Firstly, it expands the range of services available under the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme, the VVRS; and makes changes to the way certain periods of work undertaken as part of the VVRS, income earned from that work and periods of unemployment affect the rate of disability pension and/or service pension paid to participants. Secondly, it creates a single path of review for original determinations made under the MRCA. Thirdly, it allows the Minister for Veterans' Affairs to amend regulations 31 of the Defence Force Regulations 1952 so as to provide for the repatriation of the remains of service dependants buried in the Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia. Schedule 1 amends the VEA to expand the range of services available under the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme. These changes were announced in the 2015-16 budget. The VVRS has been administered by the Department of Veterans' Affairs since the mid-1990s and was introduced to meet concerns that younger veterans were being accepted as totally and permanently incapacitated for work, without being provided with opportunities for vocational rehabilitation. It is a voluntary scheme aimed at assisting eligible veterans to find or maintain paid employment. The scheme is intended for former members of the Australian Defence Force with qualifying service or those about to leave the ADF. The ADF has its own rehabilitation scheme for serving members. The VVRS is separate to other rehabilitation services provided under schemes such as the MRCA and the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988, and veterans cannot undertake vocational rehabilitation under the VVRS concurrently with any other vocational rehabilitation program. The VVRS services include    assistance in assessing and updating a veteran's skills, job-seeking techniques and interview skills; assistance to increase hours of work in an existing position, or, where the veteran is having difficulty coping, to manage the situation or look at alternative options; assistance to find suitable employment before the transition from the ADF to civilian workforce and life; and a skill development, or assistance in gaining recognition for skills, to assist in finding employment. While the VVRS is not restricted to those with disability, as a rehabilitation service it is targeted at those with impairments that can affect an individual's ability to find and/or maintain employment. As such, many VVRS participants may also be in receipt of payments from DVA in respect of their impairment, particularly the veterans' disability pension and the Invalidity Service Pension. There are two key changes proposed by schedule 1. The first is to allow intermediate rate disability pension recipients participating in the VVRS to have paid employment of up to 20 hours a week disregarded for the purposes of calculating any disability pension or rate reduction. This aligns the disregarded work income with the work test that applies to intermediate rate pensioners. Currently, intermediate rate disability pensioners have any income from paid employment over eight hours a week used in the calculation of their rate reduction—the same as special rate disability pensioners. This amendment will mean that an intermediate rate pensioner participating in the VVRS cannot receive a lower rate of disability pension than an intermediate rate pensioner who has not participated in the VVRS. It provides a greater financial incentive for intermediate rate pensioners to participate in the VVRS and to find paid employment as a greater number of hours can now be worked, and more income earned, before the veteran's pension rate is reduced. The second key change is to set the maximum reduction for a special rate disability pensioner who is participating in the VVRS and in paid work of more than eight hours but less than 20 hours a week to the intermediate rate rather than 100 per cent of the general rate. Special rate disability pensioners participating in the VVRS with less than 20 hours of paid work a week will receive a pension rate calculated under the current method or the intermediate rate, whichever is the higher. Again, this is aimed at ensuring that a special rate pensioner participating in the VVRS and undertaking less than 20 hours of work a week will not receive a lower rate of pension than an intermediate rate pensioner who is not participating in the scheme. Both of these key changes are beneficial to intermediate and special rate pensioners participating in the VVRS and will provide an added financial incentive for veterans to engage with the scheme and the workforce. The other amendments proposed by the schedule will include specific references in the VEA to medical management and psychosocial services which will now be made available through the VVRS from 20 March 2016. It will ensure that periods of unemployment of six months or more will be disregarded in determining different periods of employment used in calculating the amount of income assessed under the invalidity service pension income test for participants in the VVRS. This latter amendment refers to the two-year initial period of employment in which only 50 per cent of income is assessed under the income test, and the following five-year period in which the percentage of assessed income gradually increases. This will ensure that participants in the VVRS will not have prolonged absences from the workforce treated as part of their employment period. Schedule 2 will create a single review pathway for original determinations made under the MRCA, removing the option for internal reconsideration by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, and allowing only for review by the Veterans' Review Board. The MRCA provides compensation and other benefits for current and former members of the Australian Defence Force who suffer a service injury or disease and for the dependents of some deceased members of the ADF. This allows claimants to seek a review of certain original determinations made under the act. Original determinations, defined at section 345 of the MRCA, are determinations made by the MRCC or the Chief of the Defence Force, usually in relation to eligibility for compensation or the level of compensation payable to a claimant. Currently, there are two pathways open to a claimant for the review of an original determination: an internal reconsideration by another delegate of the MRCC or a review by the VRB. Claimants who are dissatisfied with the reconsideration by the MRCC or the review by the VRB can then apply to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a further review. If a claimant chooses to seek reconsideration by the MRCC they are not able to then seek a review by the VRB. The two pathways provide different review processes. The review of military compensation arrangements suggested that the VRB path can be seen as a lengthy and daunting process but that the MRCC process does not offer legal aid at the AAT. The AAT can award costs to successful claimants who have chosen the MRCC reconsideration pathway but not to claimants who pursued the VRB pathway. Both pathways have different time limits for the lodgement of applications and for subsequent actions. The review found that there was broad support to simplify the appeals process by removing the MRCC pathway and directing all appeals to the VRB, as proposed by schedule 2. Schedule 3 amends the Defence Act 1903 to expand the regulation making power under paragraph 124(1) to authorise, under regulation 31 of the Defence Force Regulations 1952, the repatriation of the remains of eight service dependants buried at Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia, if requested to do so by their families. The Terendak Military Cemetery is located within a Malaysian military base, the Terendak Camp, on the coast of the Malacca Straits, approximately 21 kilometres north of Malacca. Terendak Camp was originally built by the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand during the period 1957 to 1959, to house the 28th Commonwealth Infantry Brigade. Of the 521 Australians killed in the Vietnam War, 496 were repatriated to Australia with full honours. There are 24 Australian servicemen buried at Terendak, Malaysia and another buried at Kranji War Cemetery in Singapore. These 25 soldiers are the only remaining Australian servicemen killed during the Vietnam War who have not been returned to their families for burial. During the early days of the Vietnam War, families would have their son's body sent home only if their next of kin or benefactor were willing and able to pay 500 pounds for their repatriation to Australia. If families were unable to afford this, the soldier would be buried in Terendak, Malaysia. In January 1966, the Australian government resolved that all soldiers killed in Vietnam were to be returned to Australia at the expense of the Commonwealth. After a public campaign by the Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia—operation 'Bring Them Home'—and other ex-service organisations, and long-running negotiations between the Australian and Malaysian governments, the Australian government announced in May 2015 that it would repatriate the remains of the 25 Australian Vietnam veterans buried overseas, where that was the wish of the deceased's family. As the Terendak Military Cemetery is difficult to access, being within a large Malaysian military base and requiring special permissions to visit, the Australian government also extended the offer to repatriate remains to the families of the other three Australian servicemen and eight service dependants who are buried there. Labor has continued to support this offer to repatriate the remains of deceased Vietnam veterans buried in the Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia and Kranji War Cemetery in Singapore if requested to do so by the families. As we move into the 51st year since the first Australian serviceman was killed in the Vietnam War, we must remember that we owe these men and, indeed, their families an enduring obligation and respect for the sacrifice they made. As I said in my introduction, Labor will support this bill because it does represent a modest improvement to entitlements of, and services to, veterans. I commend this bill to the House. 10:07 Mrs PRENTICE 217266 Ryan As Australians, we owe a debt of gratitude to the men and women who defend our nation. As a government, we owe it to them to fund the training, equipment and support that they need to carry out their duties. But just as importantly, we owe it to our veteran community to continue to provide the care and support that they may require when they leave the defence forces. This bill ensures that we do just that by making three amendments to various acts: firstly, it creates a single appeal path under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 to streamline the appeals process; secondly, it amends the Veterans Entitlements Act 1986 to make various improvements to the operation of the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme; and thirdly, it amends the Defence Act 1903 to clear the way for the repatriation of the bodies of Australian Defence Force personnel and dependents buried at the Terendak Military Cemetery, in line with the Prime Minister's announcement in May. The single appeal path will make it easier for veterans to navigate what is currently a complex and often confusing system. The Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission, or MRCC, adjudicates on claims in relation to eligibility for compensation and the level of compensation. Under the current system, claimants who wish to seek a review of an original determination have two appeal avenues open to them: they can either seek an internal reconsideration by the MRCC or seek a review by the Veterans' Review Board—or VRB. The next right of appeal on both paths is the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Both pathways have different time limits for the lodgement of applications and different rules relating to access to legal aid. There is no rationale for the existence of dual appeal paths and it makes sense for this process to be simplified. This bill clarifies that the VRB is the only body that should hear an initial appeal of a decision of the MRCC. I am advised that the veteran and ex-service community are strongly supportive of these changes. The second set of amendments ensure that the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme can further improve the services it provides to veterans. They also ensure that the scheme is designed to minimise the risk that participating veterans suffer financial penalties for their involvement in the scheme. The Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme—or VVRS—is a voluntary, vocational rehabilitation scheme for persons eligible under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. It was established in order to assist eligible veterans to find and maintain paid employment. There are four different categories of disability pension payments provided to veterans: the general rate, the special rate, the intermediate rate and the extreme disablement—or EDA—rate. Without going into the details of each payment, they each exist for a different reason and pay a different rate. In the context of this legislation, each payment is treated differently when a veteran who receives the payment seeks paid employment under the VVRS. The coalition government wants to encourage veterans to utilise the VVRS, as there are clear benefits in veterans participating in the paid workforce wherever possible. This bill makes it more attractive to do so by making changes to the way that pension payments are treated when recipients find employment under the VVRS: firstly, this bill ensures that intermediate rate recipients who participate in the VVRS will not receive a lesser disability pension than an intermediate rate recipient who does not participate in the VVRS; secondly, special rate disability pension recipients who participate in the VVRS and who undertake less than 20 hours paid work per week will not receive a lesser pension than a recipient who does not participate in the VVRS; thirdly, there will be more flexibility introduced to the scheme that will reduce disadvantage for participants who are required to take a prolonged absence from the workforce; and, finally, an amount equivalent to the permissible earnings for special and intermediate rate recipients will be disregarded for VVRS participants so that VVRS participants receive the same benefit as a nonparticipant in the VVRS. These changes to the VVRS come at a modest cost to government of $700,000 over the forward estimates, but they will be of great benefit to veterans and their families. The third part of this bill deals with enabling arrangements for the repatriation of deceased Australian military personnel from Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia. The Terendak Military Cemetery is located within a large military base. Originally built by the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, the base hosted the 28th Commonwealth Infantry Brigade. Prior to 1966, it was Australian government's policy that the remains of service personnel who died in war were to be buried in war cemeteries close to where they died. As a consequence, some Australian casualties from the Vietnam War were flown to Terendak and buried there, as were other Australian servicemen and, importantly, eight service dependents. The nature of Terendak, being an active military base, means that access to the grave sites can be difficult and requires special permission. In response to a long-running campaign from the Vietnam Veterans Association of Australia, the Prime Minister announced in May this year that agreement had been reached with the Malaysian government to allow for the repatriation of the remains to Australia—dependent, of course, on the agreement of the families of the deceased. At present, the director of the Office of Australian War Graves has the power to repatriate deceased Australian military personnel, but has no equivalent powers enabling the repatriation of dependents. This bill clarifies that the director now has the authority to repatriate all Australians buried at Terendak, including dependents. Members will be aware that my electorate of Ryan is home to the Gallipoli Barracks and one of the largest populations of serving Australian Defence Force personnel. We are a community that supports our serving ADF personnel and also our veterans. On this note, in the time remaining, I want to pay tribute to the teachers and students of Ferny Grove State High School, who were successful in achieving a highly commended certificate in the 2015 Anzac Day Schools' Awards. The award is funded by the Department of Veterans' Affairs. The award recognised Ferny Grove State High School's commitment to teaching and encouraging students to learn about Australia's wartime history. This is something that is all the more important given that this year marks the Anzac Centenary. Having received an Anzac Centenary grant, the staff and students put the funding to good effect by constructing a walk of remembrance on school grounds. In doing so, they ensured that the Anzac legacy will never be forgotten by staff and students at Ferny Grove. However, the award-winning piece was a collaborative artwork created by students to express their emotional responses relating to Anzac day and the Centenary of Anzac. They used the symbolic poppy image and depicted scenes such as soldiers waiting to enlist, battle scenes, and grave stones and crosses to represent the fallen. I am told that judges praised the work for its inspiration and uniqueness and for its creative use of lighting for dramatic effect. I commend all of the staff and students involved for their successful project. The amendments contained in this bill ensure that this parliament and this country uphold our end of the bargain, when it comes to the treatment of the veteran community. They have served our nation with distinction and this bill ensures that they receive the support that they deserve. I commend the bill to the House. 10:15 Mr SNOWDON IJ4 Lingiari I want to thank the member for Moreton for allowing me to stand up at this particular time. I acknowledge you, Deputy Speaker Broadbent, and those who have spoken in this debate, because the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill 2015 is an important piece of legislation. As a former minister for veterans' affairs I know only too well how important this legislation is to veterans and the veterans community and, most particularly, how important one aspect of it is to the families of a small number of Vietnam vets who never came home and who currently lie buried in a cemetery off Australia's shores. As a result of this legislation their families will be able to have their bodies repatriated back to the country. The bill before us actually represents a modest improvement to entitlements of, and services to, Australian veterans. The first schedule of the bill will effect changes that will enhance the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme, the VVRS, under the Veterans' Entitlements Act. This will mean that an amount equivalent to the permissible earnings for special and intermediate recipients will be disregarded for VVRS participants, when determining whether the person's reduced daily pension amount should be increased, and it will give them the same benefit from permissible earnings as is received by a non-participant of the VVRS. The enhancements to the scheme will also expand the range of services to include medical management and psychological services. The changes will also result in certain special and intermediate rate disability pensioners having a smoother step down in disability pension whilst in the scheme and will encourage veterans to remain or continue in the workforce. Schedule 2 of the bill will streamline the appeals process into a single pathway for reconsideration or review of an original determination under chapter 8 of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act. This amendment has the support of ex-service organisations and I commend the government for putting it in. What it will do is change the appeal process to a single path, which will avoid the complexities that claimants currently face relating to different time limits for the submission of appeals, different times taken to determine the review, the choice they make impacting on the entitlements to legal aid and the awarding of costs for appeals that progress to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. I will come to schedule 3 in a moment, which I think is of most interest for the broader community, because it reflects the desire to expand the war graves regulation-making power under the Defence Act 1903 to include graves of service dependants buried at Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia. Before I come to that, I just want to make it very clear that these first two schedules, although minor, are very important. They reflect the ongoing need to monitor what services we are providing to our veteran community and to make sure that they understand our desire—that is, our collective desire across the parliament—to make sure their needs and interests are being properly looked after. We need to bear in mind, in terms of entitlements under the veterans affairs legislation, that we are, of course, talking about not only veterans but also veterans' families. I do not think veteran's families are often given proper credit for the support they provide to their veteran partners, fathers, mothers or whatever relationship they might have. This is true not only when they have transitioned out of the defence forces but also, most particularly, whilst they are in service. We know that the transition process out of the defence forces for many is quite difficult. It is quite difficult because they have spent any number of years involved in very regulated activity, involved in serving this country, often doing very intense work, very difficult and very dangerous work, and some find the transition out of the defence forces more difficult than others. Indeed, some will leave in such a way as not wanting to continue any association with the uniforms they have left behind and will try to get as much separation as possible as quickly as possible. But sometimes these particular people are the ones most in need of assistance over time. We need to make sure, whatever we do in this space, that any veteran—regardless of who they are or where they are—know that there are services available to assist them. This is particularly true for younger serving veterans and younger post-service veterans, who have transitioned out of the Defence Force. It is particular true for them, because we do not want to end up making the mistakes we made it in the past—and we will be talking about the Vietnam vets in a moment—with the Vietnam vets cohort, where we did not recognise the trauma associated with stress from service and combat, and the mental health issues that arose directly as a result of that service. So we need to make sure the transition space is being properly looked at and that people understand that the whole panoply and suite of services that they require access to is available to them. I commend the Department of Veterans' Affairs for providing on-base advisory services and I commend the various arms of the defence forces for their continuing work in that space working closely with the Department of Veterans' Affairs to try and make that transition as seamless as possible. And I thank those workers in the Department of Veterans' Affairs for the work they do on our behalf. I now want to address the issue of the potential repatriation of the Australian is to remain buried at Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia. Of the 521 Australians killed in the Vietnam War, 496 were repatriated to Australia with full military honours. There are 24 Australian servicemen buried at Terendak, Malaysia and one at Kranji War Cemetery in Singapore. These 25 soldiers are the only remaining Australian servicemen killed during the Vietnam War who have not been returned to their families for burial. During the early days of the Vietnam War families would have their son's body sent home only if their next of kin or benefactor was willing and able to pay 500 pounds for their repatriation to Australia. If families could not afford this, the soldier would be buried at Terendak, Malaysia. In January 1966, the Australian government resolved that all soldiers killed in Vietnam were to be returned to Australia at the expense of the Commonwealth. Labor supports the offer that will be made with the passage of this legislation to repatriate the remains of deceased Vietnam veterans buried at Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia and Kranji War Cemetery in Singapore if requested to do so by the families of those deceased members.. The remains of eight service dependants who accompanied veterans serving in Malaysia are also buried in the Terendak Military Cemetery and, kindly and quite rightly, the government has also offered to repatriate these remains if requested to do so by the families. Contrary to the inane comments made by the member for Solomon in the debate here last week, in my own electorate of I have held meetings with the Vice President of the VVAA NT Bob Shewring and Mr Neil Bond, the nephew of Reg Hillier, the only Territorian killed in the Vietnam War, who is currently buried in Terendak, Malaysia. These meetings lead to Labor committing to 'bringing them home', and we welcome the federal government's commitment to do just that. I found the comments of the member for Solomon not only wrong but also downright insulting not only to me but to those people who wanted their families brought home. I would like to acknowledge the work of the VVAA NT. In particular ,I thank Bob Shewring—he is an old mate of mine; he and I worked together many years ago at Fannie Bay jail—and Sue McCallum, whose tireless work on this project has meant that the families of these men will have the opportunity to at last bring their sons home. Two nights ago in Darwin, after the Vietnam Veterans Day ceremony at the cenotaph, Keith Payne VC AM spoke at a function explaining the importance of 'bringing them home' to our Vietnam vets. It will be another step in healing the wounds of that dreadful war. At the end of the Vietnam War, six Australians were among the 2,338 people then listed as missing in action. Four Australian Army soldiers and two Royal Australian Air Force were classified as 'missing in action', in four separate incidents, with all six presumed to have been killed in action. Following the war, the remains of the servicemen were recovered and repatriated to Australia. As of 30 July 2009, no Australian servicemen remain missing in action from the Vietnam War. I am really very pleased with that outcome. I was involved in aspects of bringing home some of those soldiers and undertaking to have searches undertaken for the remains of others. I was particularly engaged with the retrieval of the body of Private David John Elkington Fisher, who was a national serviceman serving with 3 Squadron, Special Air Service Regiment. On 27 September 1969 he was part of an SAS patrol which was contacted by several parties of Vietcong in the Cam My district about 35 kilometres north-east of the 1st Australian Task Force base at Nui Dat. During a 'hot extraction' by a RAAF helicopter, Private Fisher fell about 30 metres into dense jungle from a rope attached to the helicopter. He was believed to have been killed and searches failed to recover his body. In August 2008, the Australian Defence Force reported that the possible location of Private Fisher's body had been identified. At that time, as the Minister for Defence Science and Personnel, I was able to authorise a search. On 11 September 2008, the Australian Defence Force advised that the remains found as part of the investigation had been positively identified as Private Fisher's and that preparations were underway to return the fallen soldier with full military honours. It is now known that Private Fisher died as a result of the fall and was hastily buried by enemy soldiers who discovered his body. He was brought back to Australia by a special federal government and Defence Force team in 2008, which I was proud to be part of along with his old comrades from the SAS. I travelled to Hanoi to formally receive Private Fisher's remains. I also attended a service at Richmond Air Force Base near Sydney to welcome the Hercules aircraft carrying David Fisher's coffin. It was a very emotional and moving ceremony inside a hangar with people acknowledging and giving thanks for his service and honouring his contribution. And then we had a burial service on the North Shore of Sydney—I forget the name of the cemetery. It was raining like hell but it was a magnificent ceremony. It really paid Private Fisher the respect he was finally due. There have been other cases. Pilot Officer Robert Charles Carver and Flying Officer Michael Patrick John Herbert, of No. 2 Squadron RAAF, were both career Air Force officers. They were finally recovered. Mr Billson interjecting— Mr SNOWDON IJ4 The minister at the table says there were two others whom he was responsible for bringing back during his time as the minister. I thank him for his work. Lance Corporal John Francis Gillespie was a helicopter medic with the 8th Field Ambulance. His body could not be recovered. We need to be fully cognisant of the sacrifices that were made by these great men during the Second World War on our behalf. I am so pleased that this legislation will allow us to bring home those final small number of men who remain buried at Terendak cemetery in Malaysia. Last Saturday I was pleased to attend a blessing of a cenotaph at Humpty Doo, located in my electorate. Present were the venerable Ian McDonald, who took the service; Vietnam vets, many from the Patriots motorcycle club; the former mayor, Mary Walshe, who was involved with the cenotaph from its early days; local MLA, Kezia Purick; and other members of the local community. This was a very small but symbolic occasion where we recognised again the importance of service to this great country of ours. This small ceremony at Humpty Doo reinforced our commitment to making sure we remember always the sacrifices made by those who serve. 10:31 Mrs McNAMARA 241589 Dobell I rise to support the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill 2015. The bill provides effect to several Veterans' Affairs 2015 budget measures that will enhance the operation of the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. It will also create a single path of appeal under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. It will also expand regulation-making power under the Defence Act 1903 to include the provision and maintenance of a grave of a service dependant interred at the Terendak Military Cemetery. Since coming to office the government has honoured its commitment to acknowledge the unique nature of military service. For the 2,652 Department of Veterans' Affairs clients in Dobell, I assure you this government is focused on early intervention to ensure veterans and their families get the help and assistance required when they need it. The 2015 budget continues to deliver on the government's acknowledgement and understanding of the unique nature of service and delivers more than $12 billion in services for Veterans' Affairs, including $6.5 billion for pensions and $5.5 billion for healthcare. Despite an overall reduction in DVA clients, largely due to the sad but inevitable decline in the number of World War II veterans, we are seeing increased numbers of claims from veterans of recent wars who have multiple conditions including at least one mental health condition. Additional case coordinators will be appointed to assist in improving the processing times for these complex claims. The budget delivers $10 million to boost the number of case coordinators in DVA. The increasing complex nature of claims being made to the DVA requires a more tailored approach. This funding will expand existing case coordination services to ensure improved timely and tailored service delivery for veterans and their families. Swift resolution of claims is a vital part of early intervention. Progress has been made and we recognise that we need to continue to focus on making further reductions to claim times as early intervention leads to better long-term outcomes for our veteran community. Greater focus on complex case management and coordination, rehabilitation, reducing claims processing times and improving long-term health impacts through early intervention are key initiatives of the budget for the DVA. Our investment in the expansion of case coordination for those with complex needs, in addition to the measures in this bill to assist those undertaking vocational rehabilitation, are designed to provide veterans with the best opportunity in their postservice lives. The first measure within this bill will benefit veterans through enhancements to the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme, the VVRS, under the Veterans' Entitlements Act—$700,000 will be spent on improving the scheme's operation, which will benefit participating veterans, particularly those in receipt of disability pension at the intermediate and special rates. The proposed measures seek to encourage workforce participation and provide better outcomes for veterans through a whole-of-person approach to their rehabilitation. We know that many veterans who have been injured, wounded or are ill want to get back to work. These changes will ensure their pension safety net better reflects their transition back into work. Getting back to work is an important part of the recovery process. The VVRS is a voluntary vocational rehabilitation scheme for persons eligible under the Veterans Entitlements Act. The scheme is designed to assist veterans to find or continue in suitable employment. The scheme also provides incentives for participants in relation to the work thresholds for special or intermediate rate disability pension and the treatment of income from paid work on invalidity service pension. There is no penalty if a person does not complete a rehabilitation program. Persons participating in the scheme who withdraw from the workforce for any reason, including retirement, will return to the rate of disability pension they received prior to their participation in the VVRS. Effective as of 20 March 2016, the enhancements to the scheme will, firstly, expand the range of services currently available through the scheme to include the provision of medical management and psychosocial services, and remove disincentives to participation in the scheme through a more favourable adjustment of pension payments for those who are in receipt of above general rate pensions, such as the special rate or TPI. Medical management services will be involved in the monitoring of treatment to restore or maximize an individual's physical and psychological functionality. Psychosocial services include comprehensive individually-tailored rehabilitation interventions that assist in promoting recovery and optimal functioning levels. Psychosocial services can include pain management, adjustment to disability counselling, family support and education. More favourable adjustments of pension payments mean that intermediate rate recipients who participate in the VVRS will not receive less disability pension than an intermediate rate recipient who does not participant in the VVRS. Special rate disability pension recipients who participate in the VVRS and who undertake less than 20 hours paid work per week will not receive less pension than an intermediate rate recipient who does not participate in the VVRS. A more reasonable pension reduction regime will follow any prolonged absence from the workforce and will avoid disadvantage to participants who start in the VVRS but experience lengthy absences from the workforce. An amount equivalent to the permissible earnings for special and intermediate rate recipients will be disregarded for VVRS participants when determining whether the person's reduced daily pension amount should be increased and they will be given the same benefits from permissible earnings as received by a nonparticipant of the VVRS. The bill will also increase the threshold for intermediate rate disability pension recipients to no more than 20 hours per week before their paid work affects the rate of disability pension in accordance with the threshold for paid work for intermediate rate under section 23 of the Veterans' Entitlements Act. This will mean that an intermediate rate recipient who has participated in the scheme will not receive less disability pension than an intermediate rate recipient who did not participate in the scheme. These adjustments will also result in certain special and intermediate rate disability pensioners having a smoother step down in disability pension whilst in the scheme and will encourage veterans to remain or continue in the workforce. Improvements to the VVRS will allow veterans to take the important step of returning to the workplace with the support of the compensation system should they need to take a further break from employment. The second measure in the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment 2015 Budget Measures Bill will simplify and streamline the appeal process under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act by changing to a single appeal path. Under the existing arrangements the two pathways for a reconsideration or review of an 'original determination' under chapter 8 of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act are: first, internal reconsideration by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission under part 3; or, second, review by the Veterans' Review Board under part 4. Currently a claimant may see a first-tier right of reconsideration or review through either but not both. If the claimant is dissatisfied with the reconsideration of the MRCC or the review by the VRB, they have a second-tier right of review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, referred to as a 'reviewable determination'. In 2011 the Review of Military Compensation Arrangements recommended that the MRCA appeal process be refined to a single pathway. The amendments proposed in this bill give effect to this recommendation. Following the changes proposed by this bill, the first-tier right of review will be to the Veterans' Review Board The second-tier right of review to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal is not changing. The change to a single appeal path will avoid the complexities that claimants currently face relating to different time limits for the submission of appeals and different times taken to determine the review and the choice they make impacting on entitlement to legal aid and the awarding of costs for appeals that progress to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The single appeal path will remove internal consideration by the MRCC for claimants and enable a claimant to appeal an original decision of the MRCC to the VRB with a second tier of appeal to the AAT. Currently, applicants that choose reconsideration by the MRCC are not able to access legal aid at the AAT. While the removal of reconsideration by the MRCC will have the consequent effect of not being able to apply for award cost at the AAT, the single appeal path through the VRB will mean that all applicants will have access to legal aid at the AAT, subject to the usual legal aid eligibility criteria. In 2015-16, $900,000 will be provided to align the MRCA appeals process with the VEA process. This will affect claimants under the MRCA who have a primary decision made on or after 1 January 2016. The first level of appeal will be to the Veterans' Review Board. Thirdly, under schedule 3, the bill will amend the Defence Act 1903 to expand the act's war graves regulation-making power to include graves of service dependents buried in Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia. On 25 May this year, 50 years after the arrival of the first troops of the 1st Battalion Royal Australian Regiment in South Vietnam, the Prime Minister offered to repatriate the remains of 25 Vietnam veterans from Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia and Kranji War Cemetery in Singapore to the families of the deceased. This offer was also extended to the families of three other servicemen and eight service dependents also buried in the Terendak Military Cemetery. Until 21 January 1966, the bodies of Australians who died in war were buried in war cemeteries close to where they fell. From this date, with the consent of the families, remains were repatriated to Australia. This decision was not retrospective. Of the 521 Australian who died in the Vietnam War, 25 remain interred overseas. The families of those 25 Vietnam veterans now have the opportunity to bring their loved ones home. Because of the limited access for families of the deceased at Terendak due to the cemetery being on a large-scale high-security military base, the offer of repatriation has also been extended to the families of all Australians interred in the Terendak Military Cemetery. This includes the families of the eight service dependents who died whilst accompanying their fathers or husbands on service in Malaysia. The amendments in this bill will enable the war graves regulation made under the Defence Act to authorise the repatriation of these service dependents if requested to do so by their families. The government acknowledges the Malaysian government's offer to provide any assistance towards repatriation. The government also thanks the Malaysian government for their care for and maintenance of these graves over many years. The 2015-16 budget also includes: $3.7 million to extend the in-home telehealth trial for veterans and war widows, an initiative aimed at keeping veterans in their own home and community for longer; providing further funding for the Centenary of ANZAC program to support additional events commemorating battles that occurred on the Western Front during the First World War and key anniversaries of other conflicts; and extending tax deductibility status for the National Boer War Memorial and the Australian Peacekeeping Memorial projects. The DVA budget for mental health will remain uncapped and be driven by client demand. Over the past 12 months, the government has expanded access to the Veterans and Veterans Family Counselling Service, making it easier for veterans dealing with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and anxiety, plus substance and alcohol use disorders, to access free and immediate treatment for their condition, regardless of whether they are related to service. This government is delivering on its commitment to honour our veterans and the unique nature of military service. I commend this bill to the House. 10:46 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I rise to speak on the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill 2015. This bill implements a modest improvement to entitlements of and services for our veterans. Labor will always support our veterans and we strongly support this bill. Veterans are an incredibly important part of Australian society. Some people probably only think of our veterans once a year on Anzac Day, or perhaps they remember them on Remembrance Day. The last Anzac Day was especially memorable, being the 100th anniversary of the landings at Gallipoli, and Australia turned out, mingling with our RSLs and acknowledging those who gave their lives and served 100 years ago. At the Anzac ceremonies I attended in Moreton, at Yeronga, Sunnybank, Oxley, Tarragindi and a few other venues, it appeared that there were at least double the normal crowds—people paying their respects to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice for this country and to all of those who are serving or who have served and returned. Although some may only turn their minds to our veterans on one day of the year, good government obviously continually reassesses the entitlements and services that we provide to ensure our veterans are properly looked after. That is the least we can do for our brave ex-service men and women. Our returned services leagues do a wonderful job of supporting both current and ex-serving members of the Australian Defence Force and their families, as do other support organisations. There are five RSL clubs in my electorate of Moreton: Sherwood-Indooroopilly, Salisbury, Stephens, Sunnybank and Yeronga-Dutton Park, and two of these have services clubs. I have spent quite a bit of time with these clubs and worked closely with them on their ceremonies for the 100th anniversary of the Gallipoli landings and on planning some capital works and other ventures. The Returned and Services League has a very proud tradition. It is one of our oldest national organisations and has been well loved since it was founded back in 1916. As well as supporting and serving our ex-servicemen, the RSL promotes a secure, stable and progressive Australia—respectful of the past, mindful of the future, yet focused on helping today all those who wear our uniform. This bill makes some improvements to the services and entitlements available to veterans, so it will help my RSL clubs do their job. There are three areas that this bill addresses. Schedule 1 of this bill makes some changes of and around the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme. This scheme assists eligible persons under the Veterans' Entitlements Act to find suitable employment or continue in appropriate employment. The services available to veterans will be expanded to include the provision of medical management and psychosocial services. The medical management services will include monitoring of treatment measures with a view to restoring or maximising a person's physical or psychological function. The psychosocial services will provide individually tailored rehabilitation interventions and can include pain management, adjustment to disability counselling and family education. The threshold of paid work allowed before that work affects the rate of a disability pension will be adjusted up to less than 20 hours per week of allowed paid work for intermediate-rate disability pension recipients who are also participants of VVRS so that those participants will not receive less disability pension than an intermediate-rate recipient who did not participate in the VVRS. Special-rate disability pension recipients will have their maximum reduction adjusted to the equivalent of the intermediate rate of disability pension. This will result in a special-rate disability pension recipient who participates in the VVRS and undertakes less than 20 hours of paid work not receiving less pension than an intermediate-rate recipient who has not participated in the VVRS. The president of one of my local RSLs, Hugh Polson from the Sunnybank RSL, said in relation to these amendments: It is important in rehabilitation of veterans, whether it be addressing physical or psychiatric disabilities, that they be encouraged to work towards regaining the ability and the confidence to re-join the workforce … Remuneration is a very important aspect of the 'confidence' factor. It provides an added incentive … These folk find themselves out of the workforce at a relatively young age—they risk spending the majority of their life unemployed or unemployable! Thank you to Hugh Polson for sending in those comments to my office. They are intelligent observations from someone who does know, because prior to retirement Hugh was the Manager of Pensions, Advocacy and Welfare Services for RSL Queensland. The President of the Sherwood-Indooroopilly RSL Sub-branch, Kevin Alcock, also supports this amendment, saying: Anything that enhanced the vocational rehabilitation of veterans is to be much applauded. Schedule 2 of the bill concerns itself with the appeals process available for reviews of 'original determinations'. The current review arrangements create two separate pathways. As Hugh Polson says: The current review processes are not only confusing for veterans, but younger veterans often find themselves falling into the trap of a 'No Win-No Fee' predator. I will not make a comment on lawyers, Hugh—I know you have such a fine regard for legal officers and lawyers generally—but I do thank Hugh for sending in those comments. The changes to be made to the review process under this bill will streamline the process into a single pathway, and that is a good thing. This part of the amendment has the full support of the ex-service organisations. Lastly, schedule 3 of the bill will expand the war graves regulation-making power under the Defence Act 1903. Currently, regulation 31 of the Defence Force Regulations 1952 provides for the repatriation of the remains of a member of the Defence Force who has died while on service. This amendment will allow regulation 31 to be amended to include the repatriation of the remains of service dependents. It is timely that I speak on this amendment during this week in the chamber. It was only two days ago that we marked Vietnam Veterans Day, which is held on 18 August each year. Five hundred and twenty-one Australian servicemen were killed in the Vietnam War, and 496 were repatriated to Australia with full military honours. Of the remaining 25 Australian soldiers, 24 are buried at Terendak, which is in Malaysia, and one is buried at the Kranji War Cemetery in Singapore. The Terendak Military Cemetery is located on the west coast of the Federation of Malaysia. It is 13 miles north of Malacca, a beautiful city, but the cemetery lies within an operational Malaysian Armed Forces base. The base is currently home to the Malaysian Army's 3rd Division and 10th Parachute Brigade. There are stringent security requirements for access to the cemetery, which can be a hindrance for family members wishing to acknowledge their loved ones. So permission is required from Malaysian authorities and documents are required to be submitted well in advance of any proposed visit. For this reason it would be difficult for families to visit their loved ones' final resting place, even if they made the long journey to Malacca in Malaysia. The Kranji War Cemetery was part of a Japanese prisoner-of-war camp after the fall of Singapore. The small cemetery, which was started by the prisoners, was expanded by the Army grave service after the reoccupation of Singapore. The cemetery is located 22 kilometres north of the city of Singapore, and overlooks the Straits of Johor. Visiting this cemetery in Singapore is not as problematic as at Terendak. Kranji memorial—as it is known locally—is open to visitors every day between 7 am and 6.30 pm. The Office of Australian War Graves currently maintains the graves at Terendak and Kranji, and will continue to maintain any graves remaining after repatriation has occurred. The 25 Australian soldiers buried at these two ceremonies are the only soldiers killed during the Vietnam War who have not been returned. Labor continues to support the government's undertaking that the cost of any repatriation of Australian servicemen who perished in the Vietnam War will be at the expense of the Commonwealth, if requested by the families. As well as those 25 Australian soldiers, there are eight service dependents who accompanied the veterans then serving in Malaysia who are also buried in the Terendak Military Cemetery. The government has also offered to repatriate the remains of these eight dependents if requested. This amendment will allow the government to make good that offer of repatriation. Kevin Alcock, who is the President of the Sherwood-Indooroopilly RSL Sub-Branch, applauds this amendment and said, 'At least six of my own former comrades are buried there, so I have a personal interest.' It is an important mark of respect for these soldiers and the families of service personnel, in the light of these soldiers making the ultimate sacrifice for our country, that their bodies should be returned home if their families so wish. It follows that the dependents of these brave soldiers should be shown the same respect. Next year on 18 August we will commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. On 18 August 1966 the men of D Company of the 6th Battalion Royal Australian Regiment, based at Nui Dat in the heart of South Vietnam's Phuoc Tuy Province, marched out of their task force base in search of the Vietcong troops who had fired on their base the night before. The men could hear the sweet voice of Little Pattie singing—she was there entertaining the remaining troops with a concert—as they marched out to track down the Vietcong. Approaching a rubber plantation in the afternoon, the soldiers had fleeting glimpses of the Vietcong, who disappeared as soon as they were seen. A tropical storm was approaching. The D Company of the 6th Battalion was attacked in force by the Vietcong as the torrential downpour began. They were surrounded and short of ammunition. They called for RAAF helicopters to drop more ammunition. Despite terrible weather and heavy fire, the ammunition was dispatched by RAAF helicopters. Companies B and A were sent in as reinforcement. The Vietcong eventually retreated, after a horrible firefight. The Vietcong suffered terrible losses. The Australians counted 245 enemy dead on the battlefield. Some say Company D had faced around 2,500 Vietcong. Eighteen of our brave soldiers perished in the battle of Long Tan, and 24 were wounded. All but one of the dead were from Company D. We owe an enormous debt to these men and others like them. Lest we forget. I commend this bill to the House. 10:57 Mrs GRIGGS 220370 Solomon My electorate of Solomon has a very heavy Defence presence. As we know, there are nearly 5,000 uniformed personnel in Darwin and Palmerston, from all three bases, across Navy, Army and RAAF. I therefore take a particular interest in all matters relating to defence and veterans' affairs. I also chair the Coalition Backbench Policy Committee on Defence and Veterans Affairs. People who have heard other speeches in this area may have heard me discuss this already. I believe firmly that as a nation, if we are to send men and women—Defence Force personnel—into harm's way, then we owe it to them to make sure that we provide the best duty of care. Today I speak in support the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill 2015 because the three very important components of this legislation will move us further in that direction. Everyone in this place knows how the Abbott government feels about red tape and bureaucracy. The military rehabilitation and compensation measures in this bill simplify a bureaucratic process. I would like to start by putting on the record my thanks to Senator Ronaldson. In my view, he is the only minister in 50 years who has done the right thing in terms of repatriating the fallen. This has been an issue for government from both sides for a number of years, and Senator Ronaldson and the Prime Minister have come together and have been lobbied by people in my electorate, such as Bob Shewring. With this measure they have now righted a wrong. I spoke on this last week, when speaking on the Prime Minister's motion, and I gave the story of Reg Hillier, a Territorian who will be repatriated. Unfortunately his family could not afford the 500 quid that was needed to bring him home. The family suffered enormous guilt for many years because they could not afford to bring Reg's body home. So I am pleased that, once this legislation passes, Reg will be returned home and buried in the Adelaide River War Cemetery, as requested by his family. Let me just say one other thing. The member for Lingiari was the Minister for Veterans' Affairs in the previous government, and I know he was contacted about this issue. I am a little bit disappointed that he did not push this issue, because he could have done this. Mr Champion interjecting— Mrs GRIGGS 220370 I do not want to take your interjections, so please be quiet. When you are speaking, everyone has to listen to you. I give you the courtesy of listening to you, so please. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E I remind the member for Solomon to direct her remarks through the chair. Mrs GRIGGS 220370 I am sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker, but I ask that you ask that member to be quiet and give me the respect that I deserve, please. As I was saying, the member for Lingiari could have fixed this issue. He could have sorted this out but he did not. Similarly, when he was the minister he could have sorted out the RAAF base houses but he did not. He chose to ignore Territorians and not do what they wanted him to do. They wanted him to save those houses and they wanted him to make it possible to repatriate people. As I said, Minister Ronaldson has done an exceptional job. He has righted a wrong, a 50-year wrong. It would have been a good coup for the member for Lingiari to be able to say that he had brought home one of his constituents. But he did not do that. Senator Ronaldson has righted a wrong, and I am very proud to be part of a government that has righted that wrong. In terms of military rehabilitation, the government will achieve savings of $2.2 million over four years by simplifying the appeal process under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. The new single appeal path to the Veterans' Review Board and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal will rationalise the appeal process under the MRCA by aligning it with the appeal process under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. The savings from this measure will be redirected by the government to fund other measures to assist veterans. Another important aspect of this bill is the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme enhancement. The government will provide $0.7 million over four years to expand the Veterans' Vocational Rehabilitation Scheme, to encourage workforce participation and to provide better outcomes for veterans through enhanced medical management and psychological assistance services. Changes will also be made to the workforce participation guidelines affecting eligibility for disability pension so that those veterans receiving a disability pension will not be disadvantaged by accessing the enhanced scheme. The other very important part of this piece of legislation is the funding of the repatriation for those killed who are buried in Terendak. If the families choose to repatriate them, they will be able to work with the Australian government to make sure that we can do that. I just want to reiterate: when our servicemen return from the battlefield, we owe it to them to ensure that they have the best of care for their physical and psychological wounds. Another form of that debt we owe our service men and women is that, should they make the ultimate sacrifice, their service will be acknowledged and their memory will be honoured. As I said, I have spoken in this place before about Reg Hillier, who was a jackaroo in the Northern Territory in 1961 when he enlisted in the Australian Army. Reg was the only Territorian who died in Vietnam. I am very pleased that, after this legislation and the amendments go through, Reg's body will be returned home to the Territory and will be buried in the Adelaide River War Cemetery. That will be a very special day for his family, particularly for Neil Bond, who is his surviving next of kin. Neil met with Senator Ronaldson and I, and it was a very emotive meeting. Mr Bond shared some of the family's stories about Reg, or Corporal Hillier, and both the senator and I were very moved by the stories that were relayed to us. We are very pleased that the right thing is being done, after 50 years. I cannot thank Senator Ronaldson enough for his determination in making this happen. I also want to thank the Prime Minister for giving Minister Ronaldson the opportunity to right this 50-year wrong. Thank you. I know that Neil Bond and other members of Reg Hillier's family also thank the Prime Minister and Senator Ronaldson for making sure this wrong was righted after 50 years. Thank you very much. 11:07 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden The Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (2015 Budget Measures) Bill gives effect to three budget measures that benefit the defence and ex-service community. These benefits begin with enhancements to the Veterans Vocational And Rehabilitation Scheme, operating under the Veterans Entitlements Act. In that line, let me thank those who have contributed to the debate and those who have spoken on what is an important bill in the life of our veteran community. The enhancements within the bill, in the scheme, will expand the range of services available to include medical, management and psychosocial services. These additional services can further assist a participant's recovery through comprehensive individually tailored rehabilitation interventions that can include treatment monitoring in case management, pain management, family education and counselling to assist a participant to adjust to their disability. Further enhancements to the scheme will result in recipients of special and intermediate rate disability pension being able to retain more of their pension and a more favourable pension adjustment regime for participants who start the scheme but experience prolonged absences from the workforce. These enhancements to the scheme are aimed at encouraging the participation of more eligible veterans and members so they can benefit from the substantial long-term health benefits that are associated with rejoining or remaining in the workforce. The beneficial measures in this bill continue with the streamlining of the appeal process under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act—MRCA. This will be of benefit to future, current and former members of the ADF covered by MRCA. Under the current arrangements, a claimant may seek a right of review through either but not both the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission or the Veterans' Review Board. They then have a second right of review to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The bill will streamline the appeal process under the MRCA by creating a single first-tier appeal path directly to the Veterans' Review Board. This will supply the process for claimants by removing the complexities that are created by different time limits for the submission for appeals, the different times taken to determine the review and the impact of the choice of appeal paths and entitlements to legal aid and the awarding of costs for appeals that progress to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The streamlined single appeal path is strongly supported by the veteran and ex-service community. Finally, the bill will amend the Defence Act to enable the repatriation of the remains of eight service dependants buried in Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia if requested to do so by the families of the deceased. The change in government policy in January 1966 meant that, whilst most veterans killed in action in Vietnam were repatriated to Australia for burial, 24 were buried in Terendak Military Cemetery in Malaysia. On 25 May this year the Prime Minister offered to repatriate the remains of these and a number of other Australian servicemen and some service dependents buried in Terendak Military Cemetery. The amendments will enable the War Graves Regulations made under the Defence Act to authorise the repatriation of the eight service dependants if requested to do so by their families. These 2015 budget measures contribute to the government's strong commitment to recognising and meeting the needs of current and former members of the Australian Defence Force and their families, and I strongly commend the bill to the House Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Third Reading 23 11:11 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 24

Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015

Second Reading 24 11:12 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith As I was pointing out last night, a wonderful opportunity exists for the role that Australia can play in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Back in promoting development within the Pacific region. The Pacific is one of the areas in which living standards are at their lowest and nations are failing to meet their Millennium Development Goals. The power of infrastructure is to connect communities, to provide that has put links, the telecommunications hardware, the roads, the electricity and the power and energy supplies to leak communities. In doing so boost living standards. That is something that Austria can play an active role in through the Asian Infrastructure Investment Back. This is something that the Chinese government is acutely aware of. The Chinese investment in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly in the Pacific. In November 2013, Beijing announced a new assistance package for the Pacific islands, potentially worth more than US$2 billion. The package is made up of two loan facilities for use in infrastructure development, of up to US$1 billion each. Already Chinese development aid associated with infrastructure in the Pacific has had some challenges. There have been issues associated with projects that have not been of great value to Pacific communities, particularly in terms of combating policy and eradicating disease, providing education facilities and boosting living standards. There are been issues associated with a soft loans and increasing levels of indebtedness. Anything that improves transparency and accountability of investment in the region is something that should be encouraged, particularly in respect of China's involvement. That is an area where Australia can play an active, cooperative role with China. These factors point to the need for more multilateral coordination and commercial discipline for infrastructure projects in the region. For Australia, China's development assistance should be viewed not as a threat but as an opportunity. Australia's dominance in the Pacific region means that we are in a strong position to work with China for the sake of good development outcomes and to strengthen our bilateral relationship. Joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is a no-brainer for Australia and will provide opportunities for a greater role in shaping and encouraging sustainable development in our region. That is why Labor announced many months ago that, were we in government, we would sign up to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and why we welcome this government's eventual agreement to this. This is a positive economic development. In our view it took far too long. Thankfully, the government has seen the light, and we can now start working with broader Asia and, in particular, with our most important trading partner, China, in developing this great new multilateral financial institution for our region. 11:15 Mr VARVARIS 250077 Barton I thank the House for the opportunity to speak on the important and exciting bill that we have before us. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 has been in the making for some time now. It is a joint effort by our Treasurer, the Hon. Joe Hockey, and our Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Hon. Julie Bishop. The fruits of their labour are evident in the formation of this bill, which provides a rare and unique opportunity for Australia to showcase our position and give us a unique advantage in the Asia-Pacific. The decision for Australia to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank comes after extensive discussions between the government, China and other key partners around the world. I am pleased that this bill will have bipartisan support, because it is clear that there are many positive aspects associated with joining this bank. The timing of this bill is perfect because it dovetails on the incredible trifecta of free trade agreements the coalition has signed since coming into office. Free trade agreements with Korea, Japan and China mean Australians will have the opportunity of a generation to engage with our regional neighbours to make the best of increased export opportunities in goods and services. Importantly, free trade agreements will benefit further from this bill today, because having an enormous capital funding base will provide a huge opportunity for economic growth facilitated by Australia's ongoing positive and constructive relationships with its regional trading partners. This bill will enable Australia to become a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which equates to a huge investment opportunity for our nation as a shareholder. This opportunity translates to ongoing prospects for Australian businesses wishing to trade and export with their regional partners. I am proud to be on the side of the House that looks to the future for Australia's economic prosperity. The coalition is very proud of this bill because it is another component of our forward planning that looks to create opportunities and wealth for all our citizens. Creating the jobs of tomorrow and providing a stable economy underpin our philosophy of hope, opportunity and reward. We believe a core government duty is to render the right conditions and foster the relationships conducive to generating real prospects for all Australians. We believe in creating and harnessing the right conditions that encourage everyone to have a go. We believe in creating equal access to opportunities for all Australians so that we can all partake in the success of our nation, which will ensure our standards of living remain first-class. Australia is an enviable nation in the developed world because not only do we live in a fantastic country surrounded by vast beauty; we have the infrastructure and economic conditions in place for Australians to really get the most out of life. A responsible thing for government to do is to plan for the future and increase chances for our nation to remain competitive and utilise partnerships and resources to generate the best deals we can for Australians. This is where the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank comes in, because partaking in this rare shareholder opportunity allows our relationship with Asia to strengthen and ensures we are part of our region's growth and prosperity. Asia, in particular India and China, are on a growth trajectory that is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Having an investment bank dedicated to the promotion of trade in a region that needs infrastructure investment is something that will positively impact on Australia. As I mentioned previously, Asia is a growing region and, because of its proximity to Australia and our longstanding relationship, its prosperity and economic growth is tied closely to ours. A strong Asia, therefore, means a strong Australia, and a partnership allowing our authorised capital base to be injected into the Asia-Pacific region's acute infrastructure needs is a step in the right direction for us. When Australia invests in regional projects like railways, ports, transport, energy and water infrastructure, logistics, environmental protection, information and communication technology, and agriculture, we will also absorb the benefit, because it will enable better trade and exports. It will also create a demand for our expertise and services, as well as commodity products, thus, in turn, creating the jobs of tomorrow. Important infrastructure like ports, railways and other forms of transport in places like Korea, India and Indonesia enables Australian products to reach new markets or expand existing markets. By way of example, it means we can export more of our excellent beef and dairy products; wine, which is a growing market; chocolate; seafood; cheese; fruit; and other things grown or produced in Australia that are highly valued in the Asia-Pacific. Furthermore, a stake in our region's infrastructure projects is likely to drive demand for Australian services, including engineering, construction management, finance, consultancy and so forth, on top of the existing flow of services that has resulted from the free trade agreements. Australia will facilitate this through private sector investments and co-financing projects with other banks and financiers. Australian companies will be able to bid for projects financed by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank through an open procurement model. Clearly, the opportunities are vast for regional engagement and project procurement. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is truly an amazing opportunity for Australia to participate in regional development and to further engage with its neighbours and with other member countries such as Vietnam, New Zealand, Singapore and the United Kingdom. Australia's investment of approximately $932 million in capital funding to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank over five years will make it the sixth largest shareholder in the bank and a key member and investor, helping to build the region's infrastructure future. In essence, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is similar to the World Bank or the Asian Development Bank, except that this will specifically focus on bridging the gap for infrastructure funding in the Asia-Pacific region. At this stage, it is estimated that a staggering US$8trillion is needed for this decade's infrastructure needs. This is a daunting task, but the only way to tackle it is to face it and develop a real plan that will be mutually beneficial. So the priority is to establish members who can contribute, and in a manner which will see acute needs in the transport, water and energy sectors being met. We have entered an unprecedented era in the knowledge economy, with globalisation of resources at play, but there is no point in not sharing our knowledge or our expertise when we can have transformational regional partnerships that foster better relationships with our neighbours and that, in turn, provide jobs and economic growth for Australia. We are uniquely placed to take advantage of the region's needs by being a part of a capital funding institution, which means we can also bid on projects. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is set to commence later this year. It will really see Australia recognised as a key regional partner through opportunities for a multitude of deals in the region. This bill allows Australia to work closely with China and other Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank members to establish a bank that is effective, accountable and transparent to complement the works of existing giants such as the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. As I mentioned previously, the enormous rise of Asia and its uncapped potential gives Australia the opportunity it deserves to help build the infrastructure of the 21st century. The bill today sets foundations for Australia's future. We signed a trifecta of excellent free trade agreements and now being a founding member of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank will truly enable Australia to develop mutually beneficial relationships in the Asia-Pacific region. Asia has always been on our doorstep, and its economic prosperity is largely entwined with ours—thus, investing in Asia's future becomes part of ours. The vision for the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is to promote interconnectivity and economic integration in the region in addition to working with existing multilateral development banks. By becoming a shareholder in this bank, the coalition is providing a future for all Australians. By exporting our commodities, fostering trade relations and taking on regional projects delivering major infrastructure, we are given an opportunity to prove our ability as leaders and as innovators capable of delivering the answers to the needs of our Asia-Pacific neighbours. By helping to bridge the gap in Asia's infrastructure funding needs through the development of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, Australia has seized the chance to capitalise on tangible opportunities that will deliver hope, opportunity and reward. I commend this bill to the House. 11:25 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I rise to make a few brief remarks about the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015. The hope I have is that this bill represents the start of a sensible discussion in this place and in the Australian community about how we should be financing the infrastructure that we need here and in our region. It is fairly clear that in Australia there is a need for greater investment and infrastructure, and we see that in our cities in particular. I speak as a representative of a capital city where we have incredible transport congestion and a growing population. There is a need in Melbourne, for example, to invest in rail projects and a need to invest in high speed rail down the eastern seaboard in particular—something that will come at significant upfront costs, but would be a productivity booster for cities along the eastern seaboard as well as something that is good for the planet and good for people. Yet the discussion that we have had in this country about how to finance the infrastructure that we need has been marked by this incredible debt phobia. Parties which have been in government—Labor and Liberal parties—have run to successive elections on campaigns against debt, including debt that might be used to finance the infrastructure that this country or this region needs. It is often said, 'We must get deficit under control, because everyone understands you cannot spend money that you do not have.' But, on the other hand, people every day live with things called 'mortgages' and understand that if you borrow within your means to fund something that is going to end up being an asset that you own, that will be useful for you and the future generations, then it is a good thing to do. As long as you do not borrow too much, borrowing can be good—if you are investing in asset, in this case in productive infrastructure. As a result of this debt phobia that both Labor and Liberal have been caught up in, we have seen investment in infrastructure fail in this country. It means that usually the only infrastructure that gets a guernsey is where a private operator comes along to a government that has this debt phobia and says, 'Have I got a deal for you! Let me build the project for you: you underwrite our losses and we will take any profits. Thank you very much.' We see that with the proposed East West Link in Melbourne and we see it with many other projects around the country as well. Here, with this bill, we have a government saying, Let's potentially take a different approach in our region and let's actually get behind the idea that it is worthwhile putting government money into something so that projects can be financed through appropriate borrowing—so that infrastructure projects can be financed through debt. We do not necessarily need a Macquarie Bank or some private operator to come in and be our saviour for all future infrastructure needs in this country—actually, sometimes public spending on infrastructure projects can be worthwhile. If this is the start of a change in debate so that we can have a sensible debate about using government money to finance infrastructure projects here, or in our region, then it is to be welcomed. I especially hope that this starts to open up the question about how the enormous amount of money that we have sitting in superannuation funds in this country could be unlocked to invest in infrastructure projects, hopefully here in this country as well. We have the irony, with this bill, of a government which, on the one hand, comes in here and rails against debt and deficit, even if that money might be borrowed to invest in some very useful piece of infrastructure in this country. On the other hand, the government, with this bill, is asking this parliament to be prepared to spend significant amounts of money to debt-finance infrastructure projects overseas. The irony—if not hypocrisy—of that is no reason to stand in the way of what the government is going to do, but it ought to be noted. If the government, with this bill, is going to go down the road of putting money into the financing of infrastructure projects overseas, then, firstly, we have to do it with our eyes open. Secondly, we have to do it with some conditions attached. When we look at the records of the other countries with whom we are being asked to partner as part of this bill and as part of this bank, it is very, very clear that, when it comes to the environment and when it comes to protecting people's labour standards, these countries do not always have a great track record. In fact, when it comes to infrastructure, there is quite often the temptation to say: 'Let's get the environment out of the way so that we can build something. Let's not worry about the labour wages and conditions on which we employ people. Let's just go ahead and build it. Let's go to the cheapest possible bidder. Let's have the greatest possible disregard for the environment that we can.' We are seeing that in action today here in this country. I hope that the government, as a potential founding member of this bank, takes the opportunity to live up to the rhetoric about transparency and insists that, when the bank is formed, there are minimum requirements to protect the environment and minimum conditions to protect the people who are working on the projects that this bank will finance. Otherwise, the government is potentially giving a blank cheque to environmental exploitation and the exploitation of people. I still have hope, despite what the government has done in recent days. We have had the Minister for the Environment in here saying that environmental laws do not need to complied with and that apparently only the people who are directly affected by projects should have standing. Perhaps the Minister for the Environment is suggesting that animals, plants and the Great Barrier Reef ought to start hiring lawyers themselves and appearing. If that is the approach that the government takes domestically, it would not at all surprise me if it turns a blind eye to the projects that this bank funds, but I hope that it does not. I hope that it takes its rhetoric seriously. Who knows? By the time that this bank comes around to being established, we may have a new government in place. Things are moving very quickly in this place, and the Australian people are turning on this government because of its neglect of some basic minimum conditions—minimum protections for the environment and minimum protections for people. It might well be that there is a new government in place by the time that this bank actually becomes a reality. If there is, I would urge that new government to stand by what they are saying in the chamber today and this week about their commitment now to minimum environmental standards and to ensure that that applies not just to infrastructure that is being built in Queensland or elsewhere around Australia but also to infrastructure that is built in our region. If there is a change of government, there may be a very good opportunity to insist on minimum labour standards and minimum environmental standards in what this bank does. To conclude, given that we are potentially going to be a founding member of this bank, we are in a great position to insist that what the bank does meets the highest environmental standards and meets the highest labour standards. We are also in a position where we might start having a bit more of a sensible debate about borrowing sensibly to fund the infrastructure here that Australia needs, instead of being continually caught up in debt phobia. 11:34 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks I am particularly proud to have the opportunity to speak on this very important enabling legislation allowing, as it does, Australia to sign up to become a member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 is a piece of legislation which is not only important today; I believe that, in the decades to come, people will reflect back on the formation of this bank and see it as a very significant development in the Asia-Pacific economy, in China's relationship with the region, and, most importantly for us, in the relationship between our great nation and China. This is a very, very big deal, to put it simply. The relationship between Australia and China has got stronger and stronger under the Abbott government. It is, of course, the Abbott government—through the good offices of the Minister for Trade and Investment—who finally delivered a free trade agreement between Australia and China. I will come back to that a little bit later, because there have been some very unfortunate and plainly wrong comments made on that free trade agreement, by those opposite. We will need to address those comments a little later in this discussion. In relation to the AIIB specifically, there are three things that I want to do. I want to explain what it is, I want to talk a little bit about why it matters so much generally and I want to talk about how it is consistent with our policy of very practical engagement with China. Engagement is one of those words that can be a bit of a cliche. In a practical sense, what it means is that we continue to work closer and closer with China, because every day that we do that is the day that we are creating more jobs. That is what it is all about. The AIIB, of course, is a $100 billion fund to invest in infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region. Infrastructure is so important, as we all know, because it is the economic gift that keeps on giving. You build a road today, and that road is there for decades to come. You build a port, and ships not yet built will be arriving at it in the years ahead. That is particularly important in the Asia-Pacific region, where there is a very clear deficit of infrastructure. Infrastructure helps trade between our nations, it helps to raise living standards in the nations in which the infrastructure takes place and it can only be a good thing. It also creates commercial opportunities, because you cannot get goods into a market unless that market has the infrastructure to cope with the physical delivery of those goods. There are many places in the Asia-Pacific region where the roads are so bad, the ports are non-existent or in a very, very poor condition and the general supporting infrastructure, frankly, is not there to enable the development of the modern market economy. We know that modern market economies produce the best results. They produce the best results for the most people and they produce the best results for the ordinary members of those communities, so anything that we can do to light the spark of modernisation and industrialisation in the Asia-Pacific region is something that we should absolutely do. That is what this fund is going to do. It is going to be $100 billion, which is a lot of money and a lot of investment in various projects around the Asia-Pacific region. It has a greater significance as well, because the AIIB represents a very significant formation of a new multilateral institution in our region. Importantly, with China initiating the AIIB and taking a lead role in its formation and subsequent development, it creates a fantastic opportunity for nations of our region and, indeed, of the world to work closely, collaboratively and cooperatively in a multilateral environment. Multilateral organisations have their frustrations. They can sometimes get bogged down in bureaucracy. When they are not functioning effectively, they can become debating societies and that is a problem. It is certainly not something that we would ever want to see with the AIIB. But multilateral institutions are very important because they get us all around the table and they get us, as nations, talking at the same level about issues of common concern. If you look at the history of the last 70 years or so since the Second World War, it is difficult not to conclude that the development of multilateral institutions has been a very good thing for the world. We know in Europe there is a long history of horrendous conflicts and of economic sabotage by one nation onto another. We know that through the EU, with all its limitations and all its faults, that we now have a situation where European nations are sitting around a table and talking about how much milk should be allowed into one country or the other, or whatever the controversies of the day are. That is far preferable environment than one where there is an absence of direct relationships between nations and where there is an absence of the space in which to have those practical and pragmatic conversations. The development of multilateral institutions is a good thing. Even with the UN—again, for all its faults—it is very hard to argue that it has not had a constructive benefit on the international security environment since the Second World War. I believe that the AIIB is going to have a fantastic impact in bringing dozens of nations in—50 have signed up so far and there are more to come—to talk about the infrastructure needs of the Asia-Pacific region and to constructively—through agreed, objective articles of association—determine where to invest for both the economic return and the benefit of the investing nations. It is really significant to think about all of the nations that have signed up to the AIIB. This is no small enterprise. China, to its tremendous credit, initiated the AIIB and has played the lead role in bringing together all of these nations. It is a very diverse group: China is there; Israel is there; the Middle East is represented through nations like Qatar and Saudi Arabia; and the United Kingdom has signed up to the AIIB, despite being a little way away from the region. We have signed up too. We are the sixth largest investor and a founding investor. That is a good thing, because it means we are there on the ground floor and it means that we have the capacity to have a direct stake in those discussions about the precise governance model, the operating fashion and so on of the AIIB. The development of this is something that is, as I said before, not just something for today but something that 30 years from now people will look back on and think was a very important development. The AIIB is significant also in the broader context of Australia's relationship with China. My community has the largest group of Australians of Chinese background of anywhere in the nation; it is about 20 per cent. My community is extraordinarily supportive of both the AIIB and the relationship between Australia and China more generally. It is really interesting to reflect on how that relationship has evolved. If you go back 20 years, which is not that long ago in the history of the world, back then China's trade with Australia was about $6 billion. It was less than one-fifth of the size of the trading relationship with Japan and less than one-quarter of the size of the trading relationship with the United States. That was only 20 years ago. If you go back 15 years, and I find this to be probably the most interesting statistic of all, Australia's trading relationship with China was smaller than our trading relationship with New Zealand. Until about 2000, we had a bigger trading relationship with New Zealand, a nation of a few million people, than we did with China. It was just extraordinary. By 2003-04, trade with China was our third-largest trading relationship but still substantially smaller than with the US and Japan. By 2008-09 China had become our largest trading partner, but with only a little bit more than Japan. Then in the last year for which we have figures, 2013-14, the relationship was worth $160 billion. It was more than double the size of trade with our second-biggest trading partner—still Japan—and represented 24 per cent of our entire trade with the entire world in goods and services. Think about that: 24 per cent, one quarter of our entire relationship in international trade, was with the People's Republic of China. Another key point is that for every dollar that we send to China $2 comes to Australia. For every dollar we spend buying goods or services from China, $2 comes from China to our shores. That is a powerful indicator of the importance of this. The relationship with China through the AIIB and the FTA is incredibly important. That is why it is a very negative development that those opposite have sought to oppose the free trade agreement between Australia and China and make outrageous and inaccurate claims about what that agreement contains. Remember that this is the nation with which we have one quarter of our entire trade, and it is growing very rapidly. It is the biggest economy in the world today on some measures, certainly within the decade, regardless of what measure you use. We should be doing everything we sensibly can to create Australian jobs by building the relationship with China. If that is not economics 101 then I do not know what is, but those opposite have been shamefully misrepresenting the terms of the free trade agreement, basically to say two things: (1) that workers from China are going to come in on lower wages than Australians and (2) that workers from China are going to come in without the appropriate qualifications, and this is going to be an appalling thing. Bob Carr is the chairman of an institution called the Australia China Relations Institute. It has turned its mind to these questions in recent days. I might just read a quote from ACRI about this issue of workers: 'If the China FTA is ratified any temporary workers will come to Australia under the existing 457 visa scheme. This scheme allows employers to access workers where a genuine skills shortage exists. The worker protection act of 2008 means that these visa holders are entitled to receive pay and conditions at least as good as those of Australian workers who are doing the same work at the same workplace.' Let's repeat that: at least as good as those of Australian workers who are doing the same work at the same workplace. The same applies to skills. If there are state or federal rules about skills, any worker who comes to Australia under the free trade agreement needs to comply with those rules. So, it is absolutely false, it is damaging and it is, frankly, irresponsible for those opposite to seek to sow division and fear rather than to appeal to the better angels of our nature and the economic future of the country, and they stand condemned for it. This shameful campaign against the free trade agreement is something that I suspect some of the more sensible members opposite will be reluctant to associate themselves with. It is absolutely wrong. My community is very supportive of the free trade agreement. A few weeks ago we had the indefatigable small business minister in my electorate to host a seminar on the free trade agreement. It was very well received in Hurstville. I would like to thank the members of the Southern Region Chinese Business Association for their attendance at the event. The association does a great job advocating on behalf of the local business community in my electorate and I know they are strong supporters of the free trade agreement. In this area it is all about action; it is all about getting things done. The Abbott government, the Minister for Trade—the whole team—are getting a lot of things done in this space, and it will be to the great long-term benefit of the nation. 11:49 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I really appreciate the opportunity to speak on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015, and I want to thank the member for Banks for his contribution. He made some good points, some of which I am in furious agreement with but others I am not. Before I turn to the specifics of this bill, I will just note that we heard some assertions about economic maxims, and one of the first economic maxims you learn in trade economics is that trade agreements create winners and losers. What I find disappointing about some of the tenor of the discussion that has been had about the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement is the idea that we cannot have a really frank national discussion that looks beneath the surface of what is in the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement and a really frank conversation about who is winning and who is losing under this agreement. There are significant, legitimate concerns about the impact on the labour market in Australia—and I say that as someone with a lot of economics training and someone who considers herself to be very strongly supportive of free trade. But, as anyone who is well-versed in discussions about free trade knows, these agreements are not just about free trade, and we need to be very careful that we make good trade-offs that are in the interests of everyday Australians when we make these agreements. Otherwise, we lose the argument with the Australian people. If we do not make good free trade agreements then free trade itself gets called into question, and I do not think that is something that either side of the House wants to see. We have heard from members on both sides of the House about what a great opportunity the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is for Australia, and I will add some remarks on that basis. Many other speakers have talked about the very large infrastructure gap across Asia. Some have estimated this lack of expenditure to be somewhere around $8 trillion over the next decade. When Asia does not have the infrastructure it needs for development, it costs everyone in the world; it certainly costs people living in Asia as they struggle to develop in the way we want to see. But it also costs Australians, because the frank reality is that for Asian nations to export to Australia they need to travel on roads and use rail and use ports and all these other facilities, and that adds costs to us as Australians, particularly to Australian consumers. One of the really fantastic stories of the past 30 or 40 years, looking at the globe as a whole, is the increase in the standard of living that we have seen across many countries in Asia. It is through investment in infrastructure that we see people's standard of living grow. As an internationalist, as someone who is supportive of development right across the world, I am very excited about what is occurring and Australia's involvement in it. We know that the bank will help catalyse private sector investment. So this is not just about foreign governments and foreign countries looking to invest in infrastructure; it is about bringing in all of the parties to co-finance projects. The member for Banks talked at great length about the importance of multilateralism. Again, that is something we want to see more and more of in our region. This is a great opportunity for Australia to deepen the links and deepen the relationship that we have with our Asian neighbours. It is good to see that we are getting in on the ground floor—though I think we could probably have done it a little more seamlessly, which I will talk about in a moment. It is also a symbol of our shared commitment as Australians to development in Asia. This is something that we really want to get across to people living right across this region. As Australians we want to do everything we can to build living standards in Asia, to help bring Asians up to the standard of living that Australians enjoy. Being part of this bank and being an enthusiastic member is definitely a part of that. We welcome the commitment to the principle of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. We welcome the financial commitment that has been put forward. One thing other speakers have talked about is their frustration that this decision was not come to earlier, and more enthusiastically, on the part of the government. Frankly, it is been quite confusing to watch the debate that has occurred on the other side of the House about how to manage the proposal for Australia to be a foundation member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. We have heard flourishing speeches from both sides of the House about all the benefits. Why then did it take months for the government to decide that it actually wanted to be involved? It was actually Labor that came out of the blocks very early to point out what huge benefits there were in participating in such an institution and that the earlier and more enthusiastically we engage with these institutions the more benefits we will get. I raise these points not just to be political but because I think it reflects something that underlies a lot of our discussion and Australia's engagement with Asian economies that I think is a real barrier to us getting the most out of growth in that region. So I want to talk about these attitudes and a little bit about what Australian governments can do about them. The ambivalence of attitude that we saw when this proposal was initially put to the Australian government reflects within the psyche of Australians the lack of comfort that we feel about really participating fully in being engaged within our own region. I think it also demonstrates something equally terrifying, which is the sense that it is a fait accompli that just because we are somewhere in the Asian region we are innately going to benefit and grow as Asia grows around us. On both counts, those are false assumptions. When we look at the things that are going to drive prosperity in Australia in the long term, being a part of Asia, committing to being a part of Asia and feeling ourselves to be a part of Asia are absolutely central to making sure we continue to another generation of prosperity in this country. One of the really terrifying implications of these attitudes is the sense that policy does not matter when we think of making the most of the Asian opportunity. And the sense we got from those on the other side was: 'Here is the suggestion; maybe we will consider it. There seem to be downsides and there seem to be upsides.' I think that is completely the wrong approach to take. Policy is going to be essential. If we do not get the policy settings right then we are going to be living in the midst of this incredibly fast growing and eventually incredibly prosperous region but we are not going to get the benefits because we have decided that we are going to step back; we do not think we need to do anything to capture this opportunity and we believe it will just be delivered to us on a platter. It will not. Australia's future lies very much within Asia. There would be no argument from anyone in this House about that. All of the data and evidence that we can look to makes that very clear. China is already Australia's largest export partner. Six of Australia's top 10 export partners are Asian countries, and Singapore, Malaysia and Korea are on that list. It is very exciting for Australia that we have already got these thriving trade relationships because we all know that an incredible growth story is unfolding right before our eyes. Some economists think that, by 2040, two of every three dollars of wealth created will come from our region and half of every dollar of wealth created will come from China and India alone. This is an absolutely staggering change in the centre of economic power in the world and it is something from which Australia can of course benefit significantly. Disturbingly, when you look at the actual evidence of how we are embracing this opportunity and engaging with it across different sectors of our economy, you do see some real causes for concern. PwC produced a very interesting report last year called Passing Us By. They did a very large survey of Australian businesses and came up with some really terrifying statistics. One of those statistics was that today only nine per cent of Australian businesses are doing business in a significant way in Asia. For all the talk in this parliament and the various forums that we participate in, it is shocking to think that fewer than one in 10 Australian businesses are engaging with Asia. The report found not only that but also that this does not reflect a general reluctance on the part of Australian businesses to engage overseas. In fact, the report found that Australian companies are investing seven times as much in New Zealand as they are in China. That is a wild fact when you think about the incredible growth—not just the current size of China compared to New Zealand but what we will see over coming years. PwC also found in that report that not only are we engaging more with New Zealand than we are with some other partners but that the Americas and the European nations are very enthusiastically investing in and engaging with Asia. So we are really getting left behind in all of this, and other countries around the world are trying to pick up this opportunity. My colleague the member for Gellibrand and I have just done a pretty big piece of work about some of these issues. In doing that, we talked to a lot of exporters about why it is that some of them are struggling so much to push into this region. They talked to us about some very practical problems. Probably the first thing people raise with you is the language barrier. So, you would think we would have a thriving and exciting push within Australian schools to be learning Asian languages. But what we find, again, is a very disappointing outcome: today only six per cent of Australian students are learning an Asian language at school, and we are actually going backwards on this. As a share of the school population there were more students learning Asian languages in the year 2000 than there are today, in 2015. Again, the point here is that policy really matters. We need to address this. We need to do something about it. Something else we heard a lot from exporters is that it takes a lot of time to cement trusting relationships with people in Asia. Learning about the different economics in different Asian markets takes time. PwC found that it was taking around 15 years for an Australian company going into Asia to start to really make serious money. Fifteen years is a really long commitment, and when you see that CEO tenures in Australia are something like 4.2 years on average you can understand why we are not seeing that real push into Asia. It probably does not help that when big Australian companies, listed companies, try to go into Asia they are often pummelled by business analysts who say that it is a wild, crazy and outlandish thing to do. Again, this reflects this basic attitude. People are talking the talk about the big opportunity that lies ahead, but when we look at the actual activities of Australian businesses we are just not seeing what we want to see. There are issues around government, too. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade probably needs to do some thinking and some work about its Asian expertise and Asian language capabilities within the department. While I am speaking very positively about the opportunity we see today with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, I just want to make sure that when we have these debates in the parliament we have them in a measured and fact-based way. As much as it might feel good for us to all come into this chamber and speak very excitedly about all of the opportunities that lie ahead, I want us to be really cognisant of the facts. The facts are that when we look at the education system and at different aspects of the machinery of government, and especially when we look at business, we are not seeing the kind of enthusiasm, engagement and upskilling in the Asian competencies that we are going to need to make the most out of this incredible growth. What do we need to do about all of these things? I think the first thing is to have a national discussion about how we are going to make the most of this opportunity. It is not going to be through machinery of government or bills that we put through this parliament. It will be about everyday Australians understanding the realities of living in the Asian region and thinking about how they as individuals are going to better engage with our neighbours. It is fascinating to talk to businesses. You would think they would raise issues about practical and legal barriers to taking advantage of these export opportunities, but when it really comes down to it the main barriers are about people—people-to-people links and having trusting relationships across national boundaries. This is the sort of thing that governments are inherently capable of assisting with. Some of the things are around really pushing education transfers, so we make sure that the brightest and best young people in China and other Asian countries are coming here to Australia not only to study but also to learn about our culture, to make friends and develop trusting relationships with Australians—and we would like to see a lot more of that going in the other direction too. I will finish by coming back to where I began, which is to talk about the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement. I say again that we need to be a lot more nuanced in the discussion we are having today in this parliament about all of these issues. It is not only the bank over which there was this seemingly petty, silly political tussle but it is also happening for things like the free trade agreement and the set of government policies that are going to need to support Australia getting the most out of this region. The opportunity is there, but we need to embrace it enthusiastically and get the policy right, and that is the discussion we need to be having. 12:04 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 is a very important bill because it is the mechanism by which we are becoming a foundation member of a very exciting, new international investment bank. I would like to say a few words about the importance of it, the nature of it and its relationship to trade and the wellbeing of Australia. Our signing into this bank is a very important international initiative, and it is central to our standing within Asian and international communities, and I support it. In this bank we see a new institution that will allow our economy to become more enmeshed in the amazing growth in Asia. It is essential that we are involved at its foundation and remain a member as we would lose so much credibility and influence and so many economic opportunities with our neighbours and trading parties, and I think we would also lose the respect of our allies. This enabling legislation for us to become a member of the bank means we will be part of a bank capitalised to the value of $100 billion. Its aim is to deliver infrastructure across the Asian region: not in the form of small-scale micro investments or micro loans or loans with an aid flavour; it will be on a commercial basis to deliver ports, airports, roads, railways—all the major logistical things that Asian countries need at the moment. At the moment there is a huge deficit of infrastructure with a value of up to $3 trillion that needs to be installed in Asian countries for them to be able to continue to grow, flourish and trade with countries like Australia. The Asia-Pacific, as I said, is rapidly going ahead in leaps and bounds, but this will turbocharge the miracle of the Asian economy. Also, having a seat at the table and being the sixth largest contributor of capital will give us a seat on the board. The infrastructure that will actually come out of all of the investments that it will make will, in itself, mean potential markets for Australian products, whether it is for producers of metals, skills, financial services, IT, engineering, architecture, legal services and other services in our expanding service industries, or even for our traditional exports of food. Huge economic opportunities for our food and fibre will come out of the growth of a developed economy across all Asian nations. As I mentioned, it will not have an aid focus like the IMF or the World Bank; it will be a more commercially-generated banking ethic that will be in existence with this bank. Our contribution will be to the value of US$3.7 billion, with an initial contribution of $738.3 million. It will be paid in cash over the first four years, with the remaining $2.9 billion in signed-up capital being presented in promissory notes. There has already been extensive dialogue with China and the other founding members. I am proud to see that Australia was the first signatory and has been followed subsequently by 55 others. They are not just countries in Asia. The UK has signed up. Other European countries have signed up. We are part of a very exciting initiative. We will have a constituency as a result of our seat on the board, and I cannot see too many bad things coming out of new infrastructure being built in Asia. I have just a few words to say about the trade issue. It is a very topical issue at the moment, particularly as evidenced by the fine words of the member for Banks and the member for Hotham. We have established that multilateral trade and multilateral institutions are good, but in the press and coming from members on the other side there is a lot of dispute and, I think, distortion of some features of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, mainly revolving around a side letter to the agreement and taking matters in that out of context. If in the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement there are investments over $150 million, there are facilities where the labour market testing does not have to happen at the front end of the deal. The deal gets signed, sealed and wrapped up. But when the employment comes at the back end of the deal, the same 457 criteria apply, the same employment criteria apply and the same skills and registrations apply. Taking it out of context has really been done quite mischievously by unions and unionists who are praying on people's fear about their job. The thing to remember about international trade and infrastructure building is that all these things develop stronger economies—particularly in a country like Australia, where 60 to 70 per cent of what we grow and make gets exported. So the more markets we have and the stronger trade we have mean that there are more jobs and more economic security for our economy and for people who are in work. There are more jobs for more trade. The China-Australia Free Trade Agreement is going to put our existing trading terms onto another level. In my electorate of Lyne, the most obvious winners straight-up are our beef and dairy producers. At the moment we have a couple of producers, in Wingham for instance—Wingham Beef Exports—which export all across Asia and into China. In Wauchope we have another group that exports processed beef into China. At the moment they are facing 12 to 25 per cent tariffs, so Wingham Beef Exports and Meltique Beef will get a free kick as their tariffs of 12 to 25 per cent will be gone over nine years. We have wine producers that export into China—Cassegrain Wines on the Pacific Highway at Sancrox, just between Wauchope and Port Macquarie; a great business. They are exporting into China and the current tariffs, which are 14 to 20 per cent, will recede to zero. Dairy producers across the Manning, on the Comboyne Plateau and to the north and south of the electorate who sell into the Australian markets will get better farm gate prices, because some of the exporters, like NORCO, one of the local producers on the Mid-North Coast, is exporting into China. That will open up a whole new market for their new factory, just to the north of my electorate. They will be able to have long-life milk—but fresh long-life milk—able to be exported directly into the Chinese market. That means there will be more demand for milk, so the local dairy producers will have more demand for their product and their farm gate price will go up over time. There are many horticultural producers who will get great opportunities. Many of the fruit producers and other producers, like Ricardoes Tomatoes, have great opportunities, and so do macadamia producers. I have colleagues from electorates that produce pharmaceuticals—like my good friend the member for Bennelong. Australia has a huge pharmaceutical production industry, but there are tariffs when drugs made here in Australia go over to China. This is going to deliver wins for my city colleagues. The country cousins are jumping because we have different industries from our city cousins, but it is all good. The other scuttlebutt that the commentariat and the unionists have thrown in and are having a field day with in the other multilateral trade agreements is about ISDS provisions—like in the TPP. That is stalled, because they cannot reach agreement. But there are also ISDS provisions in the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement—investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms. Hello? All our trade agreements have ISDS provisions. This is nothing new. They are designed to protect Australian investors overseas just as much as trade investors in our country. There is nothing sinister about these mechanisms. They are there for a reason. I reiterate: the labour market testing, the wages and the skill levels required for any workers that come to this country for these megaprojects, or on 457 visas, are not changing one iota. But, in signing a deal worth more than $150 million, at the front-end of the deal one does not have to go through the labour market testing or these other procedures—otherwise you would never get any deal signed. It is just a practical way of doing business; it sets the ground rules. Just like, in a game of sport, you need a referee and you need a set of rules, that is what happens when you have trade agreements, whether multilateral or bilateral. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will be a huge boost. It will capitalise loans on a commercial basis. It will attract other capital. All of these burgeoning economies in Asia will get the infrastructure they need to go forward and create wealth for their country, and there will be more economic opportunities for Australia. President Xi, in this chamber, spoke about the new 'silk road' into the Chinese economy—and this very infrastructure will be part of that silk road. The more trade that goes one way, the more that can come back the other way. Australia will be a beneficiary. We have got a seat at the table. We were one of the initial contributors—and the sixth biggest—so we will have a say in the policy and the decisions that are made. I commend this bill to the House. 12:16 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand If Australia is to reap the benefits of the Asian century, we need to engage proactively with our region. The Indo-Pacific, our geostrategic sphere and our immediate sphere of economic influence, is going through a fundamental change. As the epicentre of world growth and political power shifts east, we are seeing our region grow at an unprecedented rate. The Asian century is already upon us and, over the coming decades, countries in our region will become more wealthy and more powerful. The Asian century spans further than just China—by 2050 our region will be home to 10 of the 25 biggest economies in the world. While there is frequently much talk about the growth prospects of China and India, in a few short decades Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia will all be amongst the biggest economies in the world. The Professor of Strategic Studies at the Australian National University, Hugh White, outlines the change for Australia's geostrategic environment starkly, noting that only 20 years ago Australia's economy was as big as China's, bigger than India's and bigger than the whole of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations put together. How things have changed. How things have changed in the past 20 years and how things will change even more drastically over the next 20. In two decades from now, two-thirds of every dollar of wealth created globally will come from our region. If we are to be competitive, if we want to increase our standard of living and if we want to reap the benefits of the growth of our region, we must engage with this change. We must be more open, connected and engaged with our region than we have ever been before in our history. This is not beyond us. In our history Australia has been at the centre of some of the most successful international institutions and we have been able to shape the international sphere to our advantage. We were influential in the foundation of the United Nations and played a key role in the establishment of APEC, the APEC leaders' forum, and the G20. These institutions have played a major role in seeing economic growth in our region and across the world. As a middle power, we have an interest in ensuring that economic growth continues in our region. We also have an interest in promoting increased economic integration with the countries of the Indo-Pacific. However, there are major constraints on our region's ability to grow, and in order for our region to grow and become more prosperous over the coming decades it needs infrastructure. The scale of the infrastructure needed in our region is enormous. The infrastructure gap in our region is estimated at approximately $8 trillion between 2010 and 2020 alone. The immediate 'hard' infrastructure needs come in the form of roads, railways, ports and harbours, telecommunications and electricity grids. However, there is also a range of equally important 'soft' infrastructure components that are needed, such as policies and regulations that ensure hard infrastructure investments are sufficiently efficient and cost effective. There is a new emphasis on trade, regional economic cooperation, interconnectivity and collective action on public problems in the Indo-Pacific. The region's ability to sustain high growth rates calls for huge investments from government, the private sector and non-governmental organisations to be facilitated by multilateral institutions. Without the implementation of both hard and soft infrastructure, the world's fastest growing region will be stunted, causing countries' domestic productivity to decline, undermining international competitiveness and halting efforts to alleviate poverty. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will help fill that void, and assist governments and the private sector in funding the major projects throughout Asia that our region needs to continue to grow. This multilateral development bank is a significant moment in Asia's recent history. The bank is, at its heart, a poverty alleviation institution, and has the potential to boost infrastructure investment in our region by more than $100 billion. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will focus on investment in productive sectors in Asia, including energy and power, transportation, telecommunications, regional and rural infrastructure, agricultural development, water and sanitation, environmental protection, and urban development. The bank will work with, and alongside, existing multinational development banks on infrastructure investment in Asia. Apart from the establishment of a specific infrastructure investment institution for Asia, an admirable development in itself, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank also signifies another important development—China's intent to engage positively and openly on the international stage. For years countries have encouraged China to play a larger role in assisting with development and engagement. The Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank has been multilateralised, and power has been shared across its members. This is a far cry from a unilateral investment bank acting as a tool to advance Chinese geostrategic national interests. Some critics stress that there are still unresolved issues relating to the transparency and governance of the bank, and that Australia should not have agreed to be a part of it until those questions had been answered. Others have argued that the money should have gone into existing institutions, such as the World Bank, the IMF or the Asian Development Bank. There are also arguments, emanating predominately from outside Asia, that the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is a signal of Chinese expansionism, and that this institution will use projects to leverage Chinese geostrategic objectives. I do not agree with the validity of these arguments. It goes without saying that institutions of this size need sufficient oversight and governance arrangements, and that transparency is essential to the legitimacy of such institutions. While I have faith in other existing institutions active in the region, such as the World Bank, the IMF and Asian Development Bank, they have not evolved in a way that is coping with the demands for infrastructure in our region. There is space for another multilateral institution to help fund the infrastructure investments necessary to allow the Indo-Pacific to continue to grow steadily. While there is little argument about the chronic need for infrastructure to facilitate future growth in the Indo-Pacific, some have concerns over how this can be addressed by a new organisation without the institutional knowledge and history necessary for such a monumental task. This is a further argument for Australian involvement in this institution. Countries like Australia need to take a lead role in establishing these institutions, drawing on our significant capacity-building skills and governance expertise. This calls for more collective action in our region, not less—something that the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank overtly calls for. The bank is intended to encourage regional and non-regional membership, and many of Australia's allies in the region, and throughout the world more broadly, threw their support behind the bank some time ago—nations include the UK, New Zealand, South Korea, Germany, France, Italy, India and Singapore. Australia was invited, very early on in the piece, to be a founding member of the bank. We could have had a very significant influence from the outset on developing the bank's core philosophy, principles, policies, value systems and operating platform. However, the dithering and stalling of the Abbott government has left us stranded on the starting line. This bill, in many ways, is another example of the model of 'good government' used by the Abbott government—a cabinet divided between those distracted by the nonsense on stilts of the Anglosphere and the more sensible elements in the government who understand the need to engage in our region, and that Australia's future lies in the Indo-Pacific, and most specifically in South-East Asia. The deadline for founding membership had to be extended, and even then Australia just scraped in. This is no way to engage in the international arena. Waiting for other countries to lead, while we take a back seat, is not the way to advance Australia's interests in a rapidly changing region. It sends the wrong message. It says that Australia is not a confident middle power in the Indo-Pacific with an independent foreign policy and interests of our own to pursue. If we want to be seen as leaders in the region, we simply have to lead. Labor has been calling for Australia to sign up as a founding member of the bank for many months now. But for reasons not clearly expressed in the public arena, members of the government, cabinet and the National Security Committee argued, stalled and leaked against each other until it was too late to for us to have a meaningful impact on the early development of this bank. There are obvious advantages to membership of a development bank of this kind. We could have played a part in shaping the institution from its inception. This is an institution that will enable our region to grow and prosper, but this government shrugged its shoulders and walked away. It has been an embarrassing display from the government, but a decision-making process that has become sadly familiar in the months since. It should not have been surprising that the government has been found wanting in the international arena—not willing to engage, and displaying dismissive aggression when faced with criticism. The Abbott government has trashed Australia's relationship with our nearest neighbours, excluded itself from the regional solution to the Rohingya refugee crisis and cut foreign aid to the tune of $11.3 billion. We should have expected that a government with this record would cut off its nose to spite its face and decline to be part of an institution that would be of benefit not only to the people of our region but to the Australian national interest as well. It was embarrassing that the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Prime Minister were actively campaigning in the cabinet and the National Security Committee to make sure that Australia was not one of the first to sign up to this bank. I am encouraged that the more moderate of the Liberal Party—the few that are left—were able to turn them around. But, sadly, this is illustrative of the kind of dysfunction that reigns at the highest levels of this government. They have to be dragged to get to a position so obvious that governments, NGOs and business throughout the region are united in supporting. When the government first announced it would not be joining the bank from the outset, former Prime Minister Paul Keating said what many in Australia were already thinking: The government's decision to decline founding membership of the Chinese-proposed Asian infrastructure bank is the worst policy decision the government has taken since assuming office. It is the worst because of the far-reaching implications and consequences of deciding to have nothing geo-economically to do with China at a time when China is prepared to step up to greater responsibilities in the region. Luckily, after months of indecision and infighting, the Abbott government will formally sign up as a founding member. The reasons for joining then were just as convincing as the reasons for joining now, and Labor has been actively campaigning for months for the government to change its position. It is unclear what triggered the change of heart inside the government. However, the logic has been strong throughout. When the Treasurer recently defended the expenses accrued by the previous Speaker by flying around Europe campaigning for the presidency of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, he said: When we're part of international organisations, no matter what they are, it is good for Australia to take a leadership role. Surely that logic must have applied here, too, on this much more significant piece of institutional infrastructure. Not only should we be part of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank; we should follow the Treasurer's advice and take a leadership role. This is especially the case when the institution's intention is to support much-needed infrastructure development and the bank has been welcomed both by governments and by businesses managing ever-expanding regional and global supply chains. It is perplexing that the discourse has revolved around who will join the bank as opposed to what the bank will do, because this bank really could have a revolutionary impact in our region. The modus operandi will be lean, clean and green: lean, with a small and efficient management team of highly skilled and staff; clean, with zero tolerance to corruption and nepotism; and green, with an emphasis on sustainability. We should support the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank because when we are making choices about the kind of global citizen Australia wants to be we need to be thinking about playing a leadership role in our region. In the previous government Labor commissioned an Asian century white paper, which sought to critically analyse global and regional trends and make long-term leadership commitments in response. Those decisions were political, economic and social and sought to take a long view of history and our region. There is still a copy of that document in my office, but the paper is becoming increasingly hard to find on the internet as the government has sought to purge it from the discourse—sent it down the memory hole. That says a lot about this government and its attempts to stifle the conversation about Australia's role in the region, our obligation to engage and our national interest in engaging. Australia's future prosperity will correlate with the future prosperity of our neighbours and our region. Put even more simply, we rely on our neighbours' wealth for our own. As the countries of the Indo-Pacific region continue to become more economically entwined, this will only intensify. We can no longer put our hands over our eyes and ignore the changes going on around us. We need to adapt to the changing nature of our region. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank offers immense possibilities for our region. As a country that relies on a strong and prosperous region for our own prosperity, we should support it and engage in shaping its future mission. I commend the bill to the House. 12:30 WYATT ROY M2X Longman I rise to speak on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015. I think the previous speaker made a very articulate defence of why we should support institutions like the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, but I wish that members opposite would apply that same logic to the free trade agreement that this government has sealed with China. I think this will lock our two nations together in a pathway towards future prosperity. If the logic of the previous speaker could be applied to all members when it comes to that agreement, I think that our country's future prosperity could be assured. I have spoken many times before in this place about our nation's changing economic profile, about the need to look beyond the farm gate or the mine head, if we are to continue the trajectory of almost a quarter of a century of uninterrupted economic growth. Critical to the new order is that our country's future economic prosperity will depend on our relationship with an emergent Asian middle class of more than a billion people. They will want to buy our goods and services, so it is imperative that we are opening ourselves to those markets and cultivating access for our exporters. However, for the Asia-Pacific region to become fully realised as the 21st century's economic powerhouse, one glaring deficiency must be not only addressed but prioritised. There is an acute shortfall in the region's funding reserves for major infrastructure. It is estimated to be as much as $8 trillion. With this bill, Australia openly declares its hand—to lend a hand. We want to see the Asian economy get the fiscal injection it needs in order to grow. We want to create opportunities for the region—and by extension, for Australia—through helping to fund transport, energy and water infrastructure; by investing in Asian ports, logistics, environmental protection, information and communications technology and agriculture. The reason is plain, unavoidable reality as much as any strategic drive. The current nexus between Australia's prosperity and economic growth and that of Asia will intensify to an almost unbreakable bond. A stronger Asia will underpin a stronger Australian economy. Infrastructure development in the region will provide greater opportunities for our businesses and will increase demand for our services and commodity exports. Ultimately, a deeper relationship with a better equipped and more productive Asian economy means more jobs for all Australians. This bill represents a significant step in mapping out that future, by enabling Australia to become a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which is expected to be up and running by the end of this year. This is a global multilateral initiative with more than 50 member nations involved. China is the largest of the bank's shareholders, with a 30.34 per cent stake. Australia will have the sixth-largest share. Our contribution of about $932 million in paid-in capital to the AIIB over five years has been determined only after extensive due diligence and satisfaction that the bank will be based on world's best practice. The membership has drawn widely from inside and outside Asia, from South Korea and India to France, Germany and the United Kingdom. We are in very good company. While there have been some reported concerns around governance, we have not joined the newest international bank on the block lightly. All members will absolutely be involved in the bank's direction and decision making. Transparency will be key. The construction of new ports and railways in AIIB member countries such as India, Indonesia and Korea will mean Australia's exports can reach new and expanding markets. Building a coal unloader at an Indian port will create extra capacity for Australian commodity exporters. Constructing a new railway in Indonesia will help shift Australian wheat and beef to that market. The bank will also build roads and construct telephone and internet lines, among a shopping list of infrastructure improvements. I am in no doubt that the AIIB will fuel demand for services, which take up an ever-increasing share of our export market and, as such, our national wealth. In particular, we will see demand grow for the expertise we can offer in engineering, construction, management, finance and consultancy. Currently the service sector represents 80 per cent of our domestic economy but only 17 per cent of our exports. Free trade agreements recently sealed by the coalition government will allow those service industries the unprecedented access to overseas markets that they need in order to grow. That includes the landmark free trade agreement with our biggest trading partner, China—an agreement that is now built upon by Australian and Chinese founding membership in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. With the tapering of demand for our resources and the swelling middle class of our Asian neighbours, services and experiences can become the powerhouse industries exporting to our region and employing our citizens. I am resolute in my conviction about this. No greater opportunity exists than in the tech space. If Asia is to forge, through AIIB investment, massive improvements in communication networks, we need to be there to capitalise on the explosion in innovative industries that will surely occur. We need to seize this moment now. For our economy's future health—and I believe it is as stark as that—we need to foster a start-up ecosystem of innovation which supports the next generation of entrepreneurs. Developing it will take a co-ordinated approach across government, the higher education sector and capital investment, and will involve a real cultural shift in this country. ABS data underscores how a new approach is needed by government to reverse a trend against risk and entrepreneurship which is particularly worrying for young Australians. In 1997, nine per cent of employed Australians aged 15 to 34 owned their own business. By 2013, the number had diminished to 8.3 per cent. But in the right environment young Australians will find the confidence to start their own businesses, grow the economy and create thousands of new jobs. The nation has the fundamental components, with deep reserves of young, bright, talented Australians and other young international entrepreneurs set to be lured by our unique lifestyle. Finally, we are perfectly placed at the heart of a growing Asia—which is the focus of this bill—to become an epicentre of global entrepreneurship. The startup economy, the PricewaterhouseCoopers study commissioned by Google Australia, showed that high-growth technology companies could contribute four per cent of GDP, or $109 billion, and add 540,000 jobs to the Australian economy by 2033 from a base of only 0.2 per cent today. In a recent speech to the Australian Institute of Company Directors, CSIRO chairman and former Australian of the Year, Simon McKeon, spoke passionately about a new innovation culture that should permeate business and government. He encapsulated it as an essential change in mindset, attitude and culture. While entrepreneurial spirit has always been accepted in Australia, now it needs to be championed by government, which must step up as part of a collaboration with business, science and education. Our Chief Scientist, Ian Chubb, agrees, pointing out that while Australia has the same proportion of research scientists per capita in the workforce as the United States, only a third of them are in the private sector. In the US the opposite applies, with a premium in innovation, commercialisation and entrepreneurship. In Israel we see what is achievable. A small country under constant threat with no natural resources, it produces more start-up businesses than Japan, India, Korea, Canada and the UK, and it claims more companies on the NASDAQ than Korea, Japan, Singapore, China, India and all of Europe combined. Successful governments stir an infectious entrepreneurial spirit, building direct partnerships with the private sector that attract capital for the commercialisation of great ideas. Put simply, they have made it as easy as possible to start and run a new business. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will show us what is possible, for it will work to the very same principles: harnessing private sector investment and cofunding projects with other development banks and private sector financiers. As the Treasurer enunciated in his second reading speech, this is not a development bank but a bank that funds development. Australian companies will be able to bid for AIIB financed projects as the bank will have an open procurement model. But while it is vital investment, our AIIB commitment will not come at the cost of other government spending. There will be no direct impact on the budget bottom line. Nobody can deny that Australia will face many challenges in the future. However, I believe we should also be infinitely optimistic about our potential for prosperity, not because of the resources we have in our ground but in light of the innovative capacity of our people. If we embrace our cultural heritage of 'having a go', if we look not in but out to our regional neighbours for the prospects of growth—theirs and ours—we will, as the new Asian middle class rises, be in a position to meet its demand for our food, education, health and innovative and entrepreneurial services. Our Asian neighbours will see doors open as a result of new and enhanced infrastructure across the region. They will walk through them to us. They will want to travel here and invest in our services. Their prosperity is our prosperity. That is the future, which is why I wholeheartedly support our membership of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and this bill to implement our obligations under the bank's articles of agreement. I commend the bill to the House. 12:42 Mr WILLIAMS 249758 Hindmarsh I support the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 and endorse the comments by the member for Longman, especially those regarding the new economy and the opportunities that the new economy presents, whether that be in entrepreneurship, start-ups or the digital age, and we know from history that those in Asia have done very well in this space. If we look back over the last 20 or 30 years at the Japanese and their companies in the electronics and information technology sectors, whether that be Sony, Nintendo, Panasonic, and at the South Koreans in recent decades and companies like LG and Samsung, they have been world leaders in adapting and innovating in the new economy. We must not forget that these companies started as small companies before they became large companies. This is why the package that the government announced just recently to assist start-ups with the employee ownership scheme, crowd funding and other initiatives will help Australian start-ups to better integrate into the world economy. As we know, Australia's prosperity and economic growth are closely tied to the Asian region. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 enables Australia to become a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and puts Australia in a position to influence the bank's decisions and strategic direction. Australia will be the sixth largest shareholder, contributing approximately $1 billion paid-in capital to the AIIB over five years. Our membership provides an opportunity to further strengthen our engagement with the entire Asian region, which is the fastest growing region in the world and includes China, our largest trading partner. Our relationship with China is essential to growing Australia's economy and creating jobs for all Australians. Annually this relationship is estimated to be worth $150 billion in two-way trade. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 is further evidence of the coalition government's work to ensure the Australia-China bilateral relationship continues to deliver economic benefits. It also shows Australia working with China at a diplomatic and strategic level so that it engages in the international rules based system. The government is working with China to ensure the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has the appropriate levels of governance, accountability and transparency expected of a multilateral bank of this kind. The government's negotiations resulted in a commitment that the bank will be based on world's best practice that ensures all members will be involved in the direction and decision making of the bank—vitally important governance arrangements. Becoming a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will allow a deepening of our relationships with other member countries, including New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam, among others. Ultimately, expanding our relationships with these countries will result in job creation for all Australians. This is one of the key reasons why I welcome the coalition's strategic achievements in Asia, including the free trade agreements with China, Korea and Japan. The bank will boost economic growth, create jobs and promote trade in our region by financing much-needed infrastructure investment. We know that combined investment by countries can have a profound impact. For example, if we review history, the collective efforts to rebuild Germany and Europe after World War II through the European Recovery Program, or the Marshall Plan as it was more commonly known, provided access to credit and infrastructure investment. The United States oversaw the European recovery in partnership with countries like the United Kingdom. This sped up the German and European reconstruction considerably and enabled the growth that Europe has experienced and appreciated over the last half century. In the current context, Asia faces a major infrastructure shortfall as countries in the region industrialise and develop. Australia has the capacity to be a major beneficiary of the much-needed infrastructure investment in Asia. Therefore, it is in our economic interests that we participate in building this infrastructure through the bank. Recently I spoke with Coffey International, who have major operations in Australia, and in particular in my home city of Adelaide. I asked for their input regarding the development in the Asia-Pacific, and in particular the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Coffey's Asia-Pacific General Manager, Ben Ward, commented: Investment in infrastructure is a key step in the economic development of a country—with access to reliable roads, rail and ports greatly increasing a country's ability to become a trading partner. Mechanisms such as an international investment bank, as long as they are models of good governance, which prioritise enabling the business and trade environment, can therefore become an important partner in the country's development journey. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will invest in areas such as transport, energy and water infrastructure, ports, logistics, environmental protection, information and communications technology, and agriculture. By improving infrastructure throughout the Asian region, greater opportunities will open up for Australian businesses like Coffey and increase demand for our services and commodity exports. Our services industry has benefited greatly from the development of Asia, and in particular China, and has serviced the resources and minerals sectors of those growing economies. Companies like WorleyParsons, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Sinclair Knight Merz, Jacobs—the list goes on—have grown considerably on the back of the resources and energy sector that has supplied the growing demand from Asia for our products. Australian firms will be well placed to benefit from infrastructure projects in the region in other areas too, whether they be engineering, construction management, finance or consultancy. New ports and railways in countries such as India, Indonesia and Korea will mean that Australia's exports can now reach new markets. Take agriculture as an example. If we can get better access through new ports, better railways and better transport corridors in Indonesia, we can get far more of our agriculture to market in that country, which has about 200 million people and a growing economy. As Asia develops, a middle class emerges, creating new demand for all that Australia has to offer. As we have seen with the burgeoning middle class of China, this demand expands to education, health services and tourism—all areas where Australia is fundamentally strong. Unquestionably, by making this decision to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the parliament is facilitating the growth of Australian jobs and growth of the economy, and that is why I support this bill. 12:49 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I have often spoken in this place about the huge market opportunities to our north. There is no doubt that Asia is where the action is for Australian exporters. Our introduction of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 into the House a week ago is another sign of the commitment of this government to make sure that those markets open up as quickly as possible, as effectively as possible and as profitably as possible for our exporters and for our country. As the Treasurer outlined in his speech when he introduced the bill, Asia faces a massive infrastructure financing gap. It is estimated to be over US$8 trillion over the next decade. This bank is designed to help address that infrastructure financing gap. Australia will be a founding member, and this will help to fund those major new infrastructure projects. I will come back and talk more about the detail of those benefits to Australia in moment. The decision to join the bank followed extensive consultations with key partners inside the Asian region and outside as well. Australia has negotiated our participation in the design of the bank with more than 50 other prospective founding member countries. These negotiations have resulted in a commitment that the bank will be based on world's best practice. It is critical that the governance of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank be best practice, transparent and effective. All members will be involved in the direction and decision making of the bank. As one of the largest regional shareholders of the bank, Australia will be able to influence the decisions and strategic direction of the bank, and that will be extremely important to not only the effectiveness of the bank itself but to ensuring that benefits flow to Australian exporters and Australia more broadly. Australia will lead a constituency on the bank's board of directors. This is very important because we want that board to be best practice in the way it is put together and the way it works. Negotiations on the composition of this constituency with established partners in the region are well advanced. Our shareholding with be just under US$4 billion—US$3.7 billion—and our contribution will have zero direct impact on underlying cash balance, fiscal balance and net debt as we are purchasing a shareholding in the bank which has value in itself. This is an extremely important and very positive investment for us which, as I say, will not result in an increase in our net debt position. The economics of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank are worth dwelling on for a moment. The starting point here is to understand what drives growth in developing countries. In the stage of development we are seeing in Asia, particularly southern Asia—China, India and Indonesia—what drives growth in these countries? There is no shortage of research. There are well-established principles from economic research about what drives growth. Ultimately, it comes down to three things. The first is infrastructure investment. There is no question that, in the absence of infrastructure investment, you do not see the productivity gains that are necessary to take a country from poverty to lower middle-class to middle-class to the sort of wealth and incomes that we have in Australia today. Infrastructure is absolutely essential. The second is institutional development. We know that is absolutely critical. This means the development of institutions that are not corrupt, that are transparent, that are accountable and that, therefore, deliver to customers and citizens in a way that may not be the case when a country has very immature institutions. That institutional development is central. We know that, without it, we do not see the sort of growth that we have seen in Australia and throughout the Western world over the last several hundred years. The third is innovation. That is the area where the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank can do the least. But it must be remembered that innovation in developing countries these days is largely about taking proven ideas from the West and rolling them out in developing countries. That innovation can be aided significantly by well-targeted infrastructure investment. We know that the economic growth story based on infrastructure, institutions and innovation will have huge benefits for Australia. We have already seen the evidence of that over the last 15 years. When a country goes from an income of about $2,000 per capita up to $10,000 it is in an early stage of growth where much of that growth is driven by physical infrastructure development. That is: engineering construction in bridges, roads, railways and airports; residential construction in housing—in Asia that has largely been apartment based housing; and commercial construction, which is office buildings, shops and so on. All three of those sorts of developments require large amounts of iron ore and metallurgical coal. They have been extremely profitable exports for Australia, and they will continue to be for many years to come if we continue to see the growth in the early stage of development that we have seen in China reflected not just in the western provinces of China, where it is still continuing today at a rapid rate—about 15 million to 20 million people are being urbanised each year—but also in countries such as Indonesia and India, where we know the infrastructure deficit is absolutely enormous. The other export that benefits hugely from that shift from $2,000 per capita to $10,000 is copper. We are a significant producer of copper here in Australia. Copper goes into homes and appliances, and there is heavy use of it in that early stage of development. As we move up from $10,000 per capita to $20,000 per capita or higher we see a shift in demand. There are two areas in particular where we stand to benefit enormously if we can support growth. The first is food. While someone on an income of a couple of thousand dollars per year will tend to eat carbohydrates, as they move up to $10,000 or $20,000 a year in income, they will shift their diet towards proteins, oils, sugar and fruit and vegetables. We stand to gain enormously as China moves into that zone in the next couple of years. It is happening now. We also stand to gain enormously as other countries throughout the region—such as Indonesia and India—start moving up towards that level where their consumption of food shifts from staple carbohydrates. We gain benefits from the staple carbohydrates, but we will shift to much greater benefits as they move to protein, sugar, oils and fruit and vegetables. Each country throughout Asia is at a different stage in their development. Of course, Korea and Japan are furthest advanced. That is why they provide such great opportunities for us in food exports. China is well back, but even further back is India. With a population of well over a billion people, India offers us enormous prospects, as does Indonesia. Given that story, it is critical, from our point of view, that we see the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank focus on investment in the infrastructure and institutional development that is going to allow that rapid growth of income per person in the coming years throughout the countries of Asia. Within that context, the free trade agreements that we have negotiated with Japan, Korea and—of course, the big one—China are enormously important. In the mining boom clearly much of the benefit came without additional free trade agreements. The most important free trade agreement we had was on iron ore with the Japanese in opening up the Pilbara in the 1960s. We did not need new free trade agreements for massive growth in our exports of iron ore, coal and copper over recent years, but we do for food. We absolutely need these free trade agreements to tap into that food opportunity that we see coming at us at a rapid rate. Those opposite—and I know it is not all of them—who blockade and get in the way of these free trade agreements needs to eyeball every one of those farmers who are increasing their income through feeding Asia. This is, quite seriously, the worst piece of economic vandalism I have seen. Australia has not gone down this path of looking inwards for a long, long time. In fact, Hawke and Keating, to their credit, were extraordinary leaders in this country in opening up the country to exports, and what we are seeing from those opposite is a turnaround, a change, as they become subservient to a union movement that does not care about the interest of the average Australian and certainly does not care about the farmers of Australia. I will not stand for it. I will work closely with the farmers of Australia to make sure the CFMEU's scare campaign based on absolute lies is revealed for what it really is, which is an attempt by those opposite to get into power at the expense of Australia's long-term interest, short-term interest and medium-term interest, and the interest of every Australian who works hard every day to export products into Asian countries that desperately need our food. Closer to home, I was extremely privileged to welcome the Prime Minister, the trade minister and the agriculture minister to a property at Yass in my electorate yesterday. Bellevale is owned by Brendan and Rowena Abbey. They are local cattle producers and they are enjoying great success producing beef cattle for live export to China. The Abbeys have been exporting Angus heifers to China for four years, many grown on their Yass property. They stand, as so many farmers do, to benefit greatly from the China free trade agreement. And so they should, because this is an opportunity for Australian farmers the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime—and I will not stand for the CFMEU getting between us and that opportunity. In the words of trade minister, Andrew Robb: The kind of investment the Abbeys are putting in to their business is a great sign of the return of confidence in the rural sector—their cattle have gone up in value every month for the past seven or eight months. The Free Trade Agreement with China will be fundamental to their success and the success of thousands of farmers— tens of thousands of farmers— in all sorts of areas of agriculture. Australia is poised on the edge of an opportunity that we have not seen since the 19th century. Those opposite are in the way. It is time for us to stand up for Australia's long-term prosperity, its medium-term prosperity and the short-term benefit of every Australian citizen by saying, 'We will not accept what they are attempting to do.' The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is an important part of encouraging growth and wealth creation in Asia that will benefit all of us. I strongly commend this bill to the House. 13:03 Mr SIMPKINS HWE Cowan I welcome this unexpected but great opportunity to speak today on this bill, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015. I do not think there is any doubt that this country sees its future with the best possible involvement in Asia, with its developing markets, the developing middle class that we hear so much about and the scale of humanity looking for the goods and services that this country can provide. This is in many ways the niche that this country—this small country by comparison—can fill through its trade arrangements. I said 'goods and services'. It is not just iron ore and gas; it is a wide range of services beyond that; it is our agriculture as well, of course. This is about the opportunities ahead, and I welcome the fact that the government and the minister have embraced this opportunity to participate as part of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. I also welcome the way it was done. These are not things to be rushed into. These are not things to just blindly jump into. Things need to be assessed. There needs to be appropriate consideration of the ramifications. Obviously, around the world not everyone was in favour of this, and so I think it was very wise that we did not just jump in. We gave it due consideration and we came to the view in the end that it was the right thing to do. It was the right thing to do because this dovetails so well into the government's efforts with regard to free trade agreements. We have a great future for Australian jobs that will be developed out of the China free trade agreement, the agreement with Japan and the South Korean free trade agreement. But, beyond these major trading partners, who will become even more important and will help contribute to the prosperity of this country and the lives and the jobs of Australians in the future, precisely in this case, with the development of infrastructure throughout South Asia, South-East Asia and beyond, the benefits will come from exactly this sort of investment. We want to be able to have the same trade opportunities that we have with China, Japan and South Korea for the future. The investment we make is an investment as much for the future of Asia as for the future of Australians. There are children being born right now in this country whose future employment prospects will absolutely depend and be benefited by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and, of course, by the efforts of this government with regard to the Chinese free trade agreement and, as I said, the South Korea and Japan free trade agreements. We look forward to more and more opportunities of this kind; there is no doubt about it. Yesterday, when debate resumed on this bill, I had the unfortunate experience of having to listen to the contribution by the shadow Treasurer, raving in a strident and grating manner about how quickly the opposition jumped on board with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. He derided the Treasurer for the accurate claim—but he still derided him—that the Treasurer had been the first one to sign. So that there is no doubt: was the Treasurer the first to sign? Yes, he was. Any allegation to the contrary is completely false. Unfortunately, there was more than just that to the shadow Treasurer's contribution. It was tragic, really, to see the shadow Treasurer talking all about this bill and avoiding at all possible cost any mention of the Chinese free trade agreement. But we need to see these things in the larger context. The Chinese free trade agreement is very important to this country, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and other outcomes of this bill will be important for the future of this country—and they dovetail. There is no doubt about it. But we do not have a clear line from the other side of this House on the Chinese free trade agreement. Personally, I suspect they are against it because their pre-selectors, the people who tell Labor candidates whether they get to stay in the seats they have been selected for, like the CFMEU and other unions, make those decisions. They are the key players in that matter. So the view of those opposite on the free trade agreement is unclear. I am sure they are just being given their instructions, their orders, by the people who are influential in their preselections. That is, unfortunately, always the way of the Labor Party. On this side, we know that the Chinese free trade agreement is good for this country. We reject the lies told by the CFMEU, Get Up! and other left-wing partisan organisations, because we know that in the future the benefits for this country will be great and the benefits for future generations will be great. As the father of two girls I look forward to being able to give them better job opportunities, through the Chinese free trade agreement and through the benefits to this nation of trade in the region provided by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. I look forward to those opportunities being there for my children and their children and, of course, everybody in this country—the children of today and future generations of Australians. It is the duty of this place to deliver the best possible future for Australians, not just think of the here and now, not just think of the short-term preselection opportunities, as one side of this House does, but think about what is at stake and what opportunities there are. I want to see growth in the agricultural sector. I want to see growth in manufacturing. I want to see growth in shipbuilding in this country, as well. In Western Australia, we have a most excellent organisation, a most excellent business, Austal, that does great work in the construction of ships, not just here in this country but also at their works in Alabama. On that side of things, the government have another good story to tell. We are in the business of providing a great future for shipbuilding in this country. Whereas those opposite, during their six years in government, did nothing but export shipbuilding to other countries, we actually believe in it. So it is good that, through Austal and other shipbuilders in other places around this country, the future of shipbuilding is locked in, and it is locked in because of the efforts of this government. I applaud that and I look forward to seeing more and more jobs, and jobs for the future, for Australians. It is not just about the shipbuilding. It is also about the goods and services, such as providing aged-care services in the future in the region. There are so many chances for us to make good decisions so that Australians can fully participate in exporting to and interacting with Asia. We need the best, most positive attitude towards our neighbours. We have to believe in them as they believe in us and we have to be prepared to negotiate and work with them. Bills such as this one and the Chinese free trade agreement are acknowledgements of mutual respect and the interdependent trade relationship between us and our great trading partners, even future trading partners in Asia. It is often said in this place that national security is the first priority of any government, and I think that is absolutely true. But we must also look to a prosperous future for this country. The free trade agreements that have been so successfully negotiated by this government, through the great work of the minister for trade; and, now, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank highlight such opportunities and are the right decisions for this country. I very much look forward to those benefits flowing down to our children and future generations for a much better and economically stronger Australia. 13:14 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes It is a great pleasure to follow the member for Cowan, the member for Hindmarsh, the member for Banks, the member for Barton and the member for Hume, who have spoken on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 for the coalition this morning. I would like to associate myself with all their comments. I would like to add a few other points on why Australia being part of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is most important. Back in 2013 the World Bank, which for decades had been financing infrastructure in many of the poorer Third World countries on this planet, made the decision that they would no longer fund coal fired power stations in developing countries. This was a most disgraceful decision. It has condemned millions of citizens in the Third World to poverty and a premature death. Unless there is no equal or superior alternative to a coal fired power station, the World Bank, by denying the funding to people in the Third World, have simply condemned millions to a premature death. This is a life-and-death issue. I would like to read into Hansard a story about why funding for coal fired power stations is important—something that the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will likely do. This is a passage by a lady called Kathryn Hall and it is called 'Kathryn's Story'. It is in 'Power Up Gambia'. This is an example of what happens when rich Western countries decide to deny countries in the Third World cheap, reliable sources of power: At 4 p.m. on a Saturday afternoon, I was startled when the lights came on; the lights never came on after 2 p.m. on the weekends. The adrenaline really kicked in when I was invited to observe an emergency cesarean section - a first for me. When the infant emerged I felt my heart racing from excitement and awe! But no matter how many times the technician suctioned out the nose and mouth, the infant did not utter a sound. After twenty five minutes the technician and nurse both gave up. The surgeon later explained that the baby had suffocated in utero. If only they had had enough power to use the ultrasound machine for each pregnancy, he would have detected the problem earlier and been able to plan the C-section. Without early detection, the C-section became an emergency, moreover, the surgery had to wait for the generator to be powered on. The loss of precious minutes meant the loss of a precious life. At that time, in that place, all I could do was cry. And later, when the maternity ward was too hushed, I cried again. A full-term infant was born weighing only 3.5 pounds. In the U.S., the solution would have been obvious and effective: incubation. But without reliable electricity, the hospital did not even contemplate owning an incubator. This seemingly simple solution was not available to this newborn girl, and she perished needlessly. Reliable electricity is at the forefront of every staff members' thoughts. With it, they can conduct tests with electrically powered medical equipment, use vaccines and antibiotics requiring refrigeration, and plan surgeries to meet patient's needs. Without it, they will continue to give their patients the best care available, but in a country with an average life expectancy of only 54 years of age, it's a hard fight to win. That is why we should be supporting the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. They will break the policies of the World Bank and they will loan for coal fired power stations in the Third World. If there is any doubt about this, I refer you to an article written by an Indian gentleman, Rupa Subramanya, at foreignpolicy.com. Under the heading 'Is the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Good for India?' he writes: The AIIB aims to supplant or at least challenge … the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). For India, in particular, AIIB may have a significant impact on the energy choices available, by lifting Western-imposed constraints on how the World Bank lends. …   …   … … the AIIB, if it takes off, could power billions of dollars of much needed infrastructure development throughout the region. …   …   … … in a … economic sense, the … AIIB … may well be beneficial for India. The crux is coal.    …   …   … One of the reasons India has embraced the AIIB is almost surely the fact that the country hopes to receive development finance for its coal-powered electricity generation. The Indian government has indicated it would like to increase renewable energy capacity, but it has reiterated that, to meet the country's development needs, coal-fired power generation will have to be significantly stepped up. It's in India’s interests to use the AIIB to help spur this growth. That is a fantastic reason why we here in Australia should support the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. There are currently 300 million people in India that have no access to electricity whatsoever. By being able to provide them with access to electricity, we give them an economic opportunity. It is simply immoral for countries in the rich West, where people live an opulent lifestyle because of coal fired power generation and because of our free market capitalist system, to try and deny those same opportunities to people in the Third World. Therefore, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank should take on the World Bank and make sure these vital investments go to people in the Third World and they are given the economic opportunity to advance. Another reason why Australia being part of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is important is to do with our relationship with China. That has been a subject in this debate for people on both sides of this House. The Chinese economy is growing every year. Its GDP is growing by almost $1 trillion. We need to have the faith in our Australian businesses, our Australian industries, our Australian people—the confidence in their skills, their abilities, their entrepreneurial 'get up and go'—to go out and to compete and to grab some of that market share. We are not the only country that is trying to export more product into China, but having the free trade agreement puts our exporters and our nation at the forefront. This is a vital moment in our nation's history. The opportunity for all businesses to leverage into that Chinese market and take advantage of it through the China free trade agreement is an opportunity this nation cannot miss. Yet, in one of the most shameful actions I have ever seen in this nation, the CFMEU and other unions are running around telling nothing other than bald-faced lies about this free trade agreement. This is the most disgraceful and despicable and anti-Australian campaign—a xenophobic campaign—that I have ever seen in my lifetime. What is most disappointing about this is that those on the other side are silent and refuse to condemn it. I see the member for Rankin sitting at the table. I am sure that in his heart of hearts he is ashamed of that CFMEU and union campaign. I am sure in his heart of hearts he knows that we will create more higher paying jobs if this free trade agreement goes ahead and yet, because of their ties to the union movement, members on that side will not stand up and condemn this union activity. I condemn it in this parliament here today. I say it is economic vandalism. I say it is sabotage. I say it is treasonous and against the interests of our nation. I know many of those on the other side of the parliament have to do as they are told by the CFMEU and their union bosses, but I would hope that they have the courage to put the interests of this nation first, to put the interests of jobs first and to put the interests of higher incomes first because those higher incomes are what will help flow extra revenue into the government treasuries that will pay for all our much-needed social services and social security. If you want more money spent on education, if you want more money spent on health, if you want more money spent on our disabled, if you want more money spent on our aged care, the answer is simple—you have to get behind and support free trade. You have to stand up and condemn this CFMEU-led misleading campaign of deception. It is completely against our national interests. We have seen some of the figures already. In the last several years 100,000 jobs have been created for people involved in direct export to China. This should be the tip of the iceberg. Those of us on both sides come into this parliament and say we want to create more opportunities for people in this country. We say we want to create more jobs and we say we want to create higher-earning jobs. The answer is simple—we need to leverage the opportunities that present themselves in that growing and wealthy region—not only China but also Japan and South Korea, with whom we have also signed free trade agreements. We are on a dangerous path towards our nation's future. We have one road to go down where we can take advantage of these opportunities. We can increase the wealth of this nation, we can increase the number of jobs, or we can go down a dark road of trying to close down our economy to look after the interests of a few union bosses. This is the crossroads we stand at today. I would hope over the next two-week break all good members on the other side of the chamber look into their conscience and stand up against this union campaign. Call it out for what it is—call out the lies, call out the deceptions. If you do, you will be doing your constituents a favour; you will be doing a favour to this Australian nation. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank gives us enormous opportunities in many countries other than China. We need to look to the future. We need to look also at what we can export to and how we can increase our trade with the growing economy of India. We have so many close ties with India. The ability of the Australian nation to increase our wealth, to increase our prosperity, through trade with countries like India also cannot be underestimated in any way. Many people in the world live in abject poverty today, throughout South-East Asia and throughout Africa. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which Australia is part of, will hopefully free up resources, free up dollars, so that these countries can have better infrastructure. We can give these people opportunities because prosperity is an upward spiral. As we have seen with countries like China, as they increase their wealth and prosperity, as they improve their infrastructure, it rebounds to us because they buy more of our goods and services. They are more likely to travel to Australia, so our tourism industry can get greater returns. These are things that we should be encouraging. I hope, as I said, that members on the other side of the chamber have a good look at themselves over the next fortnight and that when they come back to this parliament in a fortnight's time they will call-out this misleading, this deceptive, this treacherous union advertising campaign of falsehoods. We owe that to the Australian people. I commend the bill to the House. 13:28 Ms MacTIERNAN L6P Perth Labor unequivocally supports the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill. In fact, we were early adopters of this measure so we will not be lectured by that side; they had to be dragged screaming to the table to support it. We want to work with China, we want to work with our Asian neighbours, to ensure that they have the capacity to go forward. But we will not sacrifice Australian jobs and we ask those opposite not to use the label 'xenophobia', not to bandy that around, but to start reading this agreement, start looking at what the consequences of this agreement are. Look at clause 4 of the memorandum of understanding—look at it and understand that what is happening here is a massive change in the landscape for Australia workers. Mr Craig Kelly 99931 Mr Deputy Speaker, I ask the member for Perth whether she will accept an intervention The DEPUTY SPEAKER YT4 No. It being 1.30 pm, 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 leave to continue her remarks when the debate is resumed. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 44 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Agriculture 44 13:30 Ms McGOWAN 123674 Indi Last week the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture and Industry announced an inquiry into innovation and productivity in agriculture. We all know that people are the key to innovation and increased productivity. In Australia, one of the greatest opportunities for innovation and getting low-cost high returns is through working with all partners in the farming business. Today it gives me great pleasure to welcome to Parliament House two members of a group that do this work more efficiently and more effectively than most others. To Ilse Mathews and Alison Brinson, members of the Yarra Ranges women in horticulture group: welcome to Parliament House and thank you for the work that you do. Australian horticulture and other groups can take a lead role in putting submissions to this inquiry. They can tell us what we need to do to increase productivity and take up innovation right across the agriculture sector to ensure that in the 21st and 22nd centuries we have thriving, vital, innovative and competitive agriculture. WinHort in Yarra Ranges and across Australia are innovators, they are educators, they are supporters, they are advocates, they are lobbyists and they organise. Today I would like to acknowledge and thank you for all the work that you have done, particularly with other founding members Carolyn Burgi and Vicki Violi. I would like to thank Horticulture Australia for the vision you have shown in leading the way and encouraging and supporting women to take up their role. My call to women in horticulture is: help all the others— (Time expired) Trade with China 44 13:32 Ms HENDERSON ZN4 Corangamite Each and every day we are a government proudly fighting for jobs and growth. The deceptive and racist campaign being run by the unions and Labor against the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, or ChAFTA, is putting at risk thousands of new jobs and agricultural exports. It is estimated that over the next 20 years the ChAFTA will deliver some 178,000 new jobs. In Corangamite, a proud farming heartland, the Labor candidate is working hand in glove with the CFMEU's dishonest campaign to destroy one of the most significant trade deals in a generation. If ChAFTA does not go ahead, it will rob farmers of millions of dollars in export income. Between 2008 and 2013, New Zealand's free trade agreement with China delivered increased dairy export revenue of $3.7 billion. In the same period Australian dairy farmers received an increase of only $173 million. Meat and Livestock Australia and the Australian Meat Industry Council, representing processors, say that the ChAFTA has the potential to increase the gross value of beef production by $270 million annually by 2024. By 2030, the total benefits for beef will approach $3.3 billion. Under the ChAFTA, dairy tariffs will be abolished and Australia's beef and sheep farmers will also have great benefits. This free trade agreement is vital for Australian farmers and for Australian jobs. Trade with China 45 13:33 Mr GRAY 8W5 Brand It is interesting to hear members opposite talk about the China free trade agreement. It is an important agreement and it is an important agreement for Western Australia. The China relationship, in commercial terms, is a Western Australian relationship. We are the ones with the opportunity to underpin the export future of our nation through what we do with our iron ore, our bauxite, our alumina, our grain crops and our protein exports through seafood, beef, cattle and sheep. The interesting thing about the China free trade agreement is that the government cannot help but wrap it up with all the strings of politics as often as it possibly can. We on this side want to support this agreement; members on that side need to understand community concern about the impact on people movement that comes through this agreement. I am the person—single in this place—who stood in favour of overseas workers supporting the construction side of our resources sector at a time when it was harder than anything that members opposite have ever faced. All members opposite can do is try to wrap up this important free trade agreement with every string that they can find attached to people movements, when we in this parliament should be arguing for this free trade agreement. It is fundamentally about Western Australia, about Western Australian jobs and about Western Australia's future—and members opposite should get behind it for the nature of the reforms that it represents and the beneficial impact it will have on the jobs and the employment of the future in Western Australia. Thomson, Mr Fergus, OAM 45 13:35 Dr HENDY 00BCM Eden-Monaro During the winter break, my electorate of Eden-Monaro lost one of its finest citizens. On the morning of 24 July, Eurobodalla councillor and former mayor Fergus Thomson OAM passed away peacefully at his Belowra home surrounded by his family. Fergus was an important part of our community and worked tirelessly for the people of Eurobodalla. He was well loved and known throughout our community for his long commitment to public service. He was elected to the Eurobodalla Shire Council in April 2004 and served proudly and diligently as mayor until September 2005 and then again from 2008 to 2012. We remember him not only for his service in local government but also for his lifelong commitment to Surf Life Saving and—less publicly known—for all those lives he touched through his kindness and dedication. Even through illness, his commitment to helping others was undiminished. I know that current Mayor Lindsay Brown would not mind me relating to the House that, even while battling a brain tumour, Fergus showed great concern for others, including Mayor Brown whilst he was undergoing treatment for prostate cancer. The high regard in which he was held was clearly evident in the hundreds of council employees who formed an honour guard as Fergus made his final trip past the council chambers. We will long benefit from Fergus's service to our community through the enduring legacy of his good work. I offer my condolences to his wife, Yvonne, and sons, Brendan and James. Vale Fergus Thomson. Employment 45 13:36 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I rise to express my concern about this government's lack of action when it comes to jobs, especially in my home state of South Australia. We heard the Treasurer get up and say, 'There is more to be done.' Well, yes, there is more to be done! With 800,000 people unemployed, this government chasing the car industry out of South Australia and now failing to commit to proper shipbuilding in South Australia and with 7.9 per cent unemployment in South Australia, what we have from this government is a whole lot of hollow words. The Prime Minister comes to South Australia and says hollow words to the people of South Australia. Today in TheAdvertiser the truth has come out. The government is not going to be spending $89 billion. Indeed, it looks like the amount it is going to spend is $8 billion. Already 200-plus jobs have been lost from ASC. It is time that this government got real and stopped making hollow promises about jobs to South Australia and start acting. Of course, we have seen from this government no support for the car industry. Indeed, they want to get rid of support when it comes to component manufacturing—and there are many component manufacturers in my electorate. The components manufacturers need support to transition. Even Nick Minchin, one of the most conservative advocates on that side of the parliament when he was here, is pro support for the car industry. Why won't this Prime Minister stand up for jobs in South Australia, rather than just walking away from our state? Page Electorate: Rugby League 46 13:38 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page An election commitment I gave was for new goalposts for McKittrick Park. I must say that I had an attempt at kicking the first goal at the opening game this season, which was a very unflattering attempt. They are going to come in for much better use this weekend, because McKittrick Park will be the venue for the Group 2 Rugby League grand final. It has been 40 years since a grand final has been played at the iconic McKittrick Park. The South Grafton Rebels are taking on the Coffs Harbour Comets. So to the coach, Dallas Smith, and the players Ian Leota, Steven Walker, Tom Grady, Jeff Skeen, Karl Woodley, Josh Harris, Grant Stevens, Dwayne Duke, Hughie Stanley, Jordan Walker, Oral Monaghan, Rhys Walters, the captain, Luke Welch, Anthony Cowan, Chris Carr, Malcolm Webster, Roy Bell, Nick McGrady and Brett Woods, you can be assured that we will all be barracking for you this weekend. It is going to be a big weekend. Local businesses are being asked to dress up in red and white. The game starts at 2.30 and I encourage people to get along, if they can—and go the Rebels! This Saturday, the Wollongbar Alstonville Rugby Old Boys are having a fundraiser this Saturday. We have a guy, Dave Allen, who is running around Australia to raise money for the White Cloud Foundation, which is supporting Australians suffering from depression and anxiety. That will be happening on the Wollongbar rugby field this Saturday, and I would encourage people to attend. Employment 46 13:39 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I rise to join my colleagues today to talk about the jobs crisis in this country. There are 800,000 unemployed Australians, as we stand here today. This is the highest number of unemployed Australians for 20 years. I have in my western suburban heart burned in my memory the Treasurer standing just there, in this parliament, daring Holden to leave this country and, with unemployment in the west of Melbourne, leading our electorates down the garden path. Unemployment in Lalor sits at 7.2 per cent—much higher than the Melbourne average of 6.5 per cent. This is an increase of 1.2 per cent in the last year under this government. Many of these unemployed, 5,800 more were unemployed in the last 12 months, are young people. I was on the phone yesterday to someone who has worked in the west of Melbourne and run a company in the west of Melbourne for 30 years. His words to me were: 'The western suburbs are a ghost town now in terms of industry. The jobs aren't there.' This government needs to get on its bike and get to work. Petrie Electorate: Education 46 13:41 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie I was delighted to attend the National Science Week launch at St Benedict's College, Mango Hill, last week. It is now more important than ever to get students engaged in science, technology, engineering and maths, because I am advised some 75 per cent of the fastest growing occupations require these STEM skills. I would like to thank St Benedict's Science Curriculum Leader, Tracey Mortimer, who is clearly committed to providing excellent educational outcomes for her students. Thanks also to Allison Golsby, the STEM professional, who has been working with the students in a mentoring capacity. St Benedict's College at Mango Hill has a phenomenal robotics program, which is increasing students' strengths and interests in technology. As a federal government, we have been able to deliver more than $600,000 for St Benedict's through the Capital Grants Program. This has provided new student facilities, including four new science labs. On top of this, the federal government is increasing funding to education by some $876 million over four years. As our science minister said last week: Science is critical for jobs, growth and business success. It underpins our nation’s innovation capacity. This is important because today’s innovation is tomorrow’s industry and tomorrow’s jobs. Employment 46 13:42 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I stand today to reflect on the number of people who are currently unemployed in Australia. More than 800,000 people are now without a job. When the Abbott Liberal government was elected that figure was 686,500. It means that, under this government, unemployment is now up to 175 people a day. This government wants to talk about jobs, but let us have a little think about that. What plan has been put on the table for Australian jobs or Australian industry? We know there is a plan out there at the moment; it is called the draft report of the Productivity Commission. In that draft report we see a recommendation for a two-tiered penalty system to create a two-tiered system of workers in Australia. It is all right. We are going to say to those people who are working in hospitality and retail: 'You're not actually worth being paid a sustainable wage. We'll be chopping your penalty rates, whilst trying to protect those others that the government thinks are worthy of protection. It's picking winners and losers here.' What I would say to the nurses, the firefighters and the other essential workers whose wages are not going to be allegedly cut this first time around: 'How could you trust this government? How could you trust it?' If you look at the track record of the broken promises and the pain inflicted by this government, you would have to say: it can't be trusted. Mobile Phone Services 47 13:44 Mr HUTCHINSON 212585 Lyons I want to talk about the Mobile Black Spot Program. It was a most important issue in my electorate—a regional electorate in Tasmania. I was very pleased prior to the election, when, Malcolm Turnbull, while in opposition, announced $100 million for the opportunity for communities in regional Australia to be able to plug those black holes. I thank the Minister for Communications, I thank the great work of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications, and I particularly thank my office staff. They did an extraordinary job, with local government contributions, in identifying over 155 black spots within the electorate of Lyons. Extraordinarily, after that good work, we were able to achieve $5.2 million being spent in my electorate, out of that $100 million. Thanks to contributions by the state government, local councils and, of course, the commercial carriers—in this case Vodafone and Telstra—the total investment in my electorate is over $12.6 million. Vital infrastructure and, indeed, most welcome: 19 base stations and 50 unique locations effectively addressing 65 of these 155 identified black spots. East of Oatlands, the communities of Stonor, Whitefoord, Baden, Tunnack, Mount Seymour, Mole Creek and Chudleigh; those as Rossarden, Pyengana, Goulds Country and Goshen; much of the east coast and the south-east coast along the Tasman Highway; Bothwell and the Central Highlands will all benefit from the 19 new towers. It is a well-run program, a well-designed program and a fantastic reward for my community. Employment 47 13:46 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin You could not make it up. This week in question time we have been hearing from government members—in particular ministers like the Treasurer—trying to talk up this government's record on jobs. The hubris has been just astounding, and the shamelessness is just disgraceful. This would be funny if the human consequences were not so severe. It is telling that, through the statistics that get recited from across the chamber, we do not hear a couple of things. We do not hear about the 800,000 people presently unemployed in Australia. We do not hear those opposite utter the unemployment rate—a number with a six in front of it, Parliamentary Secretary Tudge, in contrast to our record during the depths of the global financial crisis. We discovered today more evidence from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare about the impact on young Australians. People's lives are being treated as disposable. The unemployment rate for young Australians is 13.3 per cent. It is over 20 per cent in parts of my electorate. What is worse than the government's hubris is its neglect of the future. We still do not have a plan for jobs. Saying the word over and over again is no substitute for investing in young people. It is no substitute for investing in the industries of the future. It is no substitute for listening to the concerns of my constituents, the member for Lalor's constituents and the member for Newcastle's constituents and giving them the voice that they deserve in this parliament on the issues that matter the most. Council on the Ageing Northern Territory 47 13:47 Mrs GRIGGS 220370 Solomon I rise today to commend the good work that the Northern Territory branch of the Council of the Ageing, or COTA, has done. I have enjoyed working with COTA over the last few years and have seen firsthand the tireless effort that they have put into advocating on behalf of senior Territorians. Just yesterday they ran a seniors expo in Darwin and, by all accounts, it was very successful. The event attracted stallholders from across the spectrum of the community. There were advocacy groups and care providers, and there was also an excellent program of speakers and entertainers. For the hundreds of seniors who attended, it was a fantastic opportunity to access and find out about the broad range of services available to them. Also, I am told that it was a great social occasion. Previously COTA had also run NBN information sessions to help the older residents of Darwin and Palmerston get connected. I would like to acknowledge the work they have done in running seniors rights workshops as well. To Graeme Bevis, Dean Dempsey, Stephanie Kendall and all the crew down at Spillett House, I want to say: Territorians owe you gratitude and thanks. Thank you for the excellent work that you do on behalf senior Territorians. I am just sorry that I was not able to be at your expo yesterday, but my very excellent staff were there. You put on a good outcome. Thank you very much. Defence Procurement 48 13:49 Ms MacTIERNAN L6P Perth Yesterday, the Minister for Defence said that everyone except the opposition was happy with the government's announcements on the naval rebuild. Members will recall that, when in Adelaide, the Prime Minister said that the offshore patrol vessels would be built there. The following day, in Melbourne, he said that they would start in Adelaide and they would then move to Melbourne. Members, let me tell you there are very many unhappy vegemites over in the West. Let us start with the blue team's own senator, Linda Reynolds, who said she was disappointed underperforming states were being propped up at WA's expense. She said: Major defence projects like the procurement of naval vessels must be awarded on merit and States should not rely on the projects as yet another form of economic subsidy. Today, Deidre Willmott, the CEO of the WA CCI—not a known Labor person—said this: As the sun sets on the Australian car industry, the fear is the Federal Government may be tempted to make an important defence decision based on the location of a legacy industry. This would be a mistake. What WA wants is not a handout but an open process that will allow our world-class naval facilities at Henderson to be given the opportunity to compete without a preordained outcome. The people of Canning will want to know: are WA industry and WA workers are going to be given a fair go? (Time expired) Leader of the Opposition 48 13:50 Dr JENSEN DYN Tangney Last Monday, the Leader of the Opposition set out his vision for Australia's science future: announcement after announcement of uncosted, pie-in-the-sky good ideas wrapped up in feel good statements. That is not a plan. That is a shopping list for votes: commitments to creating a $500 million smart investment fund, to boosting existing teacher science skills, to providing 25,000 teaching scholarships over five years to science and technology graduates, and to writing off the HECS debt of 100,000 STEM students. The Leader of the Opposition's vision to write off the debts of science students, will only write in an even bigger number to our national debt. This is in addition to a promise to reduce the small business tax rate to 25 per cent. These measures sum to over A$40 billion—or the GDP of Jamaica, Zimbabwe and PNG combined. This will lead to universities and others seeking money to redefine science. I can see it now: a Bachelor of Science in English. Regarding science and other people's money, it is time to be responsible not reckless. Defence Procurement, Employment 48 13:51 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin At a time when unemployment is rising, the only jobs that the Prime Minister is fighting for are his own and that of his Liberal colleagues in this parliament. Having killed off Australia's car makers, the Abbott government followed on by trashing Australia's naval shipbuilders. Two weeks ago, in a desperate attempt to lift his political standing in South Australia, the Prime Minister came to South Australia with vague promises of a $89 billion continuous naval ship build. Days later, as the member for Perth has already pointed out, the work was promised to the Victorian shipbuilders. Yesterday, with the Canning by-election just weeks away, the Defence minister in this place effectively promised the same work to Western Australians. For South Australian ship workers, the situation is grim. They have already entered the valley of death. The fact is that no new work will start until 2018 and about another thousand jobs are going to be lost in-between now and that time. No new work has been locked in. As Chris Burns from South Australia's Defence Teaming Centre has today highlighted that, from the government's own announcement, unless the submarines are built in South Australia, only around 20 per cent of the work is likely to go to South Australia—if it ever eventuates. The Abbott government should stop playing politics with the lives of Australian workers, stop dithering with naval shipbuilding contracts and put the national interest first. Cootharinga North Queensland 48 13:53 Mr EWEN JONES 96430 Herbert Cootharinga North Queensland is a great society. It is all about inclusiveness and awareness when it comes to people with disability. They are aggressive, inventive and fun when it comes to fundraising and raising awareness—be it a cocktail party with an auction attached or a wine tree. We even had the Kelly pool world championships with a championship belt. This year, they have started to do the Kokoda Track. A little bit of it is about representing our city's close ties with a fantastic nation and our nearest neighbour, Papua New Guinea. It is also about raising awareness and raising funds for Cootharinga as we move towards the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I have two friends who have done it this year: Col Harkness and John Anderson. Col Harkness is a retired solicitor and former champion half-back for the Ross River Redskins and Johnny Anderson is still a very active journalist for the Townsville Bulletin. Both men look like they are in their 90s, but they carry on a lot younger than that. They are fairly ordinary human beings, but they do sting you for a bit of cash when it comes to support. I am proud to have supported them. I do apologise that I was not able to join them. I did pull a heart muscle just before nominations closed. Congratulations to all who supported this them and to Cootharinga. What a great organisation. Let's talk about exclusiveness and education. Canning Electorate 49 13:55 Ms PARKE HWR Fremantle The voters in Canning will go to the polls in little more than four weeks to choose a federal parliamentary representative. These are sad circumstances. Canning has lost Don Randall, who was genuinely devoted to his constituents; he was a man who was relentless in his efforts to serve the people in his electorate. Canning extends from the eastern border of my electorate and spans through significantly diverse communities and landscapes, from the outer-metropolitan hub of Armadale to the coastal beauty of Mandurah and beyond. It has hills, farms, folk festivals, rivers, tourism and even gold mining. It is a landscape I am familiar with as a person who grew up a bit further south in Donnybrook before moving to the big smoke. The people in Canning now face an important choice. They have to consider whether to support a government that has no positive agenda and is characterised by negativity and fear. They have to consider whether they are well-served by a Prime Minister who wants to reward British royals but punish hardworking and vulnerable Australians. He is a Prime Minister whose only economic achievement is to enter free trade agreements that weaken Australian job security and sovereignty and put our environmental and social protections at the mercy of international tribunals. Earlier, this year Don Randall himself found that he could not support that Prime Minister. The alternative for the people of Canning is to support Labor's forward-looking and positive vision for Australia and to support a future in which our public education and health services are strengthened, our environment is protected and our Australian jobs are increasingly sourced from the emerging industries and technologies of the 21st century. Vietnam Veterans Day 49 13:56 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright Tuesday was Vietnam Veterans Day. Originally, it was a day to commemorate the Battle of Long Tan in 1966, which was the largest single unit battle fought in Vietnam by Australian troops.    However, it is a day now when Australians pause to remember the service and sacrifice of those who fought in the Vietnam War. More than 60,000 Australian service men and women deployed to Vietnam between 1962 and 1975. We suffered 521 casualties. Many of those who survived endured great hardship during the war and returned home both physically and emotionally scarred. In my electorate, there are a number of organisations and support groups who offer an incredible amount of care for the large veteran community in my electorate. I want to acknowledge RSL and RSL sub-branches in my electorate, who do a wonderful job of supporting and advocating on behalf of Vietnam veterans. Additionally, it is important to note the terrific job that the veterans' advocacy groups do. In particular, I acknowledge the town of Canungra, where there is a rich and proud tradition of commemorating the Vietnam War and honouring those who served. I lament that I was unable to be with the residents and RSL members of Canungra on Tuesday as they commemorate Vietnam Veterans Day. However, earlier this month I did have the pleasure of attending a celebration in honour of the 53rd anniversary and reunion of the Australian Army Training Team Vietnam association at Canungra. It was a great day that saw old friends reunite and look back on their time in the war, both the good times and the bad. I was honoured to be amongst such brave men and I spoke about the government's plans to repatriate the bodies of 25 Australian Vietnam veteran soldiers buried in Terendak Camp and Singapore cemeteries. (Time expired) Trade with China 49 13:58 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Last year, the Prime Minister promised he would keep labour market testing under Australia's temporary skilled migration program. Labor market testing requires employers to advertise jobs to Australians before turning to overseas workers. The Prime Minister has broken his promise in his China FTA and now he has given parliament information that is factually wrong. Yesterday, he was asked why the FTA's memorandum of understanding on investment facilitation arrangements—IFAs—states: … there will be no requirement for labour market testing to enter into an [Investment Facilitation Arrangement]. The Prime Minister's answer was because it: … goes on to say that there will be labour market testing before people are actually employed. The IFA memorandum of understanding does not go on to say that. It says that when employers on IFA projects enter labour agreements with the government, these agreements may include labour market testing requirements. The China FTA turns labour market testing on IFA projects into an optional extra rather than a legislated safeguard. It also completely excludes labour market testing for several categories of workers, including contractual service suppliers, installers and servicers. This is set out very clearly in chapter 10 of the FTA, which states: Neither party shall … require labour market testing … This side of the House supports a high-quality deal with China. The Prime Minister either does not know what is in his agreement or he is deliberately misleading this House about its contents. The SPEAKER 10000 It being almost 2 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 50 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Employment 50 14:00 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister: if the last two years have been about jobs and growth, why is unemployment up and growth right down? Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 Those on my right will cease interjecting. 14:00 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah That question is as false and misleading as the statement that we heard earlier from the member for Rankin. It is a false and misleading statement— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 Members on my left will cease interjecting. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 from a Leader of the Opposition who has a general reputation for getting things wrong and for being two-faced. For the benefit of members opposite, let me remind them that in the March quarter Australia's economic growth was amongst the highest in the developed world. We were growing at a rate which was just about the highest in the developed world in the March quarter. Our growth is strong—stronger than it was under members opposite in their last year—and when it comes to jobs there are now 335,000 more jobs in our economy than there were on election night. Jobs growth now is four times the rate it was when members opposite were in charge in 2013. This is very important, because everywhere you turn the Labor Party is against jobs. It is against jobs at the Adani mine in Queensland. It is against jobs on the East West Link in Melbourne. It is against the China free trade agreement, which will create jobs. Everywhere you look, the Labor Party is against jobs, because the only thing the Labor Party is interested in these days is protecting union rackets and appeasing the Greens. Mr Shorten 00ATG Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table the ABS data that shows the Prime Minister has increased unemployment in Australia. The SPEAKER 10000 Is leave granted? Leave not granted. Trade with China 50 14:02 Ms HENDERSON ZN4 Corangamite Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, and may I also congratulate you on your appointment as Speaker. My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister update the House on how the free trade agreement between Australia and China will boost jobs and growth? What has been the response to this important agreement? 14:02 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah I thank the member for Corangamite for her question. There are certainly businesses in her electorate, like Bulla Dairy and the Australian Lamb Company, which are in a position to take advantage of the China free trade agreement, which will be a jobs and growth bonanza for our country for decades to come. This will set our country up for the future. It is absolutely vital that the China free trade agreement take effect before the end of this year. It is absolutely vital that legislation to give it effect pass this parliament before the end of this year, because if the China free trade agreement comes into force before the end of the year our exporters will get two—not one, but two—tariff cuts: first, when the agreement comes into force and second, on 1 January next year. We know that the China free trade agreement gives Australia better access to this market than any other country. We know that the China free trade agreement has been the subject of economic modelling in 2005, 2008 and 2015, and we know that all that modelling came to the same conclusion: there will be more jobs and higher wages in Australia if the China free trade agreement goes ahead. How do we know? Professor the Hon. Bob Carr said so yesterday. This is what Professor the Hon. Bob Carr said yesterday: 'There will be more jobs and higher wages in Australia if the China free trade agreement goes ahead.' But still the CFMEU is running ads and making robocalls claiming that the free trade agreement is giving Australian jobs to Chinese workers. This is a racist lie. The claim of the CFMEU is a racist lie. We know that the Labor Party played the race card prior to the New South Wales election—and now it is happening again. Members opposite say they cannot control the CFMEU, but they can control their own senators. We know that the Labor Party takes the CFMEU's money, but they should never take the CFMEU's dictation. If they do take the CFMEU's dictation, the ghosts of the White Australia policy will come back to haunt the Labor Party. The Leader of the Opposition should make sure that the slime of an earlier age does not come back to contaminate this parliament. Employment 51 14:05 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister. If the last two years have been about jobs and growth, why are 30,000 more Western Australians unemployed, compared to when the Prime Minister was elected? Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 Members on my right will cease interjecting. Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Isn't this more evidence of a chaotic government with no plan for jobs? Mr Hockey interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The Treasurer will cease interjecting. 14:06 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah Members opposite were so interested in jobs in Western Australia that they hit Western Australia with a mining tax and a carbon tax. That is what members opposite thought of jobs in Western Australia—they wanted to clobber them with a mining tax and a carbon tax. Thanks to this government, the mining tax is gone, the carbon tax is gone and, thanks in part to what this government has done, our economy has 335,000 more jobs overall than it did when members opposite left. I am not saying that it is all the good work of this government. Yes, it is the good work of decent Australian workers. It is the good work of decent Australian businesses—but this government is open to business. This government wants to encourage the workers of Australia to have a go. I tell you what this government will never do. We will never conspire with the Greens to close down the Carmichael mine, to stop it ever happening. We will never conspire with the Greens to stop the East West Link and kill 10,000 jobs in Victoria. We will never conspire with the CFMEU to stop the China free trade agreement. We are better than that. We trust the Australian people. We respect the Australian workers. That is why our economy is now creating jobs at four times the rate that it did when members opposite were last in charge. Mr Shorten 00ATG I seek leave to table the data which shows there are 30,000 more unemployed West Australian since the Prime Minister got elected. Leave not granted. China-Australia Free Trade Agreement 51 14:08 Mr LAUNDY 247130 Reid My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer outline how the government is boosting jobs and growth through the free trade agreement with China in my electorate of Reid and throughout Australia? What are the threats to this historic agreement? 14:08 Mr HOCKEY DK6 North Sydney I thank the member for that question. I really do appreciate it. Mr Watts interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Gellibrand. Mr Watts interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Gellibrand is warned. Mr HOCKEY DK6 As the Prime Minister said, jobs growth in Australia is now running at 10 times the speed it was when Labor left government. Last month, there were 38,000 new jobs created. On average, in the last year of Labor there were 3,600 new jobs a month. So we are on track. Just this morning we saw some more good news. The Commonwealth Bank business sales index for July showed annual business sales growth was still very strong with sales up 7.7 per cent on a year earlier, well above the decade average of 5.3 per cent. That is great news about the Australian economy. And more great news about the Australian economy and the future of it is our commitment to the China free trade agreement. That agreement means more jobs and greater prosperity for everyday Australians wherever they are located. It means we can get more produce to market—a much bigger market. Just the growth last year in the Chinese economy was equivalent to half the size of the entire Australian economy. It illustrates the fact that they are hungry for our produce. They are hungry for the things we produce and they want to pay us well for it. The Labor Party are all over the place on this one. Their chief critic of the China free trade agreement, Senator Penny Wong, is a spokeswoman for the CFMEU. She has put out a number of different media statements about 'misleading on the China free trade agreement' and 'advertising won't fix it' and how we are being deceptive. And then, as the Prime Minister said, Professor Bob Carr put out a statement yesterday for the Australia-China Relations Institute. I have grown a great deal of respect for Professor Carr since he left politics. Mr Danby interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Melbourne Ports will cease interjecting. I have asked him three times. Mr HOCKEY DK6 Professor Carr points out in his statement that in the China FTA a memorandum of understanding on investment facilitation agreement states that 'the Australian government require that companies prove they have tried to find workers locally before seeking to bring any from China'. He says that 'if the China FTA is ratified any temporary workers that come to Australia will operate under the existing 457 visa regime'. That is the one the union's use. So the unions want to use it but they want to stop anyone else from using it. He went on to say that 'under the China free trade agreement the skill level will be assessed in exactly the same way as those from 150 other countries around the world'. Okay, what is the criticism of the Labor Party about the China free trade agreement? Their criticism is that it was not theirs. So now they are opposing the creation of thousands of jobs. Shame, Labor, shame! (Time expired) 457 Visas 52 14:11 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's answer in question time yesterday regarding labour market testing for investment facilitation agreements. He said the IFA MOU provides that 'there will be labour market testing before people are actually employed'. Isn't it correct that there is no mandatory requirement for labour market testing before people are actually employed in this MOU? Will the Prime Minister now apologise for misleading Australians? 14:12 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah I think the member that asked this question is channelling Billy Hughes and the other people who put the White Australia policy— Mr Hockey DK6 He was the member for Sydney, wasn't he? Mr ABBOTT EZ5 He was, I think, the member for Sydney. Let me quote back to the shadow minister for foreign affairs— Ms Butler interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Griffith will cease interjecting. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 the words of the former minister for foreign affairs Professor the Hon. Bob Carr. Ms Butler interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Griffith again! Mr ABBOTT EZ5 He says: 'If the China FTA is ratified any temporary workers will come to Australia under the existing 457 scheme. This scheme allows employers to access overseas workers where a genuine skills shortage exists. The Worker Protection Act 2008 also means that 457 visa holders are entitled to receive pay and conditions at least as good as Australian workers who are doing the same at the same workplace.' Exactly the same conditions as operated under members opposite, exactly the same conditions that members opposite put on the one or two rather small free trade agreements that they concluded, apply to this agreement. We have got a lot of hyperventilating from members opposite. This is the 'Project Agreement Form, Information for Employers Requesting a Project Labour Agreement, May 2015'. Let me read it for the shadow minister for foreign affairs, who does not do her homework—she wants a terrorist picnic in Syria and she thinks Africa is a country! Let me read it very slowly so the member for Sydney can hear it. Mr Bowen interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for McMahon is warned. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 I am trying to educate the slow learners over there who are haunted by the ghost of the White Australia policy. I am reading: The department will only enter into a project labour agreement where it has been satisfied that Australians have been provided first opportunity for jobs. Let's have no more racist lies from members opposite. Trade 53 14:15 Mr PALMER LQR Fairfax My question is to the Prime Minister. It was a national disgrace when Labor's pink batts scheme resulted in the deaths of Australians because unqualified workers did not meet Australian standards. When people are killed because unqualified workers from overseas come here under free trade agreements and complete work that does not meet Australian standards, will your government be responsible if any deaths occur? 14:16 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah That is a pretty squalid question, if I may say so, from a member who was quite happy to do deals with China when it suited his commercial interests to do so. Let me answer the member's question by quoting, again, Professor the Hon. Bob Carr—the former Labor Premier of New South Wales, the former Labor foreign minister of this country, and someone who would have liked to have negotiated the deal that we have actually done, but at least he has the magnanimity to call it for Australia rather than play sordid politics with our country and its future. Let me quote what Professor the Hon. Bob Carr had to say in response to the member who asked the question: 'Under the China FTA, the skill level of 457 visa applicants from China will be assessed in exactly the same way as those from 150 other countries around the world. If a 457 visa is granted, a worker from China will still need to meet any licensing and registration requirements at the federal or state level, including passing any tests or skills assessment.' Mr Conroy interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Charlton is warned. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 I say again to all members of this House, particularly members opposite who have been spreading racist lies about this agreement: stop and act in Australia's interests, just the once. Mr Perrett HVP Mr Speaker, I rise— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Moreton will resume his seat. Prime Minister, it is within order to refer to organisations or documents, but I would urge you not to refer to those opposite, because there is a long history in the Practice of that being unparliamentary. Trade with China 53 14:19 Ms MARINO HWP Forrest My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Will the minister explain how this government's free trade agreement with China will deliver jobs and growth to the services industry? Are there any risks to the realisation of these benefits? 14:19 Ms JULIE BISHOP 83P Curtin I thank the member for Forrest for her question. Her electorate includes the beautiful Margaret River, where tourism services play such a key role in the local and indeed the national economy. While the services industry represents approximately 70 per cent of Australia's gross domestic product and is responsible for employing approximately four out of five Australians, services make up less than 20 per cent of our total export value. There is obviously great potential for growth, and the China-Australia free trade agreement will be opening the door for new opportunities in the services sector, including in the tourism industry. Already our largest export market for services, worth nearly $7½ billion in 2013-14, China's services commitments represent the best package of outcomes it has provided to any foreign country. But, incredibly, Labor is threatening this agreement as it dances to the tune of its union bosses. Are we to believe that Labor is really convinced of its own dishonest assertions or is it being two-faced? You see, the Leader of the Opposition has form on free trade agreements, and it is relevant and revealing to understanding his true attitude to free trade agreements. The man that Labor wanted the Australian people to vote in as Prime Minister in 2004, one Mark Latham, apparently discussed the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement with the then union boss, now Leader of the Opposition. This is very instructive: Little Billy (Shorten) was in my ear about the (free trade agreement with the United States), telling me the party has to support it. I said that I thought both he and his union were against it, to which he responded, 'That's just for the members. We need to say that sort of thing when they reckon their jobs are under threat. Mr Danby interjecting— Ms O'Neil 140590 Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Melbourne Ports will cease interjecting. His next interjection will be his last for this day. I give the call to the member for Hotham, bearing in mind that I will not accept frivolous points of order. Ms O'Neil 140590 I do not think it is frivolous at all. The SPEAKER 10000 What is your point of order? Ms O'Neil 140590 Mr Speaker, my point of order is on relevance. The question was about the China-Australia free trade agreement— The SPEAKER 10000 There is no point of order. The member for Hotham will resume her seat. Ms O'Neil interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Hotham is warned. Ms O'Neil interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Hotham will cease interjecting. The member for Hotham is reflecting on the chair. You can reread my rulings on relevance. The minister is entirely relevant and staying on the topic of the question. She is entitled to quote from a book. You will cease interjecting. Ms JULIE BISHOP 83P Just to recap, this is the man that Labor wanted as Prime Minister of this country talking to 'little Billy Shorten'. He said: Great, the two faces of little Billy Shorten: Public Shorten against the FTA and Private Billy in favour of it … Political courage is not his long suit. Well, it is about time the Leader of the Opposition showed courage and supported jobs and supported this free trade agreement. Shipbuilding Industry 54 14:23 Mr BUTLER HWK Port Adelaide My question is to the Prime Minister. Just two weeks ago in Adelaide the Prime Minister said: What we are announcing today is basically a fleet build here in Australia, centred on SA … So why has the Defence Teaming Centre stated in today's Adelaide Advertiser that only $8 billion out of the $39 billion for ships will be spent in South Australia? Prime Minister, isn't this just another betrayal of South Australian jobs from a chaotic government? Mr Dutton interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The Minister for Immigration and Border protection will cease interjecting! Ms Plibersek interjecting— The SPEAKER 10000 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting! 14:24 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah It is false and misleading information; it is as simple as that. The Advertiser, which is a respectable newspaper, has been fed false and misleading information by the Defence Teaming Centre. I want to make it absolutely crystal clear that, when this government said that we would spend some $89 billion on fleet building, we were talking about acquisition, not sustainment. We were talking about acquisition. Almost $40 billion will be spent on a fleet build centred in Adelaide on acquisition. It is not on acquisition and sustainment; it is on acquisition. I will tell you what we have done which members opposite could never do. Let's not forget that members opposite did not place a single naval shipbuilding order with an Australian yard in six years. In six long, wasted years, in six years given up for the locusts to eat when it comes to Defence naval shipbuilding, they did not place one single naval shipbuilding order with an Australian yard. To help fill the valley of death that Labor created, we have brought forward the offshore patrol vessel or corvette build by two years. It will start in three years time—likely in Adelaide. We have brought forward by three years the future frigate order. By 2020 those frigates will be being built in Adelaide. We have offered a future in South Australia for naval shipbuilding in Australia. Ms Kate Ellis DZU Twelve submarines. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 I hear the cry, 'Submarines.' Ms Kate Ellis DZU Twelve submarines. The SPEAKER 10000 The member for Adelaide will cease interjecting. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 That order, like the future frigates order, should have been placed years ago. Members opposite completely neglected that. Opposition members interjecting— Mr ABBOTT EZ5 All you are doing is shrieking. That is all you ever do. You whinge and whine. You are led by 'Bellyache Bill' over there— The SPEAKER 10000 The Prime Minister will refer to members by their correct titles and withdraw. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 I withdraw. He will be remembered for one thing only, and that is backstabbing two prime ministers. This government, by contrast, is getting on with the job of providing for our nation's defences and our nation's shipbuilding industry. (Time expired) Trade with China 55 14:27 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks My question is to the Minister for Trade and Investment. Will the minister outline to the House how the campaign of misinformation being waged by militant elements of the union movement against the free trade agreement with China is threatening the opportunities for jobs and growth that the agreement provides? 14:28 Mr ROBB FU4 Goldstein I would like to acknowledge the member's very able representation of a strong and vibrant Chinese community in his electorate. I have enjoyed many meetings with the members of that community. These Chinese Australians contribute so much to his electorate in community spirit and job creation. I would like to take this opportunity, on behalf of the government, to condemn in the strongest possible terms the dishonest, vile and racist campaign being waged against the Chinese people by militant elements of the union movement—namely, the CFMEU and the ETU. Those opposite should be ashamed for supporting it. It is New South Wales's 'poles and wires' all over again. It is a total disgrace. Mr Burke DYW Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I simply ask that you remind the minister of the ruling you made earlier on an answer from the Prime Minister. The SPEAKER 10000 I am listening very closely. The minister can talk about a document or an organisation, but he cannot reflect on individual members. Mr ROBB FU4 The China free trade agreement, about creating tens of thousands of new jobs for Australians, is one that is under threat from those opposite. Let me provide another example of the opportunities being put in jeopardy—this time, Blackmores, a well-known company, our largest natural health company, who have been around for 83 years. They operate in 14 countries and they employ 1,000 people. They are a huge supporter of the China free trade agreement. CEO Christine Holgate said that in China her company faced an average tariff of 20 per cent and, for some important products such as fish oils, over 35 per cent. These tariffs will be eliminated. They will go to zero under the free trade agreement, enabling Blackmores to be super-competitive against lower cost, lower quality products. In the last year, Blackmores' sales have grown 30 per cent and they are expecting profits to grow 75 per cent, in large part because of the free trade agreements with Japan and Korea. Furthermore, Blackmores are expanding their business in anticipation of further growth with these massive reductions in tariffs in China. In the last six months alone, Blackmores have created over 100 new jobs on Sydney's northern beaches. They also pay a lot of tax. I say to those opposite: get out of the way and start backing Australian jobs and growth. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 55 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 14:31 The SPEAKER 00APG Before I call the member for Batman, I wish to inform the House that we have present in the gallery this afternoon the Hon. David Tollner MLA, the Northern Territory Treasurer and former member for Solomon and member of the class of 2001. We also have present the Hon. Judi Moylan, the former member for Pearce. On behalf of the House, I would like to extend a very warm welcome to them both. Honourable members: Hear, hear! The SPEAKER 00APG I call the member for Batman. Mr Nikolic interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Bass will not interject. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 55 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Defence Procurement 55 14:31 Mr FEENEY I0O Batman My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's statements about Australia's offshore patrol vessels. In Adelaide, the Prime Minister said construction of our future naval fleet would be centred in South Australia. In Melbourne, the Prime Minister said construction would most likely start in South Australia but would then move to Melbourne. Last week, the Prime Minister said Western Australia could bid for these vessels. Will the Prime Minister finally stop the chaos and tell Australians where these vessels will be built? Mr Champion interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wakefield will cease interjecting. 14:32 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah Our anticipation is that the offshore patrol vessels, or corvettes, will start building in 2018 in Adelaide. After 2020, when the frigates start building in Adelaide— Mr Champion HW9 Are you going to sail them around the country? The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wakefield is warned. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 it is quite possible that the corvettes might be constructed somewhere else—very simple; very straightforward. Ms MacTiernan L6P But why not in Perth? The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Perth! Mr ABBOTT EZ5 I want to say this to the member who asked the question. We have an outstanding shipbuilder in Austal, an outstanding Western Australian based shipbuilder—an absolutely outstanding shipbuilder which has not only built ships for the Australian Navy and which is not only currently building ships for the Australian Border Force; it is building ships for the US Navy. Any Australian shipbuilder that can successfully build ships for the US Navy is damned good indeed. Obviously, they will have a chance to bid for and be involved in the work in Adelaide and elsewhere—obviously. Ms MacTiernan interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Perth! Mr ABBOTT EZ5 That is why Austal welcomed our announcement. That is why BAE— Ms MacTiernan L6P Not Senator Reynolds, she's not happy with you! The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Perth will cease interjecting! Mr ABBOTT EZ5 currently building ships in Williamstown, in Melbourne, welcomed our announcement. What all of them are so happy about is that, at last, there is a government in Canberra that is prepared to make decisions and is prepared to back Australia. We are prepared to back Australia and we will give Australia the naval resources that we need to keep our country safe in the future, unlike members opposite, who sat on their hands for six years, prejudicing the defence and security of this country. You cannot trust Labor with the nation's defences based on their record between 2007 and 2013. Ms MacTiernan interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Perth has been warned! Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Not a single naval order was placed with an Australian shipyard and hardly any naval orders were placed at all, but those that were all went overseas. Every single one of them went overseas, so I repeat: Austal, BAE, the Labor Premier of South Australia—every single person that takes the defence of Australia seriously welcomed our announcement of a $40 billion fleet build centred on Adelaide. The only people who have not welcomed it are those job-destroying people opposite. Shame on them! The SPEAKER 00APG Before I call the member for Mallee, the member for Perth continued to interject after she had been warned twice. She can leave the chamber under 94(a). Trade with China 56 14:35 Mr BROAD 30379 Mallee My question is to the Minister for Agriculture. Will the minister update the House on how the free trade agreement with China will boost jobs and growth for farmers in the electorate of Mallee and across regional Australia? 14:35 Mr JOYCE E5D New England I thank the honourable member for Mallee for his question. The member for Mallee started his life working as a rouseabout in the shearing sheds and also mucking out stables, so it is very important that he is very involved in making sure that we have the best job opportunities for the people of Mallee. Mr Champion interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wakefield is warned. Mr JOYCE E5D Within Mallee, there is a big dairy industry. Mr Bowen interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for McMahon I remind is warned. Mr JOYCE E5D The dairy industry across our nation employs 43,000 people on farms and factories and over 100,000 people in related industries. Under the free trade agreement with China, the tariff on whole milk powder, which is the commodity most related to Mallee, will go from 10 per cent down to zero per cent over 11 years. But, of course, this could be put at risk if the free trade agreement is not passed. Cattle is a big industry in the Mallee, and across our nation it employs between 45,000 and 50,000 people directly and a further 150,000 indirectly. On meat and offal, the tariff is currently at 12 to 25 per cent into China, and this will go down to zero over nine years. There is only one thing that could put it at risk, and that is if the Labor Party decide they are not going to support it. Wool is also a big industry in the Mallee, and we are getting very good prices again now in the wool industry. The eastern market indicator is up over 1,300c a kilogram clean. This quota will go up by more than 50 per cent under the free trade agreement. But this also will be put at risk if the Labor Party decide that they are not going to support the free trade agreement. Let us go to other industries that we might not hear about all the time but that are emerging industries. The biggest horticultural export in our nation is almonds. Almonds last year were worth about $522 million. Within part of the Mallee, they are looking at expansion—the CEO of the Almond Board told me this before I came to question time—of over $1 billion in the next three years. This is an industry that possibly many people in Australia do not even recognise, and it employs 2,000 people directly and 7,000 indirectly. With the free trade agreement, the tariff on this product will go from 10 to 24 per cent down to zero over four years. But this also could be put at risk if we do not pass the free trade agreement. Last night, I was talking to the NFF. Their major concern is: what is the Labor Party's position on the free trade agreement? The sheepmeat exporters want to know: what is the Labor party's position on the free trade agreement? It is absolutely disgusting to hear in the recollections of the former leader of the Labor Party, Mark Latham, that even the leader of the Labor Party has two positions on the free trade agreement—one for the public and one he holds privately, and neither position agrees with the other. Environment 57 14:38 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter My question is also to the Minister for Agriculture. Minister, you mentioned the National Farmers Federation. Its vice-president has said of the government's changes to John Howard's environmental protection laws: … suddenly and with no warning or consultation, we get this put forward … Minister, if farming groups were not consulted on these changes, the question becomes: were you consulted? And isn't this just another sign that this government is in absolute chaos? The SPEAKER 00APG I remind the member for Hunter to refer to former governments, rather than individuals, making laws. 14:39 Mr JOYCE E5D New England I thank the honourable member for Hunter for his question. I think that it is very important that we clearly understand that local agricultural producers and others with legitimate proprietary, economic, financial and other direct interests will not be affected and can be assured that their voices will be heard and the courts will be available for the protection of their rights. Farming groups can still use their organisation and resources—such as those employed on occasion by the NFF, through their fighting fund—to support individuals affected by decisions. Those with a standing interest, those with interests pertinent to issues such as mines, have the capacity to have standing in the courts, as they did in the past. They still have that capacity. It is still the case. But what I am also hearing is that the people of Central Queensland want to know how their rights are going in regards to having their jobs supported in the Adani mine. That is an issue that the people of Dawson really want to know about. They want to know whether they have a future, whether they have a job or whether you are still placing skinks and snakes ahead of working men and women in Australia. The member for Capricornia wants to know— Mr Giles 243609 Mr Speaker, on a point of order— The SPEAKER 00APG The Minister for Agriculture will resume his seat. Mr Joyce interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Minister for Agriculture does not have the call. His microphone is off. Mr Giles 243609 My point of order is on direct relevance. The question went to consultation with farming groups and the minister. He has not touched on either of those issues. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to draw him back to the question. The SPEAKER 00APG The Minister for Agriculture is precisely on the question of his portfolio, and the issue he has raised now was raised in a question to him yesterday that he would have been within his rights not to answer. I call the Minister for Agriculture and remind him to remain relevant to the question. Mr JOYCE E5D The member for Herbert certainly wants to know whether the Labor Party are going to put skinks and snakes ahead of the working men and women of Australia. It is a clear question: where do your priorities lie? Do you still stand behind those in high-vis or do you stand behind the 'high-vis' snakes and skinks which we never actually find, we never actually know about, until you go looking for them? The opposition are more interested in supporting their friends in the Greens than supporting the working men and women of Central Queensland. Now, we have made sure that the farmers still have standing in the court. We have had cabinet discussions to make sure that they still have standing and they can still fight their issues, and that is the information that we have received from the Attorney-General. Those are the discussions of cabinet. But what you have not done— The SPEAKER 00APG I ask the minister to come back to the question. Mr JOYCE E5D what you on the other side have not cleared up is when you decide that your skinks and snakes are actually less important than the people who believe that you are down here to represent them, but actually we are representing—the working men and women of Central Queensland. Trade and Investment 58 14:42 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer outline how the government is boosting jobs and growth by encouraging investment in Australia? What are the threats to investment in Australia and how is the government responding? 14:43 Mr HOCKEY DK6 North Sydney I thank the honourable member for Barker for that question. He knows, as every other member on this side of the House knows, that you have to earn economic growth. You have to earn an environment that is conducive to job creation. Because we are rolling out our economic plan for the nation that includes removing taxes like the carbon tax and the mining tax; entering into new free trade agreements with China, Korea and Japan; getting the budget back to surplus and fixing up the mess left by Labor and, importantly getting rid of regulation, tens of thousands of pages of regulation, left behind by Labor that we have already abolished; providing incentives for the states to go through an asset recycling program so they can put more money into infrastructure; rolling out the biggest infrastructure program in Australia's history, as a result of what we did in last year's budget; and delivering the biggest small business package in Australia's history that is giving small business the opportunity to go out and have a go—as a result of these things—we are able to create an environment where 38,000 new jobs are created in just one month in Australia, the fastest rate of job growth in the developed world, and at the beginning of this year we had the fastest economic growth of any major developed nation in the world. It comes about because we are entirely consistent in delivering policy that facilitates growth. And nothing illustrates our position better than what I have just said, and nothing illustrates the Labor Party's position better than what has happened in the last 24 hours in relation to the Adani mine—because the Labor Party does not know whether it is Arthur or Martha in relation to the Adani mine. Yesterday the shadow minister for the environment, the National President of the Labor Party—someone very close to the Greens in that regard—said, 'For the life of me I can't see where the particular problem is,' with the challenge to the Adani mine. And today Gary Gray—we like Gary Gray— The SPEAKER 00APG The Treasurer will refer to members— Mr HOCKEY DK6 the shadow minister for resources— The SPEAKER 00APG That is better. Mr HOCKEY DK6 the member for Brand, was asked on ABC's AM, 'Do you support the Carmichael mine?'—the Adani mine. He said, 'I do, yes.' 'Why is that?' 'Because the development of this resource, of this coal resource, is in our national interest.' Government members interjecting— Mr HOCKEY DK6 Yes! Come over! Come over! You're one of us. Come over! He also said that the mine is 'in the interest of the communities affected'. He says it is actually very good for everyone involved. This is a project which is a good project which will bring good economic activity and it is eminently sensible. We agree. (Time expired) Mr Danby interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I remind the member for Melbourne Ports. Goods and Services Tax 59 14:46 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon My question is to the Treasurer. Just three months ago when I asked if the GST should be removed from sanitary products the Treasurer said, 'It probably should, yes. The answer is yes.' Why doesn't the Treasurer shows some leadership, stop the chaos and make the additional GST from digital downloads conditional on removing the GST from tampons and pads? 14:46 Mr HOCKEY DK6 North Sydney I have been waiting two weeks for a GST question, and why? Because I have got some great stuff here. The GST question from the Labor Party— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left will cease interjecting. Mr HOCKEY DK6 It is quite interesting. In relation to sanitary products, as I said, it was raised with me—it was raised, in fact, by a number of states— Mr Burke DYW On television. Mr HOCKEY DK6 No. Actually it was raised by some states, and they asked whether it could be included. I said I am happy to put it on the agenda. In that regard, I did. Quite clearly a number of states are opposed to that. What we have always said is that the only way you are going to make any changes to the GST is if all the states and territories agree. So it is in their court, and it will be decided tomorrow by the states and territories. In relation to the GST, the Labor Party have been making a number of unfounded accusations about the GST more recently. In particular, they are asking us what we would do. I have said, as the Prime Minister has said repeatedly: we are going through a tax reform process. We want to have a proper discussion with the Australian people about how to make sure that the taxation system is best suited for the 21st century. We think it is hugely important to have a contemporary taxation system for the new economy. But the Labor Party have been running around, as they have tended to do lately, saying one thing to one group and another thing to another group. Government members interjecting— Mr HOCKEY DK6 I know it is hard to believe. I know. I know. I am shocking you all. It is shocking and quite unbelievable, but it is true. Of course, nothing is more surprising than the Labor Party saying we have secret plans on the GST. But I went back to Treasury and I said, 'What did the Labor Party do when they were in government—specifically the member for McMahon when he was Treasurer?' And they said, 'They modelled an increase in the GST.' It happened to be in July 2013. But the only modelling we have been able to find is one called 'Scenario 3: increase the GST to 12½ per cent and broaden the base'. So it begs the question: what was scenario 1? What was scenario 2? What about scenarios 4 and 5 and 6? It was the Labor Party that were modelling an increase in the GST, a broadening of the base of the GST, and now, with deep hypocrisy, they are campaigning against a proper discussion on tax. Once again, it illustrates that a party without leadership, like the modern Labor Party—that stands for nothing, that believes in nothing—can only be believed to be a hypocrite. National Security 59 14:49 Mr RUDDOCK 0J4 Berowra My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. I ask the minister to update the House on what the government is doing at home and overseas to starve—let me emphasise it—starve terrorists of the financial and logistic support that they require to commit their atrocities? 14:50 Ms JULIE BISHOP 83P Curtin I thank the member for Berowra for his interest in this issue of national importance, because Australia is making a significant contribution to international efforts to combat terrorism, particularly the terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq, and to starve them of the fighters and the funds and the logistics support that they need for their atrocities. We are attacking terrorism at its source. We are making progress. Australian fighter jets recently conducted a successful strike in Anbar Province in Iraq, killing up to 15 Daesh fighters, including a senior Daesh commander, thereby weakening Daesh's ability to plan and carry out attacks in that region and beyond. We are choking terrorist groups of the funding and resource support that they need for their violent campaigns. We are cooperating with countries in our region to boost collective efforts to track and block terrorist financing. Indeed, in November we will be co-hosting with Indonesia the first counter-terrorism financing summit in our region. We have listed 94 people and entities from Australia and around the world for financial sanctions, making it a serious crime, punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment, for any person who provides any form of material support for terrorism activities. Today I have listed Australian national Mostafa Mahamed, also known as Mostafa Farag, for targeted financial sanctions. This follows my previous listings of other Australian terrorists Neil Prakash, Khaled Sharrouf and Mohamed Elomar. Farag occupies a senior leadership position in al-Nusra Front, also known as Jabhat al-Nusra, listed as a terrorist organisation under Australia's Criminal Code and the UN sanctions regime. Al-Nusra Front is responsible for multiple vehicle suicide bombings in Syria, targeting innocent civilians and reportedly killing thousands of people. Farag is the highest ranking Australian within al-Nusra Front and has been described as a 'magnet' for foreign fighters. He has facilitated violent terrorist acts and through social media has solicited funding and lured vulnerable young people, including from Australia, to become terrorist fighters. Listing Farag sends the strongest possible message to anyone who recruits for or supports terrorist organisations that the coalition government will do everything in our power to combat the threat of terrorism and to keep our people safe both at home and abroad. Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption 60 14:53 Mr BRENDAN O'CONNOR 00AN3 Gorton My question is to the Prime Minister. Is it not the case that Mr Dyson Heydon would not have to sit in judgement of his own bias tomorrow if the Prime Minister finally stopped the chaos, showed some leadership and withdrew Mr Haydon's commission? 14:53 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah Again I rise in this parliament to defend the professionalism and the impartiality of a distinguished Australian who was a distinguished judge of the New South Wales Court of Appeal appointed by the then Labor government— Ms Claydon interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Newcastle. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 and a distinguished judge of the High Court of Australia, appointed by the then coalition government. Ms Claydon interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Newcastle is warned! Mr ABBOTT EZ5 He has given distinguished service to our country and he continues to give distinguished service to our country, exposing the rorts, the rackets and the rip-offs that have been covered up for too long inside the Australian trade union movement. Sadly, this question from the shadow minister shows yet again that members opposite are not interested in Australian jobs—they are only interested in protecting dodgy union officials and appeasing the Greens. There have been some overnight statements, and I do not want to unduly detain the House by repeating things that I have said to the House before, but let me read from the president of the Law Society of New South Wales: The Society is concerned at the personal attacks made on Justice Dyson Heydon. Dyson Heydon is an eminent former judicial officer and a current Commissioner and is well respected in the community. The president of the Law Society of New South Wales goes on to say: There are appropriate ways to deal with accusations of bias, they are through an application to the Commission or an appeal to the Federal Court of Australia. Members opposite know the rules—they know the appropriate way to deal with any problem that they might think exist with any presiding officer, and I say to members opposite: just for once, do it the right way—stop smearing a distinguished Australian and stop trying to cover up rorts, rackets and rip-offs. Stop running a protection racket for dodgy union officials. Border Protection 60 14:56 Mr BROADBENT MT4 McMillan My question is directed to the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. Will the minister update the House on the success of the government's border protection policy, particularly in preventing potential terrorists from joining our enemies overseas? 14:56 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for McMillan for his question and for his very deeply held beliefs in relation to keeping our community safe. The government of course has no higher priority than keeping Australians safe and secure. The largest single group, I regret to say, of suspected jihadists attempting to leave the country bound for Syria and Iraq have been intercepted at Sydney Airport by Australian Border Force officers. The suspected jihadists were flagged by ABF officers at the Immigration checkpoint. The government's new counter-terrorism units were then alerted to intercept these people and to stop them from boarding their flight. Allowing these people to go to foreign shores to be trained in acts of terrorism would mean that when these people returned to Australia they would pose an even greater threat. People are seeing on their television screens right now the situation unfolding in Bangkok and the way in which innocent people have lost their lives to terrorists there. People in our country understand that the threat here is as great as it ever has been, and it is why we need to make sure that we provide more support to our frontline officers. I commend the work of the 80 counter-terrorism unit officers who have been stood up at the eight international airports around the country. We have put significant funding back into Customs. Regrettably, when in government Labor ripped out $700 million from Customs. We have boosted counter-terrorism funding for our agencies by $1.33 billion—indeed, by $600 million in the last budget alone. We are investing more than $40 million to counter violent extremism, along with $650 million dollars for settlement services and social cohesion. We have provided the ABF with funding of almost $50 million over four years to establish these CTU teams, who are doing exceptional work. As we have seen from recent events, the teams are making a real difference. In the 2014-15 financial year, the CTU teams have assisted in 336 passenger offloads, they have conducted 133,000 real-time assessments and they have conducted 9,200 patrols. Our message as a government is very clear to people who would want to go to other countries to fight and to engage in terrorist acts—we will apply whatever resources are available to us to keep the Australian public safe. This government is determined to make sure that our borders are secure, and we are providing every assistance possible to our frontline officers to make sure that we can stop these people from going. Through the citizenship laws that we are proposing, which will be introduced into parliament in the next sitting period, we are proposing wherever possible to stop from coming back to our shores those people who would seek to conduct terrorist attacks here to kill and maim innocent Australians. Mantach, Mr Damien 61 14:59 Mr BRENDAN O'CONNOR 00AN3 Gorton My question is to the Prime Minister. In 2013 the Prime Minister said: I know Damien Mantach well. He is a person of integrity, so let's see where this investigation goes. He has my confidence. Does the Prime Minister agree that this ringing endorsement is yet another failure of judgement on his part? Ms Henderson ZN4 That is a disgraceful question! The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Corangamite! Opposition members interjecting — The SPEAKER 00APG Those on my left! Dr Chalmers 37998 They're his own words. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Rankin is warned! Mr Andrews HK5 Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. Under the standing orders, it is quite clear that any minister, including the Prime Minister, can only be asked questions which go to his official responsibilities. That question does not do that. The SPEAKER 00APG The Acting Leader of the House is right. The standing orders do make it very clear that the question can only go to matters that the Prime Minister is responsible for. The question contained a quote— Ms Kate Ellis interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I do not need the member for Adelaide's assistance. The question contained a quote, and in that very narrow field the Prime Minister can answer the question. 15:01 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah I do think it is interesting that this is the level to which members opposite have decided to operate— Dr Chalmers interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Rankin will leave under 94(a). The member for Rankin then left the chamber. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Those on my left will cease interjecting. Mr ABBOTT EZ5 But I can inform the House that matters concerning the individual in question have this morning been referred to the Victorian police. Carbon Pricing 61 13:01 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development. Will the Deputy Prime Minister update the House on the benefits to the economy and jobs of the repeal of the carbon tax, and are there any risks to these benefits? 15:02 Mr TRUSS GT4 Wide Bay I thank the honourable member for his question. He recognises that this government is about building a stronger economy— Mr Champion interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wakefield can leave under 94(a). He had been warned twice. Mr TRUSS GT4 and creating more jobs. That is why we axed Labor's anticompetitive, costly, job-destroying carbon tax. The carbon tax was a $9 billion penalty on the Australian economy, slowing it down, preventing the creation of jobs. Today Qantas has announced its strongest profit in many years. Amongst the issues for which they gave credit was the abolition of the carbon tax. It made a significant contribution to the turnaround in Qantas's profitability—and there are many other companies that could say exactly the same thing. For Qantas, this means savings of $116 million made in just one financial year. As a result of the abolition of this carbon tax Qantas will be able to return 23c per share to shareholders before Christmas this year. The people who have endured the pain with Qantas will now get some reward. They have stuck by the company and it is now able to pay a dividend. Once more, they are going to buy eight new Boeing 787-900 aircraft. What this government has done by abolishing the carbon tax has meant that one of Australia's iconic industries has been able to return to profitability. One would think that that is a very strong lesson that members opposite would have learnt from their carbon tax experience, but they have not. They have said that, if re-elected, they are going to bring it back, bigger and uglier than ever—bigger and uglier than ever! Qantas's relief would be short-lived. Australian households and taxpayers would be slugged again by Labor. It is a job-destroying tax. When we scrapped the carbon tax it made a difference to business confidence and it is now also showing up on business bottom lines. We want a strong economy that is capable of creating jobs and an economy that does not have to carry a carbon tax—a carbon tax that adds to costs but does absolutely nothing to change the climate. Fair Work Commission 62 15:05 Mr BRENDAN O'CONNOR 00AN3 Gorton My question is to the Prime Minister. Does the Prime Minister stand by his statement about his personal pick for vice president of the industrial relations umpire, Michael Lawler, when he said, 'Vice-president Lawler has the human insights, intellectual skills and strengths of character to enhance the commission’s work'? Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members will cease interjecting. Mr Dutton interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection will cease interjecting. 15:05 Mr ABBOTT EZ5 Warringah Again, I simply observe that it is curious that this is the level that members opposite have chosen to operate at. But, if members opposite have an issue with any member of the Fair Work Commission, there are appropriate processes in place, and they should take them. Employment 62 15:06 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman My question is to the Minister for Social Services. Will the minister update the House on what the government has done to make it easier for families to get into work, stay in work or work more? 15:06 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for Bowman for his question. I know he would be very pleased to know that since the last election more than 170,000 more women are now in work than at the time of the last election—more than 170,000! We know that more women and more families want to be in work; they want to work more and they want to have more days in work. We know that, and that is why we have crafted a package of some $3½ billion to ensure that families can have more affordable access to quality child care. It includes $30 extra a week in support that would see them have better access to affordable child care. It means removing the cap on middle- to low-income families so they can access that child care, and it means better support for families with children with disabilities so they can access that child care. We also know that affordable child care needs to be affordable for the taxpayer. Those opposite do not seem to understand that. They are happy to shovel the money out the door but they are not happy to commit to the savings that are necessary to fund their policies. As a result, the opposition's policy on child care is a vapour. It is an absolute vapour because it is not funded. Alternatively, what those opposite did when they were in government—where we have put forward a policy for affordable child care—was that they had a $300 million fund to enable the childcare centres who signed up with United Voice and other unions to get the dollars. So, a $300 million fund and they signed it off on the day before the election. They put it out so that the unions got around $70 million. There is not a payment that the government provides that those opposite would not use to butter up their union mates. This government, this Prime Minister, this side of the House will never be bullied by unions and we will never be bought by unions Mr Abbott EZ5 I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. DOCUMENTS 63 DOCUMENTS Presentation 63 15:08 Mr ANDREWS HK5 Menzies A document is tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members today. Full details of the document will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 63 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Economy 63 15:09 The SPEAKER 00APG I have received a letter from the honourable member for McMahon proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The impact of the Government's failed economic management on jobs and the cost of living. I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:09 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon When this Treasurer's time in office comes to an end, probably at the hands of his own party in the not-too-distant future, he will be remembered for a few things. He will not be remembered for bringing down a surplus, because he will not be doing that. He will never bring down a surplus. But he will be remembered for the times that he was allowed out and gave his views on economic policy—the times when the Prime Minister's office, those rare occasions, authorise the Treasurer to go out and make public comments. There was a time when he said, 'Poor people don't drive cars.' He will be remembered for that. But even more than that, he will be remembered for his great advice to young Australians in particular about housing affordability: to go get a better paying job. That advice was taken so well by so many millions of Australians because they had never of it! They had never thought of going and getting a better paid job to give them a better chance of getting into the housing market. But what was most insulting about that Treasurer's intervention, what Australians have found most angering about his contribution, is that on his watch it has become harder to get a job and harder to get a better paying job, because unemployment is up and wages growth is down on his watch as a result of his actions and his policies. We have the highest rate of unemployment since 2002, when the now Prime Minister was minister for employment. It is the highest rate since then. We have 800,000 Australians unemployed. That is the most since 1994. Since the last election, 114,000 Australians have joined that unemployment queue—114,000. Government members interjecting— Mr BOWEN DZS The government scoffs. They mock. They engage in their childish games. And, as they have done so, more than 114,000 Australians have joined the unemployment queue. We have got youth unemployment, which can soberly, carefully, objectively be called a crisis, because it is at 13.8 per cent. There are 300,000 young Australians unemployed—young Australians who should be getting into the labour market, who should be building their skills and building their experience. Instead, they are engaged in soul-destroying youth unemployment, which sees their self-esteem attacked, which sees their opportunity evaporating, which sees them thrown on the scrap heap in their younger years—the dispiriting scourge of youth unemployment. Yet, we get this Treasurer who insults them and simply says: go get a better paying job. That is his economic plan: go get a better paying job. Well, he needs to go get a jobs plan. He needs to go get a plan for a better and stronger economy. That is what this Treasurer needs to do. Sometimes international events can see unemployment go up. Sometimes there are global recessions and unemployment goes up, and a Treasurer and a government is limited in what they can do. But we have been through that period. We went through that period of the global financial crisis, and unemployment did not top six per cent once during the global financial crisis in Australia. It certainly topped six per cent elsewhere. We saw the UK at eight per cent, the US at 10 per cent and Canada at nine per cent. But in all those countries unemployment is now coming down as Australia's unemployment rate continues to go up. We see unemployment coming down right around the world but going up in Australia on this Treasurer's watch. That is the circumstance we are faced with in Australia. That is the circumstance that unemployed people are faced with. What the government are doing is having rhetoric-led recovery. They are strong on the rhetoric. They have lots of things to say about our economy. They have plans to do all sorts of things. Let us go through a few of those. We know on this side of the House that one of the areas in which you can create jobs, one of the areas with good paying jobs and in which jobs of the future can be created is a thing called 'renewable energy'. There are these wind turbines, which are apparently a blight against humanity according to some. The Treasurer has declared war on them. He hates them. They are ugly compared to all of the things he loves, but they actually can create jobs, as can solar technology. Renewable energy right around the country is creating jobs, and this government hate it—and they have wrecked it. We have gone from being one of the top four countries in the world for investment in renewable energy under the previous Labor government to 10th under this government. Their prejudice against science and renewable energy has wrecked renewable energy. The Labor Party—the member for Port Adelaide, the member for Brand and I—had to step in and negotiate a better renewable energy target to save them from their own incompetence. Then we have infrastructure. Remember we have the infrastructure Prime Minister! We also have the Indigenous affairs Prime Minister! Those are both areas that he has cut. He is the minister for women as well! During question time we saw the approach to taxation from the Treasurer and from the Prime Minister for women as well. Two years ago yesterday, the then Leader of the Opposition said: What we want to do is build, build, build so that there are jobs, jobs, jobs for Australians. What he has done is nothing, nothing, nothing! We have had nothing, nothing, nothing from the Prime Minister. We have public spending on infrastructure at 3½ per cent of GDP. That is just barely above the record lows since records began. In 2010—just five years ago—it was 5½ per cent. Under this infrastructure Prime Minister, it is 3½ per cent! There is no plan there to build jobs. Then we have the Treasurer, old 'huff and puff'! Remember we had the G20 in Australia? It was a good thing. It was secured by the previous Labor government and held in Brisbane. It was a good thing to have the G20 here, but the Treasurer could not help himself. He went out and puffed his chest, and he said: 'I have reached an historic agreement. I have got every finance minister in the world to agree that we are going to add growth to the world economy.' They had not thought of it before coming to Brisbane! It had not occurred to them that it was a good idea! They needed this Treasurer to explain it to them! He said: 'This is historic—a great step forward. We are going to add two per cent to growth.' What has happened? Nothing, nothing, nothing yet again. It was all words. Joe Hockey's great global plan for growth, which he engineered, has turned out to be absolutely nothing. This is a government that is completely bereft of ideas and of a plan for jobs and growth. They talk about it; they do not understand it. They do not understand the need to plan for the future. They do not understand the need to plan for jobs of the future. On this side of the House, we understand the challenges and the opportunities. We know that 40 per cent of all Australian jobs are at risk from automation over the next 15 years—that is five million jobs which may not exist by 2030—but new jobs will be created. Australian people should be optimistic. New jobs will be created. The question is: will we be creating young people who can win those jobs, who are skilled to get those jobs and who can create the jobs in an age of entrepreneurialism? Can they do that? This government certainly cannot. When we have outlined plans to teach coding in school, to lift the qualifications of teachers in maths, and to give young people the chance to study science, technology, engineering and maths debt-free through our university system, what did this Prime Minister do? He said, 'This is outrageous. You are going to teach children to code and program. What do you want to do? Send them to work at age 11?' That is his answer for jobs of the future. He is so completely stuck in the past that he does not understand that encouraging young people to learn, and teaching them about, science, technology, engineering and maths helps them to prepare for the jobs of the future and that it helps them to prepare for a rapidly changing world. This is a Prime Minister who is so stuck in the past, so stuck in previous decades, that he does not understand the opportunities that are arising for Australia. Instead, we have a Prime Minister and a Treasurer who mock, who scorn and who insult. They tell Australians, 'Go get a better paying job.' They tell Australians, 'Poor people do not drive cars.' They tell Australians: 'We all need to tighten our belts. The age of entitlement is over.' They divide Australians between lifters and leaners. Australians deserve better than that. They deserve a government which unites Australians. They deserve a government which concentrates on the opportunities for the future. They deserve a government which has a plan for infrastructure; has a plan for science, technology, engineering and maths; has a plan for job creation; and has an optimistic focus on the future. They deserve a government that is not stuck in the past, that is not stuck in division and that is not stuck with insults, like this failed Treasurer is. They deserve a government that actually understands that Australia's best years can be ahead of us. The best years of those 800,000 unemployed Australians can be ahead of them, but they will not be ahead of them when they have a Prime Minister and a Treasurer who simply do not understand what it means to have a jobs plan for Australia. They do not understand the opportunities. All that they understand is division, prejudice and, most of all, chaos. 15:19 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong Look at what Labor does not what Labor says. Its six years in office saw more than 500,000 jobs lost in small business alone. Labor rotated ministers like no tomorrow—one every year. Labor saw businesses, big and small, suffocated by more than 21,000 new regulations. This is the Labor Party that brought to you the carbon tax and the mining tax—those jobs-destroying taxes which sent investment offshore. This is the Labor Party that gave us Grocery Watch, Fuelwatch, overpriced school buildings, and the tragic pink batts fiasco. So, when it comes to looking at what Labor says, it is more important to look at what Labor does. In contrast, the Abbott government, in two years in office, has delivered more than 330,000 new jobs. This year alone, 163,000 new jobs have been created—nearly four times the pace of new job creation under those opposite. If you look at female workforce participation, it is now at the highest level since we started recording those numbers: 171,000 more women are in jobs today than at the time of the 2013 election. The shadow Treasurer talks about the unemployment rate of 6.3 per cent, which we accept is too high and which we are trying to get down. Let us not forget that when the shadow Treasurer was the Treasurer, on 2 August 2013 in his economic statement, he predicted 2014-2015 unemployment numbers to be 6.25 per cent. So the rate is very much consistent with what the Treasury numbers were when Labor was last in office. Then if you look at our headline economic numbers, the March GDP quarter growth was 0.9 per cent. That is higher than it was in other comparable developed economies, including all the G7 economies. We have seen retail sales up 4.9 per cent over this time last year. Export volumes are up five per cent year on year, as we see the dividends from the heavy investment. 223,000 new companies were registered in 2014. Ten out of the last 12 months have seen rises in the job advertisements, project approval times have been halved and we have seen $1 trillion worth of projects approved by this government. The most recent project we are debating in this chamber is one that will create 10,000 jobs as a result of the Adani investment in coalmine in Queensland. If Labor would get out of the way, those jobs would actually be created. If you think about small business, one of the things that we need to do is to introduce more flexibility into our labour markets, so we said at the last election that we will get the Productivity Commission to produce a report into the workplace relations sphere. What the unions and the Labor Party do? They kiboshed it before the report even hit the desks of those in this place. Some of the issues it talked about were unfair dismissals, penalty rates, greenfields and statutory contracts. They were all on the table from the same organisation that gave us the NDIS, namely the Productivity Commission. But those opposite will not undertake any reform in the workplace relations sector unless, of course, it betters the position of the union movement, who they are beholden to. The union movement only represents about 12 to 13 per cent of private sector workers in this economy and in this country, so 88 per cent of private sector workers decide not to join the union. But the other side of the political divide is completely dominated by former union officials and union members on their side of politics, and that dictates their bad policy in this place. If we are serious about getting youth unemployment down from around 14 per cent—where it is today—and if we are serious about getting unemployment down from 6.3 per cent, we need serious workplace relations reform. In the other place—the Senate, where the red seats and the red carpet rule—those opposite blocked the reintroduction of the Australian Building and Construction Commission, which was effectively a cop on the beat that came out of the Cole royal commission in 2004 and which produced a $6 billion annual productivity dividend to the Australian economy. But what did Labor do when they got into office? They got rid of it. Not because it was not creating jobs—it was—and not because it was not policing building sites—it was—but because it was a bit uncomfortable for their friends in the union movement. Did you know that the number of days lost to industrial disputation per 1,000 employees before the ABCC came into existence was 224 days? 224 days were lost to industrial disputation per 1,000 employees before the ABCC came into effect; after the ABCC came into effect, that number fell to just 24. That is what job creation is about: less dimes spent industrial disputation, lower costs for buildings and more of a green light for investment. I could go on. What about our infrastructure projects? Just listen to these numbers. The WestConnex project—and I see the member for Bennelong there; it is in his state of Sydney—creates 10,000 jobs directly and indirectly. The Bruce Highway, with a $3.6 billion contribution from the Australian government, will create 10,000 jobs. This Pacific Highway duplication will create 4,000 jobs and 12,000 jobs indirectly. NorthConnex will create 8,700 jobs. The Western Sydney airport, which we made a decision on after half a century of indecision, will create 4,000 construction jobs and 35,000 jobs by 2035. What about in my state of Victoria, where the East West Link was shovel ready to create 6,000 jobs? Those opposite basically turned a blind eye when their friends in the Labor Party and Daniel Andrews, the Premier of Victoria, ripped up that contract and introduced serious sovereign risk into my state. What about Labor's job-destroying multinational tax policy, which will cost jobs? The deputy secretary of Treasury, Rob Heferen, was at Senate estimates on 2 June 2015. When asked, 'Would this policy cost jobs?' Mr Heferen said, 'Yes.' What about what the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said about Labor's policy on multinationals? They said that it will make Australia a less attractive place for international investment, thereby pushing projects offshore and hurting jobs. What about what the BCA said about Labor's tax policy? They said that it has the potential to slow economic growth and further diminish Australia's competitiveness. Mr Husic interjecting— Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Colleagues on this other House, if you want to know why those opposite and the member the Chifley are not ready for government, it is because of this very question that was put to the shadow Treasurer. The shadow Treasurer was asked this at a doorstop interview on 6 June: The Treasury deputy secretary said a senate estimates this week that Labor's multinational tax policy would cost jobs if it was ever implemented. Given this revelation, are you still committed to the policy? Chris Bowen, the shadow Treasurer, answered: 'Absolutely.' That says it all. The Labor Party has a $50 billion-plus blackhole in their costings. They left us a legacy of escalating debt that is reaching $667 billion and an interest bill of $1 billion a month that is growing to $3 billion a month, which means that money flows offshore that cannot go to hospitals, roads or schools. That was their legacy and now they have the hide to come into this place to move a motion about jobs. There is one last point I want to mention, because this is the red carpet to job creation in this country: our free trade agreements with China, Korea and Japan—three booming and strong economies in our region. We know tens of thousands of jobs will be created by the China free trade agreement. We heard in the parliament today that the Leader of the Opposition, when it comes to free trade agreements, says one thing in private and another thing publicly to his friends in the union movement. We support jobs and we are the only party that delivers real jobs. 15:29 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley I am worried about my friend the member for Kooyong. He did not deliver that with much vim or vigour. You are not your usual self, Member for Kooyong. Normally you are bursting out of the gate! Even he cannot come here today and defend this government against its tawdry record, against a failing record and against what everyone knows: this government is not up to the job of delivering jobs. It is nearly two years since this government has been in place. Mr Watts 193430 They think they are still in opposition! Mr HUSIC 91219 They are, member for Gellibrand, acting like they are still in opposition. They are always causing a fight and they always want to find a way to create division. For nearly two years they have been trying to get through their first budget—a budget that shocked the general public because of the fact that it was such a contrast to what was being promised, to what was being suggested would happen when this government got into office, to what they were planning to do. They shocked and stunned the public massively. But I have got to say, when you think about that stalled budget, I like reading The Australian Financial Review, especially on the weekends. It is a very good read. What I like about it is that editor Michael Stutchbury has got a sense of humour—he does! I looked at it on the weekend. The person who had trouble getting his first budget through, who spent most of the two years in office trying to get a budget through—do you know what they called him? They called him the 'delivery man'. They called Joe Hockey the delivery man. Stutch has got a great sense of humour. This was a 'crackalackin' read! Look at growth. It was spluttering along, and the RBA was softening us up for lower growth. Joe Hockey's quote in this article is, 'Our economy is more robust today than it has ever been.' That is the Joe Hockey quote. He reckons it is more robust than it has ever been. This is what the man who struggled to get his own budget through said: 'Look what we have achieved in the first 22 months and no-one could accuse us of standing still.' This is a Treasurer who counts going backwards as momentum. He will take that; he will count going backwards as momentum. Look at every single measure. Joblessness is now higher than it was in the GFC, the highest in 20 years—backwards on that. He is going to count that as momentum. Growth, as I have mentioned, is already softening and is nowhere near the level that will help sustain job growth. Living standards are quite a shock and should have received a lot more focus, when you consider what is happening on that front. You can see here that the living standards of Australians—as measured by real, net national disposable income per capita—have gone backwards for four straight quarters under this government—backwards! Look at what is happening with wages. Wages are growing now at the lowest rate of growth since the RBA began records, the lowest rate of growth since 1995. The Treasurer is claiming we are not standing still. He is right. He is not standing still—the economy is going backwards, growth in wages is flattening and the jobless rate is higher. Also, debt and deficit; they do not talk about that much anymore. Where is the old debt and deficit line that you used to have? Where did it go? They are right; they are not standing still. Debt and deficit has gone up. They told us it would go down. It is up. So on every measure this government has failed us. And the 'delivery man'? What is he delivering? Ms Rowland 159771 Bad news! Mr HUSIC 91219 Bad news, as the member for Greenway rightly says. Always, all of the measures have gone backwards. We have here the member for Kooyong as the Assistant Treasurer. Again, they are saying, 'We are not going to stand still.' Member for Kooyong, the public wants to see us have a tax system that is fit for purpose and that is not being gamed by multinationals. They want to see some response. The member for Kooyong spent most of his time defending inaction—a failure to actually act on that rate. He mentioned project approvals, like that was the hard work of the government. The government had to tick off on an approval, and they are claiming credit for it. They are not claiming credit for all the other stuff that is happening in the economy that is going backwards—they are not acknowledging that. This is the problem with the government: they have no creativity, imagination or ability to guide the economy through. All they will do is deliver us division, argument and politicking, but they will not deliver what the people want: jobs, growth and a stronger future. 15:34 Mrs McNAMARA 241589 Dobell I thank the member for Chifley. Denial, denial, denial—'denial' is not a river in Africa. Once again, all we see in this place is those opposite trashing the Australian economy and the jobs market. You are more focused on your union-led propaganda and your protection rackets; that is all you care about. Since coming to office this government has created 330,000 jobs. There are 330,000 people who, under you, had no jobs. Australia's job growth over the past year has been stronger than that in the US, in the UK, in Canada and in every G7 nation. We have seen job creation at four times the highest level it was in Labor's last year in office. Since the beginning of this year around 163,000 new jobs have been created—that is more than 38,000 new jobs last month. We have seen the labour market continuing to perform strongly in the first seven months of 2015, after a strong 2014. We talk about the free trade agreements. A recent report commissioned by the government estimates that the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement will, when combined with trade deals finalised by this government with Japan and Korea, create an average of almost 9,000 jobs per year and will create 178,000 jobs by the time the agreements come into full force in 2035. But what do those opposite do? They are behind this negative advertising campaign full of scaremongering. They are not telling the truth. The truth is the FTA with China will create jobs. In my electorate of Dobell, for example, we have got this new company called SpotGo. They are ready to expand into China. It means creating new Australian jobs in my electorate of Dobell. If you want to have a go about 457 visas—the hypocrisy!—well, we are talking about jobs too. The former member for Dobell, Craig Thomson, has got a new job. Do you know what he is doing? He is selling 457 visas. That is what he is now doing for a job. Craig is out there creating jobs—but they are not Australian jobs. Ms Owens interjecting — Mrs McNAMARA 241589 I'm talking about jobs in my electorate and your absolute hypocrisy. We are doing some great things in Dobell. Work for the dole—amazing. These young people are getting skills and getting into employment. When I became the member for Dobell, I invited someone from one of the departments to come into my office. I said to them: how much was spent by the previous government over the last 12 months on job creation funding for young people in the Dobell electorate? They could not answer. All they said was 'millions and millions and millions'. That was under those opposite. Our program to get kids off the streets and teach them to fly aeroplanes was a huge success. We are looking at practical solutions that are going to get young people into long-term sustainable jobs. Those on the other side are laughing. Well, I don't think trying to get kids off the street to learn how to fly aeroplanes is a joke. In this budget the government has committed $50 billion to infrastructure. That is really important for my electorate. We have been starved for the last six years. Under the union controlled former Labor government, under the sadly lacking leadership of Craig Thomson, we got nothing for six years in Dobell, and for 16 years under the state Labor government. And now we are hearing about this unprecedented $30 million of union membership money that is going to be spent on, basically, scaremongering and lying in marginal seats. Shame on you! One thing I will not do is allow Dobell to ever come under union control again. They are already taunting me that they are going to have an HSU member running against me. Good luck to them! We will not let it happen in our marginal seats. We will tell the people the truth. We are here for the Australian people and we are here to create jobs, and that is what we intend to do. All you lot are interested in doing is creating union membership and then using $30 million of union membership money to run a rubbish campaign full of lies. Ms Owens interjecting— Mrs McNAMARA 241589 There is no cut for health. We are increasing funding in education. I go into my schools and I know what they want. For the first time, they are getting proper representation. (Time expired) 15:40 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fraser Recently scientists have been exploring a creature known as the sea squirt. It is a fascinating creature. It is a simple creature whose job in life is to try and locate a place on the sea floor, where it will sit and feed for the remainder of its life. It takes a little while to discover that place, but once it does, it begins absorbing parts of its body. It absorbs its tail, its eye, its spine and, finally, it eats its brain. That is right, the sea squirt gets to where it wants to be and then eats its own brain. I am sure I not the only one in this House who, when I hear about the sea squirt, starts to think about the history of the Abbott government. They had a brain that was devoted to getting where they needed to be and, once they gained power, they just ate their own brain. You can talk to Labor Party supporters who are appalled by this government, but you can also talk to plenty of Liberal Party supporters who say, 'What is this mob doing!' They gave a knighthood to a duke. They goaded Holden to leave the country. They promised that submarines would be made in Adelaide. But they had a defence minister who said the Australian Submarine Corporation could not built a canoe—despite being headed by one of their own—and that they would not build submarines in Adelaide. They said they would create jobs. But now we have got the highest unemployment rate in more than a decade and the highest youth unemployment rate in more than two decades. They said that, under a coalition government, taxes would always be lower. But when you look at their own budget papers they do not show that picture. In fact, they show taxes going up every year and they show that the tax share is going to be higher under this government than it was under the former Labor government. Before the coalition came to office—back when they had that small brain that was trying to get to where they wanted to get to—they said that the election of a coalition government would be like 'a shot of adrenaline'. Now the best they can say is 'The consumer confidence figures are really good; they're nearly as good as they were two years ago.' Oh wait, they fell after this government was elected! They said at the G20 that they would deliver two per cent growth—that is two per cent growth over five years, so it is a mere 0.4 per cent a year. But we now read in the 'Government Gazette'—I mean The Australian—that there is no chance of that target ever being met. They reckon that, despite the fact that they have increased the unemployment rate, they need to punish young people into work. 'Six months without the dole,' they said. But then they said, 'No, we'll be really generous to you: you only have to live in your car for a month before you get the unemployment benefit!' They said that there would be no cuts to health, education, pensions, the ABC or the SBS. That has turned out to be less a promise and more a to-do list. We have had cuts to health. We have had cuts to education. We have had cuts to pensions. We have had cuts to the ABC and cuts to the SBS—the very same firm whose camera Mr Abbott was looking down when he made that promise. Oh, I missed one thing from that list, and that is the GST—the tax that Mr Abbott said 33 times before coming to office he would 'never ever' increase. And now Mike Baird says it is a 'sensible idea' to increase the GST by 50 per cent. So much for 'never ever' increasing the GST; it is fast becoming clear that Mr Abbott's economic strategy is to starve the states in supporting a GST increase. We have ambitious growth targets in the budget projections—so ambitious the Reserve Bank is now saying they do not think they can be met. And we have got a tax debate. The government has put out a tax white paper saying, 'Let's look at whether superannuation tax is fair and sustainable.' Many business groups say that is a good idea. Many tax experts say that is a good idea. The government now says they definitely would not touch the superannuation tax concessions—despite the fact that they called for a debate on those tax concessions in their own tax white paper. This would be funny if it were not so serious, if there were not serious challenges such as housing affordability, innovation and inequality facing Australia. Australia deserves better than this 'sea squirt' of a government. 15:44 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie I rise with pleasure today to talk on this MPI from the member for Bowman: 'The impact of the government's failed economic management on jobs and the cost of living'. I have to note that the member for Bowman comes into this place today— Opposition members interjecting— Mr HOWARTH 247742 I mean the member for Bowen, and his contribution is to attack the Treasurer in a very personal way and bring up what he will be remembered for—'He'll be remembered for this; he'll be remembered for that'—in a really nasty, aggressive way. The member for Bowen is not showing leadership. That is not the leadership that the Australian people want to see—personal attacks. I say the member for Bowen is not fit for leadership. We heard from the member for Chifley and we heard from the member from Fraser, and they were able to construct an argument in a decent way, but the member for Bowen comes in here and criticises in a really personal way. Opposition members interjecting— Mr HOWARTH 247742 I mean the member for McMahon. It is very funny. I am sorry. Forgive me; I am a new member. The shadow Treasurer is not fit for leadership, but I will not go on. He says that the economy is not going well—we see the Labor Party continuing to talk down the economy. He spoke about RET. What have they done for the last two years? They have only spoken about how we are not going to achieve it and how it is not going to be reached. We came up with a target we are on track to achieve, and the next minute they say it is going to be 50 per cent—no plan, no modelling; overnight a 50 per cent RET target. How they are going to pay for it? No idea. We see what the unions have been doing in relation to the CHAFTA, the China-Australia free trade agreement. The member for Moreton, who is a good fellow, came in here the other night and, in the adjournment debate, he was quick to attack the member for Dawson. Some members opposite ignore the xenophobia and fearmongering that goes on from the unions in relation to CHAFTA. There is hypocrisy in that. Talking down the economy is not the way to go. In relation to jobs, we are all about jobs. We have a high target of one million jobs in five years. I am happy to say that, because it is something that we want to achieve. We have things in place like the Green Army, like Work for the Dole, like the $5 billion jobactive program to help the over 50s, and like our work experience program—which the member for Bowman is a champion of and is about to implement. As members here, we want to see our electorates do well. We want to see that, when people wake up on a Monday morning, they have a place to go. We saw, last month alone, 38,000 new jobs created. I think we are at 330,000 jobs, which is slightly below our target but I believe we will get there. In relation to the cost of living, we have to look at Labor's record. We saw increased taxes on business and the mining tax. Right now the mining industry is in a bit of a downturn. Did the mining tax have something to do with that? Maybe it did. The carbon tax had an effect on the cost of living—not just on electricity and gas bills but when you go down to the local shops to buy food or you go out to have dinner at a restaurant. Last week the AMWU came and saw me in relation to shipbuilding in this country. I strongly support shipbuilding in this country. They said that we have a five-year gap where there are no ships being built. The Defence budget was cut significantly and, as the Prime Minister raised in question time today, not one ship was ordered. That is why we have a five-year gap. Member for Chifley, I will raise Labor's debt and deficit. I promised I would. That does push up the cost of living. You talk about the GST. We should not be increasing any taxes until we can get a government that spends less than we earn. We have schoolchildren up there in the gallery. They know and their parents know that you cannot spend more than you earn year in, year out. We are at eight years and all we get from those opposite are more unfunded policies, higher taxes, 'Let's increase super' and everything else. We stand for lower taxes. 15:49 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I want to address some of the comments made by the member for Petrie//Bowen/Bowman opposite. I want to put a few things in context, because he touched on the fact that he is a new member. So I will go back to two years ago, because he has been a member for two years, and point out a couple of things. For a start, in those two years, debt has increased by $108 billion on your watch. Let us compare a few other things from two years ago, when you were democratically elected by the people of Petrie. The unemployment rate when you were elected was 5.8 per cent. Now it is 6.1 per cent—the highest since 2002. Youth unemployment when we were voted out was 12.4 per cent. Now it is at 13.5 per cent. All of those young lives damaged because they have not been given real jobs, real opportunities. The last time it was that high was when Tony Abbott, the member for Warringah, was the employment minister. There is a bit of a trend developing here. Real net national disposable income per capita has decreased for the last four quarters. Growth in average weekly earnings is at 1.5 per cent, the lowest for nearly 20 years. The dollars that we get in our pocket are buying us less. Government debt is now at $381 billion, an increase of $108 billion in two years, or a 40 per cent increase. If there had been a debt and deficit disaster—the narrative that Joe Hockey clung to for the first five minutes that he was in office—if that had been the case and they had stopped borrowing and stop spending on programs, I could understand; but there are all those borrowings and still unemployment is at 800,000—ridiculous levels, frightening figures. The GDP back in September 2013, when those came opposite to office, was at 2.6 per cent. It is at 2.2 per cent at the moment. These are the facts that I just wanted to lay out for those opposite, because this is how the economy has changed under their watch. We saw the Deputy Prime Minister stand up today and give us the carbon tax talk. It was like being taken back to four or five years ago. He was reliving the hits of 1970 or something like that. It is because those opposite do not have a plan for the future. Every single week that Tony Abbott has been Prime Minister 1,000 extra people have become unemployed. How is that for a figure? It is a horrible figure. As I said, that is 800,000 people. In July, another 40,000 people joined the unemployment queue. Before the election, the member for Warringah said that he would deliver jobs. But, instead, he has done a job on the Australian economy—a shameful job. Since this government took office, the 1,000 people who have been forced to join the unemployment queue in electorates like Moreton and Petrie have been asking, 'What is the plan? What is the government's plan? It is obviously not going to include renewable energy. Large-scale renewable energy investment has fallen by 88 per cent. At the same time world investment in renewable energy has increased by 16 per cent, investment here dropped by 88 per cent. What did that translate to? Lost jobs. Mr Hutchinson interjecting— Mr PERRETT HVP I am sure they will remember that down in Tasmania. Under Labor, we went through the global financial crisis, the worst economic time since the Great Depression, but still unemployment did not go over six per cent. This government is negligent. Let's compare ourselves with other countries. Unemployment rose to eight per cent in the UK, to 10 per cent in the US and to nine per cent in Canada. Let's look at them now. The unemployment rate in the UK is 5.6 per cent. The unemployment rate in the US is 5.3 per cent. The unemployment rate in Germany is 4.7 per cent. They are comparable countries. Under this government's stewardship, we are going backwards and there is no positive plan for the future. Obviously the Prime Minister has no vision. He is a boxer looking for an opponent. That is what he likes. He likes to 'fight against' rather than 'work for'. This country does not have time for him. We need a leader who is able to make the right decisions. (Time expired) 15:55 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks Today's discussion is about jobs, so let's talk about jobs. There is nothing more important to jobs in Australia than trade with our Asian partners and particularly with China. What this government has done through the free trade agreement is create an historic opportunity for the creation of tens of thousands of jobs. Let's look at what those opposite say. Let's shift our attention to the normally very civil environment of the Federation Chamber, where just a couple of nights ago the member for Bendigo gave an extraordinary, divisive, completely unfounded and damaging speech about the free trade agreement. There was so much in that speech that I would hesitate to repeat, but one of the things she said was that: It is also alarming for consumers to think that you could call an electrician to come to your house and not know whether they have Australian qualifications and safety standards or those of another country. That is a very, very serious claim. That is basically trying to scare people and say that the electricity environment will not be safe because of the China free trade agreement. But we know from the Australia-China Relations Institute, headed up by Bob Carr, that, under the China FTA, the skill level of 457 visa applicants from China will be assessed in exactly the same way as those from 150 other countries around the world. We have an agreement here that is going to create 178,000 jobs. We have signed a trade agreement with our biggest trading partner. It is twice as big or more than our second biggest partner. It accounts for more than one-quarter of our entire trade. We have signed an extraordinary, blockbuster agreement with China that is going to create an extraordinary number of jobs right around the country, nowhere more than in my electorate of Banks where this agreement has been greeted with much enthusiasm. We have a member over on the other side scaremongering and making appalling statements about this free trade agreement. If the Leader of the Opposition has any courage or capacity to pull his members into line, he should publicly rebuke his member for those appalling statements. We are talking about jobs. The story on jobs is a very good one. We have the strongest rate of job creation in the G7. The G7 includes the biggest, most powerful economies in the world and Australia's job creation rate is the strongest. We got rid of the carbon tax, which has significantly improved the lives of ordinary Australian families and saved them $550 per year. We are also going to crack down on this absurd practice of fly-in fly-out litigation where environmental groups with no relation to a particular project can fly in and slap down a legal order and delay and frustrate projects that can create tens of thousands of jobs. The Minister for the Environment has approved projects worth $1 trillion since taking office two years ago. He has approved $1 trillion worth of projects because he knows that the last thing we need is obstructionist, fly-in fly-out litigation. We need to get projects happening, construction on the ground, workers on the ground and cranes in the air. Last year we had record new-company creation—the highest since records were created. We had a 10 per cent increase in a year from 2013. There is an alternative proposition on the other side. We as a society want to encourage people to save for superannuation. Those opposite want to smash hundreds of thousands of Australians with a new tax on superannuation. We want to encourage people to build assets. About 70 per cent of household assets are in housing—either owner occupied or investment. They want to hit people who invest in housing with a new tax through changes to negative gearing. We want to protect the environment through smart strategies that actually work, like Direct Action. They want to hit them with a new, souped up electricity tax scheme. Tax reform is not about tax increases. Tax increases are tax increases are tax increases are tax increases. They are not tax reform; they are very, very different things. This government is committed to real tax reform to drive productivity and business formation. They just want to charge more tax. 16:00 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I am really pleased for the opportunity to participate in the matter of public importance today because it gives me a chance to reflect on what we have seen in the last, shall we say, eventful fortnight in politics. I think I speak for most Australians when I say that those of us on this side of the House did not believe that this government could get any more hapless, but then we got to August and the switch was flicked to craven, incompetent and, frankly, at times pretty damn weird. We hear a lot during MPIs and question time that the dynamic feels a little jovial, but I have to say it does not reflect the real attitude of people on this side of the House to what is happening in politics today. The truth is that we are worried—very worried—because what we see on the other side of the chamber is a government that has completely lost its way. Having lost its way, it has become consumed with things that are essentially meaningless to the lives of ordinary Australians. We have seen these things that the government obsesses over from day to day while real, serious issues are affecting the lives of Australians out there in the community. Let me run through some of the examples. One of them is this awful leaking that we have seen from the cabinet over previous days. We have the Prime Minister coming out, as he does, all bluster, saying that he is going to crack down on people who leaked from cabinet, and then what do we see? Half an hour later what happens in cabinet gets leaked again. Day after day we are seeing the lines that get sent around from the Prime Minister's office leaked out into the broader community, and all they are doing is just eating themselves up. But what is probably even more worrying than all this is the fact that, all the while that they consume themselves with these problems, the government have no agenda. We saw it earlier with the leaked cabinet document. Basically, the cabinet met to talk about a few matters that were not really that important. There was no substantive policy on the cabinet agenda, and then the last note on the cabinet agenda was that the next meeting of cabinet was to be cancelled. We do see that down here in the House because we are scratching around a bit looking for legislation that we can talk about, when all of the things that are really critical to what is happening in this country at the moment are not getting debated and discussed in this parliament. I do not want to gloss over one of the most awful and disappointing things we have seen in the last two weeks, and that is the scurrilous attempt to shut down the debate about equal marriage that should be happening today in this parliament. We have seen the Prime Minister, who is meant to be the statesman and to be showing leadership to this country, using his power as the leader of this country to try to stymie debate in his party room and to stack the party room so that the people of Australia do not get the debate that millions of them want to see in this chamber. The reason this is so worrying to us as Labor people is not that we really care what sorts of fights the people on the other side have between themselves but that there are fundamental problems facing this country that are not getting the attention that they deserve. The critical problem facing this country today is unemployment. There are 800,000 Australians who are unemployed in this country today. That is an absolutely staggering figure and any government worth its salt would spend every minute of every day trying to work out what to do with these people and how to get them back into work. Yet what do we see? They just fight amongst themselves. That is not the end of the employment problems that we have in this country. One million Australians are underemployed and another 800,000 Australians are getting the disability support pension. All these problems are dramatically more difficult to solve than when we had the global financial crisis, when global conditions were so much more challenging. We can never, ever forget when we face an employment issue in Australia the terrible plight of young people who are unemployed. We know that when young people spend significant time out of work they bear scars of that for their entire working lives. We look at these people when they are 40 years old and, if they spent significant periods unemployed in their youth, they are getting paid significantly less and have a much patchier employment record for the rest of their lives. It is a scourge on this country to have so many young people unemployed. Many of the people in this chamber would represent electorates where 20 per cent of young people are out of work. I feel this very acutely. When I talk to youth organisations, they tell me there are young people in their services who believe that they will never get a job. What we have on the other side is a government that is consumed with its own particular controversies, and it is just not good enough for this country. It is not good enough. 16:05 Mr HUTCHINSON 212585 Lyons It gives me great pleasure to speak on this matter of public importance because, indeed, jobs and the cost of living are things that are important to everyday Australians. They are important to people in my electorate as well, but the people in my electorate and the people in Tasmania lived it. They lived through the destructive misery that was created when we had the double whammy of a Labor-Greens government in Hobart and a Labor-Greens government in Canberra. They saw the damage that was created when that situation occurred. They saw the lack of jobs, they saw the opportunities taken away and they saw the incentive for people and small business to invest removed from them, because there was no incentive. The answer was always 'No'. I see it here today and I hear them today. We saw in question time that the way they operate on the other side is by scaring good people with mistruths and misrepresentation of fact. They scared pensioners about things that this government has done. This is not why I got into this business; it is not why I was elected to represent the people. This is the same modus operandi that the Greens use in their fundraising campaigns. We have seen it on the Great Barrier Reef and in the good work that Greg Hunt has done. It is not about the Barrier Reef; he has removed from them the ability to scare people and, therefore, generate revenue for the causes that they want to prosecute. That leads us into the discussion around Adani. We lived it for six long years, where we had the Greens wagging the tail of the Labor dog. It was a disgrace. We saw that with the forestry industry. We have the best managed forests in the world in my state of Tasmania. It was never just about the people who were working in those forests. It was about workers in the takeaway shops. It was about the people working in the tyre businesses in Sorell. It was about the engineering shops in Launceston. These were the businesses. So, when they talk about the numbers of people employed, they never mention the broader impact that these sorts of industries had. It is the same for Adani and Queensland. I heard a figure quoted the other day—I think it was by the Greens: 'There're only 2,000 jobs.' In fact, I got an email at my office the other day saying, 'There's only 2,000 jobs,' or 1,500 jobs. The figure we are quoting is 10,000 jobs, because it is not just about the people working directly in the mine; it is about all the other jobs there. It is about the transport operators. It is about the family businesses. It is about the subcontractors who work there, and I know that well. Whether it is Bell Bay Aluminium in the north of the state, whether it is Norske Skog at Boyer in my electorate, whether it is Nyrstar in the good member for Denison's electorate, we live this. The job-destroying tactics and misrepresentation by those on the other side is simply palpable. Tasmania has turned the corner, I am very pleased to say, with small businesses once again having the confidence to invest—and it is little wonder, with the good work that this government has done, particularly in the last budget, with things like employee share schemes, the instant asset write-offs, the tax cuts and the discounts. Unemployment is coming down. When we came to government in September 2013, unemployment in Tasmania was 7.9 per cent. Today it is 6.6 per cent. It is working, and every Tasmanian, if they are honest, knows it. They know we are working collaboratively with a government in Hobart that is absolutely committed to jobs and growth and they know we are working with a government here in Canberra that is absolutely committed to jobs and growth. My state and the good people of my state deserve so much better but were dealt a dud hand under Labor and the Greens for six long years. We are turning the corner. Confidence is returning. As for services, we have seen tourist numbers in my state set new records this year. On education services, our very important University of Tasmania is attracting more students. These are things that will expand under the free trade agreements that we are negotiating. We have already done that with China, Japan and South Korea. Yet we have those on the other side, at the behest of the unions, trying to knock off the China free trade agreement. It is a disgrace. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D The discussion has concluded. BILLS 72 BILLS Gene Technology Amendment Bill 2015, Australian Defence Force Cover Bill 2015, Australian Defence Force Superannuation Bill 2015, Defence Legislation Amendment (Superannuation and ADF Cover) Bill 2015, Passports Legislation Amendment (Integrity) Bill 2015 72

Gene Technology Amendment Bill 2015

Australian Defence Force Cover Bill 2015

Australian Defence Force Superannuation Bill 2015

Defence Legislation Amendment (Superannuation and ADF Cover) Bill 2015

Passports Legislation Amendment (Integrity) Bill 2015

Returned from Senate 72 PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 72 PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 16:10 Ms MacTIERNAN L6P Perth Mr Speaker, I wish to raise a matter under standing order 68. I wish to make a personal explanation. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D I give the call to the member for Perth. Ms MacTIERNAN L6P Yesterday, in the other place, one Senator Mathias Cormann claimed that about 15 years ago I had campaigned against the Northbridge Tunnel and the Graham Farmer Freeway, only to rush to the front row and take a seat at the official opening. I have no recollection of such an event and I have written to Senator Cormann today and asked him to produce evidence of this allegation that he is making. BILLS 73 BILLS Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 73

Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015

Second Reading 73 16:11 Ms MacTIERNAN L6P Perth Labor have been an enthusiastic supporter of this proposal for an infrastructure bank, as we see the need for us to have in place good multilateral arrangements that will facilitate development in our region. We are very mindful of the need for investment across our region in order to allow many people to reach economic fulfilment and we totally appreciate that this will be a great positive for the region. We are also very mindful of wanting to support China when it is working to take a leadership role. It is now the second largest economy in the world, and of course it will want to have a leading role in the political and diplomatic architecture of the region. I think the leadership that they have shown on this matter is fantastic. Labor certainly needed no persuading that we should get behind this project. But I do note that a lot of the speakers from the other side have been focusing on ChAFTA, the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, claiming that we are trying to whip up a xenophobic reaction from the community, and I can tell you it is the exact opposite. Our whole instinct is to want to support the China free trade agreement. Under the leadership of Senator Penny Wong, we have been enthusiastic embracers of moving the trade barriers down and integrating our economies more closely with those of our Asian neighbours. So we have totally no desire to undermine a free trade agreement. However, we cannot stand by and allow to happen what it is proposed will happen under this agreement. We do not believe that the government have been honest with the Australian people about how this arrangement will operate. They have tried to hide behind the banner of xenophobia—accusing others of it—to avoid discussing some of the detail that is creating concern out there in the community. Why are the unions concerned? Why are the union movement concerned? It is true they are concerned. It is true that they are running a program about it. But it is because they are deeply concerned about the implication of this for Australian jobs. And no amount of bleating and jumping up and down should replace the cool, calm and honest analysis of this agreement. I know that the government often recites—and a former Labor luminary notes—clause (2)(e) of the memorandum of understanding on an investment facilitation arrangement. This is the provision that is often quoted: The project company agrees to comply with all Australian laws and regulations, including applicable Australian workplace law, work safety law and relevant Australian licensing, regulation and certification standards; If that is all you read, you would say, 'That's fine.' But that is not all there is. That is what we are asking there to be some honesty about. Let us look in a little more detail at how this operates. We have got the agreement proper and we have got a provision at the side that relates to investment facilitation arrangements. We have read the clause, which makes it all sound like it is going to be good. But then we have got clause 4, and it outlines the areas that could be negotiated. These include the occupations covered by the IFA agreement, English language proficiency requirements, qualification and experience requirements, and calculation of terms and conditions of the temporary skilled migration income threshold. So it is expressly opening up the opportunity for the project companies to request concessions in relation to any of those issues. And one of those issues is, quite clearly, the income and the terms and conditions of employment. We then go to clause 8 of this memorandum of understanding. It quite clearly indicates that labour market testing is optional for IFAs. It says: Once the IFA is executed, direct employers … on the eligible project can seek the endorsement of the project company to enter into a labour agreement under the IFA with DIBP to sponsor and nominate temporary skilled workers to be engaged on the project. A labour agreement will be entered into in a timely manner and will set out the number, occupations and terms and conditions under which temporary skilled workers can be nominated, consistent with the terms of the IFA, and the sponsorship obligations associated with the labour agreement, including any requirements for labour market testing. So, quite clearly, labour market testing is at play. There may not be any requirement for labour market testing. If the government is sincere and if the government is truly of the view that we have misread this agreement—that the natural and plain words of the agreement do not mean what they do—we ask: let us put this into some legislation. Let us, in the legislation, put this beyond doubt and allay the very real concerns that emanate from a close reading not just of the agreement but of the side letters, the memorandums of understanding. There are people on the other side of the House that are capable of reading these documents and making an interpretation of them. That is our point. We want to support this free trade agreement. We do actually want to see our economies grow together. But we cannot stand by idly and allow there to be this provision that will see there being, quite conceivably, in relation to these large projects, an abandonment of the principles of labour market testing and all sorts of concessional arrangements entered into around the skills of the persons coming in and around the terms and conditions. The whole Australian story, what we have been able to achieve in this country, has been built upon there being the availability of good, well-paying jobs within this country, and labour—'labour' with a small 'l'—having been able to negotiate an industrial relations architecture that ensures that working people are paid a decent wage. We are not going to stand back and let the essence of that Australian experience be compromised by this abandonment of these principles. And it is in the fine print and it is complex and there are a number of documents that have to be read together. But I actually congratulate the union movement. I congratulate them for the attention to detail that they have paid. They have been able to analyse this document closely and see the future pitfalls. And the response from the Prime Minister, along the lines of, 'It'll never happen,' is simply not good enough. There is a need for us to be able to protect the jobs of Australian people. My electorate is 46 per cent born overseas, and they share this concern. This is not a concern just of Anglo-Celtic Australians or Italian Australians or Greek Australians; this is a concern shared right across the board, because people actually get it. They get that the ability for us to have an industrial relations architecture that protects wages and the economy and that gives labour a fair bargaining power is the very thing that has created the circumstances wherein they can build a better life. These are people coming from India, from Vietnam and from China. They are not concerned about this. This is not anything to do with xenophobia. This is about getting across the detail of this legislation. I think that the Prime Minister is paying the people of Australia a profound disrespect with the two options—you are either with us or against us—and refusing to get down and examine these legitimate concerns that are being raised by the union movement, by AFTINET and by this side of the House. We want to work with the other side on this, but these are issues that do need to be addressed. Thank you. 16:23 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright It gives me great pleasure to stand and speak on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015. I will do my very best to contain my comments to this bill—unlike the good member for Perth, who managed to make 100 per cent of her contribution dedicated to the free trade agreement! I did not hear the words 'Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank' come across her lips once! Nevertheless, I will try to enlighten the House as to the benefits of a bill which I believe has bipartisan support. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 enables Australia to become a substantial founding member in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which is expected to become operational from late 2015. The bank will boost economic growth, create jobs and promote trade in our region by financing much-needed infrastructure investment, using its authorised capital base of around $100 billion to help address the Asia-Pacific region's acute infrastructure needs, estimated to be around $8 trillion this decade. That is an enormous amount of money that is going to be needed to build wealth in the region. Can I say in my opening comments how critical this bank set-up is for Australia? We saw that firsthand when China—one of our Asian partners—was doing well, with growth rates of around 13 per cent. Our iron ore, resources, infrastructure and services where we can value-add, like our education services, health services and our food, flourished. But as we saw China come off 13 per cent growth back to where they sit currently at about six per cent, that has had a negative impact on us. Any economist would share their concern that the long-term sustainability of growth in China at those rates of around 13 per cent was always going to be difficult. We needed to see a correction and a more level long-term average applied to sustainable growth rates in the Chinese market. It just goes to show the point that I want to make: if our Asian partners are doing well and if their lower classes are shifting to their growing middle class then Australia is a beneficiary of that. If Australia is a partner in a project like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank then we will be one of the first to benefit. With the emergence of a growing middle class comes a greater need for protein. We have not only the benefits of the free trade agreement but an extra one million head of cattle will come out of Australia as a result of that free trade agreement, and those on the other side want to say that that is not good for Australia or for Australian jobs. I beg to differ, and Australia will ultimately be the judge on this. There is a good reason for the member for Perth using the word 'xenophobia' on a number of occasions during her contribution. From the outside, that is what it looks like to anyone looking at how Labor want to address the free trade agreements. This will create opportunities for the region and Australia by investing in areas such as transport, energy and water infrastructure, ports, logistics, environmental protection, information and communications technology and, as I said earlier, agriculture. We only need to look at some of the current port infrastructure. Some of our Asian partners, like Laos, are not set up for live cattle imports. We are quite happy to partner with them to build those ports to unload cattle. We are quite happy to deal with them to create efficiencies in their resources ports so that when our product gets there we can increase the productivity in those countries, to increase their turnaround times in boat movements. If that means investing in ports, then that is a great investment for Australia to be committed to. During the GFC, the then government chose to stimulate the economy. We agreed to a stimulus package, but we would have invested the money in far different ways. We would have invested the capital that was needed to stimulate the economy in the very same ways that this global bank is looking to do in Asia—investing in infrastructure; investing in upgrading port facilities, such as at Abbot Point. The capital investments that we would have made would have given the capacity to generate its own income, service its own debt and then, once the debt was paid off, have assets in our country actually deriving revenue and giving a benefit back to the community. As it was, we managed to put pink batts into ceilings and burn 400 houses to the ground. The only thing we stimulated was the building trade, rebuilding homes. Australia's prosperity and economic growth is tied closely to Asia. A stronger Asian region underpins a stronger Australian economy. Australia will benefit from improved infrastructure throughout the Asian region, which should provide greater opportunities for Australian businesses and increase demand for our services and our commodity exports. New ports and railways in AIIB member countries, such as India, Indonesia and Korea, will mean that Australian exports can reach new markets or expand existing markets. Our Asian trading partners need strong economies and we need to have strong relationships with them. We are constantly reminded about how we can do immense damage to relationships with trading partners. For example, one phone call can shut down the live cattle trade overnight on the back of one Four Corners program televised here in Australia. Protein, by way of beef, went from $2 to $7 a kilo in a very short time in Indonesia. There were associated health risks, potentially in the provincial areas, where lack of protein in the diet had substantial community— Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 75 ADJOURNMENT Taxation 75 16:30 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fraser Respected political commentator Peter Hartcher recently wrote that increasing numbers of Australians are asking the question: what is the point of the Abbott government? One point, you might think, given that the Abbott government came to office promising that it would deal with what it called a 'budget emergency' in order to deliver a surplus in the first year and every year after that, would be to redress holes in our tax system. We have heard plenty of talk about the holes in our tax system through a Senate inquiry on multinational taxation, which handed down its report at the beginning of this parliamentary sitting week. Getting the multinational taxation system right should be a concern for all Australians. It is not an antibusiness measure to want a uniform tax code; it is a pro-business measure—because a tax code with too many loopholes hurts businesses that are doing the right thing. When he was asked on ABC radio what the government was doing about the problem, Treasurer Joe Hockey said: … in December, all companies that have a taxable income over $100 million have to disclose how much tax they pay in Australia. He was pointing out the benefits of tax transparency, making sure that, as Justice Louis Brandeis put it, sunlight is the best disinfectant. With more information, we can tackle the problem of multinational profit shifting. Unfortunately, what Treasurer Hockey did not say on ABC was that he was about to gut that law. Today the Abbott government introduced into parliament a bill which will exempt half the firms that would have been caught by Labor's tax transparency law from having to comply with that. That is right. They say, on the ABC, that they are for transparency; when they come in this House, they are for secrecy. That means, if this bill passes the House, that we will never know how much tax dodging is occurring by Australia's biggest firms. These laws only apply to significant firms in Australia. You have to have a turnover of over $100 million. The estimate is that there are only around 2,000 companies that will be caught by it. What is striking about this law is that it is the first major piece of tax legislation the government has introduced this year. Mr Hockey talks a big game when it comes to tax transparency and tax reform, but when he comes into this House it turns out that he is all mouth and no trousers. He is not serious about making sure that we tackle the problem of multinational profit shifting. My office wrote to the Treasury under the freedom of information laws asking for copies of all correspondence, in any format, to the Treasurer, the Assistant Treasurer and their staff regarding altering the scope of rules requiring publication of tax paid by firms earning over $100 million. The government have responded to that. They told us how many requests they received. Would anyone like to take a guess at the number of submissions received? Well, it is an easy number. It is a whole number. It is a round number. It is zero! That suggest that this is not the kind of sensible reform that has come out of a thorough consultation. It suggests, instead, that it is, more likely, the sort of reform that you dream up with a couple of mates after the second glass of wine at the Melbourne Club. This is a government that is on the side of secrecy. It is not on the side of regular Australians, of small businesses, of pensioners, or of community groups who want tax transparency. The government knows that if we have a tax system for multinationals which does not ask big firms to pay their fair share then two things have to happen: we have to cut services or we have to raise taxes on the most vulnerable. We need tax transparency because we need to make sure we have a good tax code. While this government has handed $1.1 billion back to multinationals and voted against profit-shifting measures every time it has had the chance, Labor put on the table during the first half of this parliamentary term a sensible plan, costed by the Parliamentary Budget Office, that returns $7 billion to the budget bottom line. We were following work that had been done by the OECD under their base erosion and profit shifting initiative. That means that Labor is serious about tackling multinational tax avoidance, while the coalition is in favour of loopholes and secrecy. Calare Electorate: Mining 76 16:35 Mr JOHN COBB 00AN1 Calare I rise to speak about the Lithgow Springvale mine, where over 300 workers will bear the brunt of a final decision not being handed down to extend the project. This is not a new mine; this is an extension of operations of an existing and quite old mine. On Friday, Centennial Coal's licence to mine at Lithgow will expire, resulting in some hundreds of workers being stood down. Over the past three years these workers have faced uncertainty while the assessment process continues. Of course we must have rigorous assessment processes in place. However, today I want the parliament and the people that are causing a lot of this process to take place to be aware of what it means to those on the front line. The Springvale mine employs well over 300 people, and tomorrow 218 of them will be stood down. Ninety-eight of these workers have over eight weeks annual leave, while 255 have less than six weeks and some less than two weeks. At this time they face an unspecified amount of time without work and in some cases without payment. We have to acknowledge the hardship this has produced. Last Friday a community meeting was held in Lithgow, and many of those present were miners. There were hundreds there, probably 400. As I walked around the room, it was clear that many of them were not miners; they were members of the Lithgow community. This is a strong community showing its support. In regional communities we do stick together. You realise that this is not just about those who work at the mine; it has an effect on the whole community. The meeting acted as an opportunity for our community to have their voice heard. They spoke with passion and they showed real concern for the future of their colleagues and the future of the region. While we must ensure the correct planning processes are adhered to, we must not forget the reality of what over 300 jobs mean to a community and to the central west. I brought Maree Stratham, the mayor of Lithgow, Ray Brown, the deputy mayor, and the general manager to meet with the Minister for the Environment, Greg Hunt. He was able to assure them—and we expect it—that a good decision will be handed down for sign-off by the federal government. Due to the fact that we came to office with a one-stop-shop policy, the state government is able and has been able to do the work required by the federal government so that there will be minimal—and I mean minimal—hold-up on the decision once it reaches the federal government. Lithgow is a place where, for over 200 years and especially over the last 100 years, what we do in that part of the world is mine coal. We do create energy. We do have power stations. We do have forestry. We do have agriculture. We do have the Lithgow Small Arms Factory. Those who would cause the state government to have to dot every 'i' and cross every 't' to prevent people from making objections in court and tying up these things for years has meant that the state government has to go through an incredible process to prevent that from happening. What I say to them is: if you don't like mining, if you don't like agriculture, if you don't like forestry, if you don't like power generation or if you don't like the Small Arms Factory, don't come and live in our region. Just don't come there. And don't stand outside it, trying to cause every bit of trouble you can. When you put 300 people's jobs on the line, you put a community on the line. We do not need this. It is not even a new project. It is a continuation of an existing one. Everything has been done right. I just wish that people who are not in our community but are outside it would stop trying to cause every possible legal disruption to industry, employment and production that they can. Middle East 77 16:39 Ms PARKE HWR Fremantle Considering the approach this government has taken so far to our renewed military engagement in the Middle East, it was no great surprise to hear through the media that the Prime Minister was entertaining an expanded role for Australia's armed forces following a public call by Liberal MP Dan Tehan that the Australian Air Force could undertake strikes within Syria. Far be it for anyone to suggest that such concepts might first be discussed in this place, the national parliament, rather than aired in the media as a 'thought-bubble'. After all, our military commitment to the conflicts occurring in Iraq has been badly formed and poorly defined from the start. We announced we would be going to war in Iraq with no reference to an appropriate resolution by the United Nations, at a time when we were on the UN Security Council, and without invitation, at that stage, from the Iraqi government. Having once proposed that Australia act alone in putting troops on the ground in Iraq, the Prime Minister has described his latest military idea in the following terms: While the legality is different, whether these air strikes are taking place in Syria or Iraq, the morality is the same. The death cult is just as evil on either side of the border. It's just as dangerous on either side of the border. It's just as deadly on either side of the border and that's why I can understand why there is some interest on the part of our partners in Australian air strikes being extended. This sophisticated analysis brings to mind Mr Abbott's    argument against military involvement in Syria from back in 2013, when, as opposition leader, he said: We've got a civil war going on in that benighted country between two pretty unsavoury sides. It's not goodies versus baddies—it's baddies versus baddies. In the pages of Australian political history, that really speaks for itself. But I was glad yesterday to hear Vice Admiral David Johnston pour what could only be described as cold water on the Prime Minister's latest idea, noting that the circumstances in Iraq and Syria are very different. Last week, Anthony Ricketts of the University of Queensland noted in the Age: The day that Mr Tehan called for Australia to expand its role into Syria, Attorney-General George Brandis reinstated the PKK on Australia's terrorist list. This decision, then, runs contrary to the critical role that the Kurdish forces play in the war against IS, and demonstrates the lack of co-ordination, and awareness, in Australia's national security strategy. As a democracy, we continue to operate on a substandard basis as long as we fail to institute the sensible reform of a 'War Powers Act', enabling the parliament to debate any proposal to commit forces overseas when Australia is not under direct threat. When such a decision can occur with so little scrutiny and so little structure, the potential for mission creep is obvious. If it is not clear at the outset why we are in Iraq, what we are seeking to achieve and how long we expect to be involved, can anyone be surprised when the reasons, objectives and scope of our engagement shift and move like smoke in the wind? The rationale for being involved in Iraq this time was at first a humanitarian rationale: we were seeking to protect some 50,000 Yazidis under threat from IS in the vicinity of Mount Sinjar. Ever since, the rationale has begun a telling slide into the strange and overheated claim of self-defence. It has been said that we are fighting IS in Iraq because IS is coming for us—however alarmist that must sound to the people in Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and other countries within cooee of the battleground. While the Prime Minister contemplates bombing Syria, the Syrian government this week proceeded to further bomb its own people, with multiple strikes on a marketplace in the town of Douma. At least 82 people were killed and more than 250 wounded in one of the most violent single incidents in the war that is now four-years old. Let's remember, as the Prime Minister considers his own bombing campaign in Syria, that there are nearly 12 million people made homeless by this conflict: four million refugees and 7.6 million people who are internally displaced. It would be interesting to hear more from the government about this aspect of conflict in the Middle East. I am glad that Australia contributed $20 million in April to the United Nations No Lost Generation Strategy, supporting refugee children in Lebanon and Jordan. But let us not forget that the UN-Syria appeal is seeking $6.5 billion to address what continues to be the greatest humanitarian crisis on the planet. Unfortunately, as we continue on an uncharted trajectory of increased military involvement and related expenditure, we plummet down a clearly marked ravine of sharply-cut international aid. By 2016-17 our aid budget will be at 0.22 per cent of GNI—its lowest level—comfortably in the bottom half of OECD nations and well below average. I have no doubt that in the coming months we will be subject to the further ratcheting skyward of concerns that exist in relation to global terrorism—as it is termed—and further calls for poorly justified measures in the name of greater security. Based on what we have seen so far, some of these measures will impact on human rights and civil liberties and the rule of law. Some of them, ironically, will make us less safe. Trade 78 16:44 Mr WILLIAMS 249758 Hindmarsh The current economic situation in South Australia has been well-documented in recent times. We have the highest unemployment rate of all the states in Australia. We are witnessing the downturn in the mining and manufacturing automotive sectors, which is leaving many South Australians concerned about what the future holds. Unfortunately, however, the state government is more focused on having a debate about changing South Australia's time zone than on promoting the opportunities presented by the FTAs and delivering on its 2010 promise to create 100,000 jobs by February 2016. For all the news about the state's unemployment rate, the decline in manufacturing and the downturn in the mining sector, agriculture and services like education, tourism and health remain strong foundations for South Australia and offer immense growth potential. This growth potential is further heightened by the trifecta of free trade agreements with our Asian neighbours that we have signed over the past 18 months. The opportunities and potential that Asia offers is incredible, and South Australia is well positioned to leverage off the opportunities in front of us. Asia is on our doorstep. Not only is the sheer size of the population in Asia important; the consistent growth of Asia's middle class is key to this. In the future, Asia will be home to the majority of the world's middle class—one billion people. By 2025, the region will account for almost half of the world's output. The increasingly wealthy and mobile middle class is creating new opportunities and demanding a diverse range of goods and services, health and aged care, education, tourism, and high-quality foods and wines. Thanks to the federal government, South Australian businesses and primary producers have been provided the platform to tap into this market. The free trade agreements with China, Korea and Japan mark a new era in trade liberalisation for Australia. As the Minister for Trade and Investment, Andrew Robb, always says, they are a truly historic trifecta of agreements that will deliver jobs, economic growth and prosperity for all Australians for decades to come. It is estimated that these agreements will boost the economy by over $24 billion and create thousands of new jobs over the next 20 years—yes, thousands of new jobs. The recently signed China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, ChAFTA, will bring unprecedented opportunities for South Australia's agriculture sector, which will be able to capitalise on its well-deserved reputation as a clean, green producer of premium food and beverage products. ChAFTA closes the gap between Australia and international competitors that already have FTAs with China, such as New Zealand and Chile, and provides a significant advantage over major competitors, such as the US and European Union, which do not have FTAs with China. To put the impact of the historic China free trade agreement in context: Australia and New Zealand commenced negotiations with China in 2005, with New Zealand finalising its agreement in 2008. Since that time, New Zealand's dairy industry has grown by close to 900 per cent while our dairy sector grew by 150 per cent. New Zealand's free trade agreement with China has been an enormous boost for their economy whilst South Australian dairy farmers had to wait, as did our wineries and food producers. Already we are seeing some quite extraordinary business opportunities and partnerships emerging between Australian and Chinese companies in anticipation of the China deal coming into force later this year. The recent special signing of an MOU between Adelaide Produce Markets and Guangzhou Jiangnan Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market is a prime example of FTAs working for local growers. I was proud to join the Prime Minister, Senator Sean Edwards and South Australian Liberal shadow minister David Ridgway MLC to tour the Adelaide Produce Markets and witness the signing of the MOU. Of this special event and the importance of China FTA, Angelo Demasi, CEO of Adelaide Produce Markets said: South Australian growers are extremely optimistic about the future trade conditions with China—with all tariffs on horticulture products to go within four to 8 years. The recent special signing of an MOU between Adelaide Produce Markets and Guangzhou Jiangnan Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market is a prime example of the FTA's working for local growers. The MOU has now paved the way for increased exporting opportunities to China. The Guangzhou Jiangnan Fruit and Vegetable Wholesale Market is one of China's largest wholesale fresh produce markets, which supplies a diverse group of retail customers in China. Needless to say, this poses a significant export opportunity for our local horticulture industry. This agreement will provide tens of thousands of new jobs, providing hope and opportunity to all Australians, including young Australians including my children, Sasha and Joshua, up there in the gallery today, who are witnessing how important such an agreement is. The free trade agreements are a key plank of our economic strategy to help drive jobs and growth beyond the mining boom. This is critical for South Australia, as we must maximise existing strengths while looking to build new industries. Just as we have taken advantage of the strong growth in Japan, Korea and China over the last 30 years by supplying minerals and energy to these countries, I believe we will gain enormously by supplying fine food and wine and quality services to those same countries over the next 20 years to come. This is a unique opportunity to grow our economy. We must all act in the best interests of South Australia and our country. Blair Seniors Link Directory 79 16:49 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair I rise to speak about a valuable new information resource for older people living in Ipswich and the Somerset Region, the 2015 Blair Seniors Link Directory. I was pleased to launch this, my first annual Blair Seniors Link Directory, last Friday, on the eve of 2015 Queensland Seniors Week. The directory provides information on a wide range of services, activities and programs available to seniors living in the Blair electorate. It details more than 40 service providers, community organisations and agencies. They include: Home Assist Secure, Walk on Wheels, Carers Queensland, Golden Years Ipswich, Ipswich Men's Shed, and Ipswich Meals on Wheels, which, interestingly, was begun in 1956 by the late Mrs Rhonda Cameron, whose husband, Dr Donald Cameron, was Minister for Health in the Menzies government and a former member for Oxley. These organisations, and the others listed in the directory, help seniors live more healthy, full and enjoyable lives. However, it is often difficult for people—especially those not connected to the internet—to know what services are available and how to access them. The Blair Seniors Links Directory puts that information at easy reach. To assist further, this week providers from the directory have held stalls at the first annual Blair Seniors Link Information Week, outside my electorate office at the Brassall Shopping Centre in Ipswich. They include: the Department of Human Services, whose staff have been on hand to show seniors how to navigate and download apps to help with Centrelink and Medicare; Blue Care; KinCare; and SeniorNet, the wonderful Ipswich based organisation that assists seniors to use computers and the internet. Throughout the week, local seniors have been dropping into Brassall Shopping Centre to chat with providers and have their questions answered face to face. I offer my warm thanks to the service providers, community organisations and agencies who held stalls this week and the many others who participated in the directory. I also thank the owners and managers of Brassall Shopping Centre for permitting me to hold the information week. Finally, I also acknowledge Kylie Stoneman from my office for her work putting the directory and information week together. I understand her caffeine intake over the last fortnight has been unusually high, even for her. I am delighted to report the directory is already a smash hit. On Monday this week, Ipswich City Council held its annual Seniors' Week Variety Day at the Ipswich Showgrounds. I certainly would have enjoyed the festivities and I would have been there, if not for the parliamentary sitting week. However, there was a Shayne Neumann stall staffed by my great volunteers, who tell me they distributed more than 520 of the Blair Seniors Link directories to those attending the variety day. My office tells me they have been inundated by constituent requests for the directory and have been sending copies across Ipswich and the Somerset region during the week. But it is not over yet: tomorrow, I will be attending the Somerset Regional Council's Seniors' Day at the Esk civic centre, holding a mobile office. I anticipate that by the end of this week we would have given out a thousand of the new directories. Somerset Regional Council's Seniors' Day is always a terrific event. I expect the Blair Seniors Link Directory to receive a very strong and warm reception. The need for a directory came about because I held the Blair Disability Links event for the first time in 2010 to provide organisations in the Blair electorate and people, their families, carers and service providers with a forum to connect and share information. The Blair Disability Links is held ever November each year to celebrate the International Day of People with Disability. It has been an enormous success. Last year, 750 people came to talk to providers and with each other and to look at the stalls and see what was being provided. The success of Blair Disability Links prompted me to produce an information kit detailing the disability services available in Blair and also an information kit to seniors this year. Since 2010, I have given out 20,000 of the Blair Disability Links kits from my electorate office to help people with disability, their carers and providers across Ipswich and the Somerset region. With the success of that particular directory, we have launched the Blair Seniors Links this year. I launched it last Friday with a round table held at Blue Care at Eastern Heights in Ipswich, where I was joined by representatives from Cabanda Care at Rosewood,    Anglicare West Moreton, Carers Queensland at Ipswich, Southern Cross Care at Raceview, the West Moreton Hospital and Health Service, Carinity Baptist Aged Care, Ozcare and Blue Care. It was great to hear from local providers about what is happening in their sector. As the shadow minister for ageing and as a local member, it is important to listen to local members in the development of policy. Mining 80 16:54 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson The people of Central and North Queensland—in cities and towns like Mackay, Bowen, Ayr and Townsville—have been through difficult times over the past two years as the region adjusts to a downturn in the resources sector which underpins that region's economy. It has been tough. In the city of Mackay, where you could not find a house to rent for love nor money just a few years ago, there are now 1,200 houses for rent and 3, 000 for sale. Many people have left the region and many are in dire need of employment. Dozens of businesses have closed and many more are on the brink. Those business operators who are hanging on and workers who are desperate for more job opportunities have pinned their hopes on the Adani Carmichael mine project going ahead. In this economic climate, you can understand that it is a massive slap in the face when a local extreme green group, with five paid activists, acts against the best interests of this region by holding up the development of the Carmichael mine with court challenges. This project has faced court action on at least five different fronts, largely from extreme green groups who have no direct link or association with the Carmichael mine and who are located hundreds of kilometres away from the project site. It is quite illuminating to take a closer look at the key litigant in the job-destroying action being undertaken in the courts. The key litigant is the Mackay Conservation Group. Once upon a time, this local group was made up of local conservationists who advocated on local issues. They were concerned about the preservation of the melaleuca forests at Slade Point; development on islands, like Lindeman Island; and pesticide run-off into the Pioneer River. These were local concerns, raised by local conservationists. But something changed at the Mackay Conservation Group, about three years ago: the vast extreme green network, the professional environmental activists, infiltrated this group. These professionals are a new and different breed. They are well-trained, well-resourced and networked in with the vast extreme green network across this country. The woman now at the helm of the Mackay Conservation Group, one Ellen Roberts, is one of these professional activists. Ms Roberts moved to Mackay from Melbourne three years ago—and my, my, how things have changed down at Mackay Conservation Group since. She is a veteran environmental activist from Friends of the Earth in Victoria; she was on their management committee. In 2012, she was part of Climate Action Moreland, which campaigned to shut down the Hazelwood coal-fired power station in Victoria's Latrobe Valley. In 2010, she was spokeswoman for the Camp for Climate Action protest, which saw two protesters chain themselves by their necks to the Hunter Valley conveyer belt carrying coal to the Bayswater power station north-west of Sydney. At the time of that action, Ellen Roberts said: The purpose of the action was to take direct action against coal infrastructure. That was her purpose then and that is her purpose now: taking direct action against coal and the jobs that coal creates She is basically an agent provocateur of the vast extreme green network, who has been sent into our community to manufacture dissent, to divide the community and to pit neighbour against neighbour and mate against mate—the likes of which we have never seen in our community before. On behalf of the business owners in Mackay who are struggling and on behalf of the mining and construction workers who are desperate for work, I would like to suggest to Ms Roberts that it is time for her to move on. She was not the only member of the vast extreme green network who infiltrated the Mackay Conservation Group. There was also Jack Redpath, a University of Tasmania student council environmental officer and founder of the Tasmanian branch of the Australian Youth Climate Coalition, who was sent to Mackay. There was also Ahri Tallon, who was also heavily involved in the Australian Youth Climate Coalition. Ahri, it seems, has even taken a law course in activism. An article in The Australian last year referred to Mr Tallon as an environmental serial offender: … showing up repeatedly as part of public actions. The article referred to backing organisations such as Lock the Gate, Greenpeace, 350.org and GetUp! and stated: Activists move from site to site to add their protest expertise to a range of causes, often engaging in civil disobedience activities and providing the infrastructure for others to join the cause. … Ahri Tallon from Queensland has shared his campaigning skills across organisations in Queensland and NSW after training as an activist … The activities of the vast extreme green network raise some serious questions. Why should these activists who are not directly affected by a project have any legal standing in the courts to derail such job-creating projects? Why should groups who seek to divide the community, destroy jobs and wage political campaigns and legal warfare enjoy the benefit of tax deductibility status? Why should they be the beneficiaries of state government donations, such as the $50,000 that the current Labor government in Queensland gave to the Mackay Conservation Group in their budget? Why, indeed. These are the questions that this government is going to address. House adjourned at 17 : 00 NOTICES 81 NOTICES

Thursday, 20 August 2015

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Hon. BC Scott ) took the chair at 09:30.

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 82 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Shortland Electorate: Australian Technologies Competition 82 09:30 Ms HALL 83N Shortland Today is the Hunter region final of the Australian Technologies Competition. There are four finalists that are going to be judged today. One of those finalists comes from Shortland electorate. They operate their business in Belmont. The decision that will be reached today will pay tribute to one of the four businesses that have been nominated. Ai Group, in association with their sponsors and supporters—Hedweld, Forgacs, Dantia, the University of Newcastle and the New South Wales Department of Industry—are responsible for the heats in the Hunter today. Out of the four finalists, there will be one winner. They will then move to the national semifinals. The winner from the Hunter region will come from either Melvelle Equipment Corporation at Maryland, for a portable machine for the safe removal of corroded rail track flexiclips; Corky's Sustainable Energy, in Mayfield, for the safe abatement of methane from coalmine ventilation air; FluidIntel, Rutherford, for fuel and lubricant management systems facilitating fuel reduction of two to five per cent in the mining sector; or Lumo Solutions, Belmont, for a glow-in-the-dark visual awareness product for pedestrian traffic and also for boating equipment. Lumo Solutions is a new and dynamic Australian company. It focuses on providing quality, unique glow-in-the-dark safety guidance components and systems. It is not limited to pedestrian crossings but used to mark out wharfs on the lake. Andrew Brown, who came to see me when he was starting his company and who has kept in touch with us throughout the process of growing his company and his innovative product, is a really good example of an entrepreneur. He has an eye for innovation. I wish all the finalists good luck today. I understand the final takes place around 12 noon today. I congratulate Lumo Solutions and Andrew Brown for reaching the finals. Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program 82 09:33 Ms MARINO HWP Forrest These are the words of Major Tracey Allison of the Australian Army. 'The Australian Defence Force Parliamentary Program aims to promote mutual understanding amongst Defence personnel, members and senators. It allows parliamentarians to 'ground truth' the realities of service life with the men and women at the coalface by participating in a full spectrum of activities with the Australian Defence Force. The annual parliamentary exchange component of the program is a wonderful opportunity for Australian Defence Force members to learn more about the inner workings of the Australian parliament and gain insight into the routine and duties of their host parliamentarian. The program allows parliamentarians to hear the unpolished truth about the equipment government funding provides to us, to experience the conditions in which we work and live, and to experience the missions that you send us on and the impact that service has on us and our families. Hopefully this enhances the understanding of the challenges and rewards of military service and assists the parliamentarians in their role as law-makers, in developing policy and inquiring into matters that affect our nation. While the program allows unencumbered access to the people behind the uniform for parliamentarians, an element of the exchange that I had not considered was the opportunity to get to know and understand the motivations of our parliamentarians. There are many common elements between the motivations of those who volunteer to serve our nation in the Australian Defence Force and those who volunteer to serve our nation as members of parliament and senators. In our hearts, our most basic motivations are altruistic. We want to be part of something bigger than ourselves, help people and contribute to improving our great nation in some way. We fight for what is behind us, our families, communities, beliefs and values, rather than fighting who is facing us, be it in the political area of the chamber or on the battlefield. As members of the Australian Defence Force, we pride ourselves on our commitment to put service before self. While there are those who would have us believe otherwise, I have seen innumerable examples of this commitment in my interactions, the meetings and conferences I have attended with my host this week in the Australian parliament. I have also been overwhelmed by the gratitude of the members and senators for the work of the Australian Defence Force and their genuine concern for and interest in soldiers, sailors and airmen and women. The parliamentary exchange element of the program is very popular amongst Defence members of every service as we want to better understand our parliamentary process and gain an insight into the roles of our members and senators. I feel very fortunate to have had the opportunity to be here and am privileged to have been allocated to Nola Marino MP whose commitment to her constituents, Australian Defence Force personnel and the betterment of the nation is inspirational. This year the program offered parliamentarians 19 options covering all aspects of defence capability in training, on exercise and operations. In the raise, train, sustain environment, options include Army and Navy recruit training, the Collins class submarine, a range of programs right throughout Defence.' These are the words of Major Tracey Allison, the Australian Army. Indian Independence Day 83 09:36 Mr BYRNE 008K0 Holt Over 400,000 people of Indian descent live in Australia and Australia's Indian community has made a profound contribution to Australia and to our local community. Last Saturday, in Melbourne, the organisers of the Indian Film Festival were delighted to celebrate Indian Independence Day. The 2015 festival opened with a vibrant day of festivities featuring dance, film and fashion. According to my local Indian community and the ArtsHub Melbourne website, the Indian Independence Day celebrations kicked off at 11 am when Indian superstar actor Anil Kapoor, known to audiences as the quizmaster in Slumdog Millionaire, and Rajkumar Hirani, director of PK, the highest grossing Indian film of all time, participated in a traditional flag hoisting ceremony at Federation Square. Festivities continued from 12 noon as Federation Square became the scene for the ever-popular Bollywood Dance Competition. This year 31 dance teams, which were selected from over 70 entrants across Australia, New Zealand and Fiji, took to the stage. The star-studded panel of judges for 2015 included multi-award-winning actress Kangana Ranaut, Hollywood heartthrob Imran Khan, and director, screenwriter and producer Nikhil Advani. The highlight of the event was undoubtedly the Indian Film Festival of Melbourne's awards taking place for the second time. Fashion and film collided for a spectacular live celebration honouring the best of Indian cinema at the 2015 IFFM awards. The gala event moved from the red carpet to the catwalk, featuring two very special shows from India's leading fashion designers, Anamika Khanna and Gaurav Gupta, in the Great Hall of the National Gallery of Victoria. There was also a third showcasing of exceptional Melbourne designers. The 2015 festival theme was equality. Melbournians from all walks of life modelled alongside professional actors and screen icons such as Sonam Kapoor, screen legend Simi Garewal, Puneet Galati, Sarah Roberts and Menik Gooneratne in the fashion charity show, with all the designers donating some of their garments. All proceeds for the event went to the Royal Children's Hospital Foundation. At a local level, the Australian Indian community has been incredibly active in advocating for extra funding for the Little India precinct in Foster Street, Dandenong, and setting up a new Twenty20 cricket tournament called the Kerala Premier League in Cranbourne. Nema Singh has been petitioning my office with concerns about local Indian radio being cut back. We will be pursuing that shortly. The local Indian community has made an enormous contribution to life in our country. This is just a small snapshot of the contribution that they continue to make to our country. Over several years now, Menindee Central School, a kindergarten-to-year-12 school which is 70 per cent Indigenous, has been developing a partnership with schools in Bradfield. As part of the visit I joined a forum which discussed this relationship, dubbed the City/Country Alliance and the lessons which have emerged. Jane Dennett, principal of Killara High School observed that many of her students have much more familiarity with the Qantas lounge when travelling to Europe than with travelling to far-western New South Wales. Brian Debus, the former principal of Menindee and the human dynamo behind this program, spoke of the progress he had seen with some of his Indigenous students over the years. The current principal of Menindee Central School, Daryl Irvine, updated the forum on how the program is continuing. An important element of this partnership is the remarkable artwork many of the students produce. Mark Cepak, a Lindfield East parent, has been a champion of this, and every second year, when the Menindee children come to Sydney, there is an art show held at the Deli in the Park cafe in East Lindfield. The City/Country Alliance clearly involves a lot of hard work, and there have been some frustrations along the way. Nevertheless, it has achieved something very significant. This program has helped to open the eyes of Indigenous children from a small country school to understand something of the opportunities that the wider world offers. And it has also allowed students from schools on Sydney's North Shore in my electorate to come to know children from a remote part of Australia, many from a very different cultural background to their own whom they would otherwise not get the chance to meet. There was a strong representation from Sydney's North Shore at the forum which was held: Lindfield East Public School principal, Andrew Stevenson; Beaumont Road Public School principal, Malcolm McDonald; Killara High School principal, Jane Dennett; and Masada College HSIE teacher, Ryan Gill. My state colleague the member for Davidson, Jonathan O'Dea also joined to the group. It was particularly pleasing to see this extensive representation from North Shore schools. I was also pleased to see representatives from a number of other Sydney schools, as well as representatives from a number of other remote schools. The purpose for bringing all of these schools together was to explore opportunities for the establishment of similar alliances between remote western New South Wales schools and schools in metropolitan Sydney. In my view, this is a model which offers significant benefits. I congratulate all who have been involved in what has been achieved to date and I hope to see the program expand beyond its current participants over coming years. Vietnam Veterans Day 84 09:42 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler This year has been a very significant one for Australia. Earlier this year our nation came together to mark the centenary of the Gallipoli landings and the forging of the Anzac spirit. But this year was also the year that we commemorated 40 years since the end of the Vietnam War. This week my community once again came together, this time to acknowledge the 49th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan. The Battle of Long Tan represents Australia's first major engagement in the Vietnam War. It was one of the most difficult and courageous battles ever fought by Australian soldiers. In a rubber plantation on a rainy afternoon on 18 August 1966 an engagement started as an ambush on an Australian force comprising 108 men by an approximately 2½ thousand-strong Vietcong and North Vietnamese Army contingent. Confronted with the equivalent of almost two battalions, Delta Company 6RAR, under the command of then Major Harry Smith, demonstrated acts of sheer courage, determination and mateship—acts which have come to typify the spirit of Anzac. As in 1915, on this occasion the Australians were also well supported by New Zealand artillery. Even so, against overwhelming odds the prospect of success was dim. But they did succeed and, as a consequence, this battle takes pride of place in Australian military history. Tragically, 18 Australian soldiers were killed in the battle and 24 men were wounded. But it is to our nation's shame that our Vietnam veterans were not recognised for their courage and extraordinary service when they returned home. That took almost 20 years. Prime Minister Bob Hawke took the initiative in declaring 18 August, the day of the Battle of Long Tan, to be Vietnam Veterans Day, to recognise and honour the almost 60,000 who served in Vietnam and also to remember the 521 who made the ultimate sacrifice in the name of freedom and liberty for the people of South Vietnam. I know that the memories run deep in the minds of my Vietnamese constituents. They have always held the Australian soldiers in the absolute highest regard. Our Vietnam veterans fought with great courage and determination. On the 49th anniversary of the Battle of Long Tan, I honour and pay respect to all those who served in the Vietnam conflict. Their significant sacrifice will never be forgotten. China-Australia Free Trade Agreement 84 09:45 Dr HENDY 00BCM Eden-Monaro Earlier this week in question time I asked the Minister for Trade and Investment why it is important that the government's landmark free trade agreement with China comes into force by the end of this year. The minister explained that doing so would result in a double benefit of tariff cuts for our exporters, one before the end of this year and one in the first week of January, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars of extra benefit to Australian businesses. This is exceptional news for Eden-Monaro. The FTA will see tariffs fall to zero for products such as wool, sheepmeat, beef, forestry products and fishery products such as oysters—all principal export earners for my electorate. The cost of delaying or failing to ratify is enormous, particularly for rural and regional areas. The National Farmers' Federation estimates that the cost to rural communities would be $300 million next year alone. The red meat industry will see a cost of $100 million, dairy $80 million, and wine $50 million—real costs, real losses, real jobs. These are real businesses that are out there working hard, taking risks, driving our economy and strengthening our communities. I would like to advise the House of one such business. Australia's Oyster Coast Ltd is an innovative Australian company with a growing international brand and an emerging tourist destination in my electorate of Eden-Monaro. Representatives of the company have been in China this week exploring further export opportunities. They attended the Hong Kong Trade Development Council Food Expo and conducted the company launch in Guangzhou. Following a successful commercial tasting and the launch, they held meetings and negotiations with potential customers, partners and supply chain providers from Guangzhou, Hong Kong and Shenzhen as well. I received a brief from Mr David Trebeck, Chairman of Australia's Oyster Coast Ltd, on his return from China yesterday. David conveyed to me the very positive outcomes of the launch. Australia's Oyster Coast Ltd confirmed short-term sales, with expectations of those sales tripling within three months. The Hong Kong Trade Development Council CEO stated that the Australia's Oyster Coast exhibition was the highlight of the expo. The existing tariffs on this sector will be eliminated under the China free trade agreement over three consecutive years. The resulting price reduction will be critical in making our products more competitive vis-a-vis the current market leader, France. David said to me the importance of that is 'hard to overstate'. I stand firmly behind Australia's Oyster Coast Ltd and will support them in any way I can. Those opposite hold a different view, but they should get behind jobs in my electorate, jobs for small business, jobs for regional areas, and back the China FTA. Pakistani Community 85 09:48 Ms MacTIERNAN L6P Perth Earlier this month I had the pleasure, as always, to attend the Independence Day event put on by Pakistanis in Australia. I always enjoy these events because not only do they have fantastic food but also it is hosted by a great community. I think they are great role models for the Islamic community in showing how modern Islam is more than compatible with the values of Australia. I want to pay particular tribute to the women in this group who have taken a leadership role not only in their own organisation, Pakistanis in Australia, but in the Islamic community generally in Perth. I know from my time as Mayor of Vincent and now in my role as member for Perth that they are always at the forefront when we are organising events with the Islamic community. But at this particular event I had the singular pleasure of meeting a fantastic young woman, Senior Constable Zen Mohamed Kassim. Zen came from Singapore. She is of Indian origin. Zen wears the hijab with her police uniform. She is a truly engaging young woman who is doing a fantastic job out there, breaking down the 'us and them' barriers that can so often emerge, particularly as we try to deal with these challenging issues in the Middle East. So here we have a young woman who is doing her job brilliantly, but she is going an extra step. She has engaged a number of women in the Pakistani community—women who are successful doctors, people who are working in professions—to work with her, to volunteer with her to work with women in the Islamic communities who perhaps come from a more traditional background, who perhaps do not understand or have not had the exposure to education and role models to enable them to integrate fully into Australian society. It is fantastic work that is being done. This is what we need to do to really ensure that all of these new and emerging communities can take full advantage of being part of our great community. Dobell Electorate: Rural Fire Service 85 09:51 Mrs McNAMARA 241589 Dobell I have spoken many times in this place about volunteering. Volunteering is a strong Australian tradition. It is so strong, in fact, that it is estimated to be worth more than $200 billion a year. Each year in my local community more than 16,000 men and women give time back through volunteering, and many place their lives at risk to assist others: from surf lifesaving to marine rescue, the Rural Fire Service, the SES and the Volunteer Rescue Association. I am sure we are all very grateful for their service to our communities. One of the great joys of being a member of parliament is getting the opportunity to meet and support these volunteers and the organisations to which they belong. I was honoured to have recently attended The Lakes Team Volunteer Appreciation Day, where volunteers from Rural Fire Service units across the Wyong and Lake Macquarie councils are recognised for their hard work, dedication and commitment. It was great to also see the member for Shortland there. Our local RFS' tireless firefighting is the difference between life and death and having lives forever altered by the unforgiving nature of fire. Not only do our RFS volunteers protect us in times of fire but they also play a significant role in times of other natural disasters, including the recent Central Coast storms, which ravaged the Central Coast in April this year. In fact, it was a particularly poignant ceremony as the volunteers had only recently finished dealing with the April storms. RFS members' contributions are not just measured in the aftermath of natural disaster, they are felt all year round when we know that if we are ever under threat from Mother Nature we can call on them to protect our community. It is important that we acknowledge the bravery and efforts of our volunteer firefighters. I would like to pass on my congratulations to: Mathew Shoesmith, who received a national medal for 22 years of service; Jason Wade, who received a national medal for 19 years of service; and Glenn Woods, who received a national medal for 17 years of service. I also extend my congratulations to the following long-service medal awardees from the Dobell electorate: Scott Bennett, Albee Vickery, Simon Webster, Leo Smit, Brad Stilton, Joshua Sullivan, Peter Thorn, Paul Smith, Bernard Smith, Lindsay Denton, Christopher McBurney, Tracy Chyla, Byron Dossett, Janice Mackinnon and Scott Gillett. It is also important that Steven Tindall receives acknowledgement for receiving a long-service medal and 1st clasp for 32 years of service—what an extraordinary achievement. I am extremely proud of all the men and women who volunteer their time to serve the New South Wales Rural Fire Service in Dobell. In Dobell we are proud of our RFS brigades, and I take this opportunity to acknowledge all of them: Berkeley Vale, Charmhaven, Chittaway, Dooralong, Kulnura, Matcham, Narara, Ourimbah, Wadalba, Wamberal, Warnervale and Yarramalong. To all of the above, thank you for your commitment. Schools: Science 86 09:54 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio A week or so ago at the Australian American Leadership Dialogue I was very heartened that a great deal of the focus of that discussion was on science and technology, in terms of students pursuing these studies at school and also the need to focus on science and technology as part of the future of our economy and particularly as something that we can gain in terms of our relationship with the United States. I was there with Jane den Hollander, the vice-chancellor of Deakin University, and I was gratified that, in the discussion around science, there was a lot of focus on the science which is being pursued at Deakin University in Geelong. The carbon fibre research centre—something that was established under the former Labor government through a $100 million investment—has the best carbon fibre research furnace in the world and is giving rise to cutting-edge science and technology in this field of endeavour, which will undoubtedly give rise to jobs in the future. This, I believe, is very much in Geelong's tradition—a tradition that was first established by James Harrison, the great figure of Geelong's history. James Harrison was a newspaper person; he founded the Geelong Advertiser. He was a politician, like us. But he noted when he was doing the typesetting for the Geelong Advertiser that when evaporating fluid evaporated it would leave the metal type on the printing presses cold to touch. In that moment of insight he understood or he started to pursue the idea of refrigeration. What James Harrison is really remembered for today is for being the father of modern refrigeration. In that, he is Geelong's great scientific export. In the two weeks between now and when we next come here, we will be noting the 122nd anniversary of James Harrison's passing on 3 September. Science is very much a part of our country's future and is a part of Geelong's future. There are not enough kids studying science today. We have, of course, in Geelong, experienced the decisions by Alcoa and Ford to stop manufacturing in Geelong. Both are very high-tech science based companies. It would be great to encourage more people to study science and if, as their legacy, these companies could sponsor a science prize—indeed, it could be called the James Harrison science prize—for the very best scientists in primary schools in Geelong. So today I want to inform the House that I will be approaching both Alcoa and Ford to establish, as a parting legacy of their contribution to the Geelong community, the James Harrison science prize for excellence in science in primary schools in Geelong. Lawfare 86 09:57 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia Queensland's biggest coalmining project is to be sited in my electorate of Capricornia. Our government supports this project which would create thousands of jobs for Queensland families and contracts for business. The Adani Carmichael coalmine offers up to 10,000 new jobs, mainly in Queensland; $20 billion of investment in Australia; and power, to build the living standards of 100 million people in India. The Carmichael site is about 160 kilometres west from Clermont in Capricornia. The Adani project would build the most important coal rail project in modern Queensland, and it would upgrade export and shipping infrastructure at Abbot Point. The project is worth $21 billion to Queensland. Why is it, then, that it is under threat from activists waging so-called lawfare? Lawfare is the way extreme greens are using court action to delay important job-creating infrastructure projects. Their attempts to disrupt and delay the Adani coal project would cost Queensland families jobs, and turn potential investment away from the state. How can the Greens and Labor look families in our coal-belt of Central Queensland in the eye and say they care? Labor and the Greens do not care if families default on their mortgages or if they cannot put food on the table for their kids or meet their car repayments, because Labor and the Greens do not care about creating important job opportunities. Clearly the Greens and Labor do not care about the future of Capricornia. Earlier this week, four of my LNP parliamentary colleagues from Central Queensland united to put the practice of lawfare under the spotlight. We have exposed the extreme green groups for putting a roadblock in the way of job creation. This is occurring while their Labor mates, who have no feasible economic management skills, are looking on in silence. Our coalition government wants to create jobs for Australians; this is the message we need to make clear. The interests of hardworking Central Queensland families need to come first. Investment creates jobs, but both opportunities have been put at risk by the Greens and a lacklustre Labor Party. Labor used to say they stood up for the workers; well, not in the bush and not in country towns around Capricornia. Labor only care about city people and the latte-lounging Greens. You might be forgiven for thinking that Labor and the Greens are the same party. There is no point of difference when it comes to destroying jobs in Central Queensland; they are both guilty. The question for Labor is: does it stand for jobs and workers? The coalition government knows where it stands on jobs and economic growth. Where does Labor stand? If Labor and the Greens were serious about jobs for Central Queensland families, they would get out of the way and let Adani move forward. Griffith Electorate: Bulimba Barracks 87 10:00 Ms BUTLER 248006 Griffith As you know, the federal government is moving to sell about 21 hectares of land in my electorate at the site of the Bulimba Barracks. The Brisbane City Council and the state of Queensland are going to commence, in partnership, a master-planning process with community input and an evaluation of the mix of uses, housing types and densities. That is about to go ahead, but there is a potential for significant numbers of additional residences on the site, and there will be a corresponding pressure on local schools and infrastructure. Accordingly, there will be a need for upgrades to roads. There is a set of traffic lights needed at the Apollo Road and Lytton Road intersection, which, unfortunately, because of the number of underground services, is costed at about $2.5 million to fix. It is a significant cost for the local community to have to bear. That is why I have asked the federal government, along with my state and council colleagues Di Farmer and Shayne Sutton, to make a contribution to the local infrastructure costs from the proceeds of the sale. The community has welcomed the military in its midst since the Second World War and, in return for that welcoming and that accommodation, I do not think it is too much to ask that some sort of contribution be made to the infrastructure costs of that land being sold and the consequential increase in residential development in the area. Yet the parliamentary secretary has informed me that there will be no contribution of that nature from the proceeds of the sale. So imagine my surprise recently to learn, from the Westside News and from a statement in the parliament from the member for Ryan, that there is consideration being given to a concessional sale to the Brisbane City Council of the land at the Witton Barracks at Indooroopilly. If the government were to forgo revenue by a concessional sale of the Witton Barracks, then there would be a gross double standard if there was not a similar contribution to the community in respect of the sale of the Bulimba Barracks. I think that my community would be very disappointed if that were to occur. I also want to mention that on 20 July the parliamentary secretary for defence wrote to me and indicated that a contamination report for the land at Bulimba would be available by 30 June 2015. Imagine my surprise to get a letter dated 20 July telling me that something would be available by 30 June. So of course I immediately wrote back to the parliamentary secretary and asked for an urgent copy of that contamination report. I wrote back to him on the same day; no response. I then wrote back to him on 30 July, again seeking that a copy of that report be provided urgently, and I am yet to receive a response in relation to that issue. I urge the government to ensure that the community get the appropriate support for the infrastructure that will be needed in the event that there are significant numbers of residential places after the sale and development of that site, and I ask that the parliamentary secretary do everything that he can to ensure the community benefits from the sale. Page Electorate: Business 87 10:03 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page I want to acknowledge some business excellence award winners in my community over the last few weeks. On Saturday night, the Richmond Valley Business Excellence awards were held. I want to acknowledge the Excellence in Retail award won by Metcalf Quality Meats—Mick, Nicole and the staff. The Retail Highly Commended award went to Liberty Fuel Services at Evans Head. Congratulations to the owner, Marie Mortimer, and to employee Bridie Garwood, who took out the Employee of the Year award. The Excellence in Hospitality award went to the Casino RSM club—to Neale and the team, well done. The Excellence in Trade and Construction award and the Business of the Year award was won by Casino Tyre Professionals—Scott Brereton, Leah Beaumont and the team, congratulations to you. The Best New Business award went to Lighting, Electrical and Data—to Christina and Shayne, who took this business over quite recently and have done a great job: well done. The Excellence in Beauty and Fitness award went to the Ivy Room Hair Studio. Congratulations to Abby and her team. The Excellence in Sustainability award went to the Kookaburra Early Learning Centre; to Naomi Higgins, the director, and her team: well done. The Best Home-Based award was won by Sabihah Couture—congratulations to Annalise Burton, the owner and designer. The Excellence in Professional Services award was won by LJ Hooker real estate in Evans Head—congratulations to Brian and Dianne, and their team. The Excellence in Community, On Focus award went to Fiona Miller, the CEO, and all the workers: congratulations. The Community Highly Commended award was won by the One Voice Choir, who did a show called Gallipoli 1915, which was a great show. The Apprentice Trainee of the Year award went to Sacha Clark: congratulations. The Trainee Highly Commended award went to Jodie Soloman and the Wurlitzer Bakery at Evans Head. The Business of the Year award was won by Casino Tyre Professional Services. The People's Choice award was won by Wurlitzer Bakery at Evans Head. The owners, Helen and Mick, and their daughter Sandra, employ 33 staff over their two bakeries, so congratulations to them. The Hall of Fame award went to Frank Karam: well done, Frank. The Induction for Lifetime award to the Hall of Fame went to Nell Pinkerton, Maryanne Bentley, and Jack and Dennis Londy. The sponsors were Richmond Valley Council, Crowe Horwath, NCMC, Tursa, Metgasco, On Focus, Country IT Computers, Home Timber and Hardware, and Casino Travel Shop, so thank you to the sponsors. Also just recently, the Kyogle Business Awards were held. I want to congratulate their winners as well. The Best Large Business award was won by Michael Smith from his group: well done, Michael—a well-earned award. The Best Small Business and Business of the Year award was won by Gateway Fine Foods at Kyogle Cafe and Kyogle Deli. Well done to owners Debbie and Ian McQueen. The Best New Business award went to Kyogle Quality Meats. The owner, Rhys Thomas, has owned it for two years. Well done to Rhys. The Employee of the Year award was won by Margaret Murray, who works for Oaten and Hoffman Pty Ltd. Congratulations to Margaret. She has worked there for 30 years and has been a wonderful person there. The Customer Service award went to Care Connections: congratulations. The Community Service award was won by Louisa's Fine Foods, which do great work and have great things like fruitcakes and puddings. The Tradesperson of the Year award was won by Neal Nugent, who is the owner and director of Neal Nugent Electrical. Congratulations, Neal. The Young Entrepreneur award went to Timothy Hoffman. The People's Choice award went to Patches of Kyogle. I congratulate them all for the work they do in our communities. Marriage 88 10:06 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin Tolstoy famously wrote that all happy families are alike, and I like to think, in saying this, he did not mean that all happy families were in any particular form; rather, that they were loving families, particularly in respect of the children in those families. Certainly, that is what I believe, and I believe this has been a key part of the journey in the communities that I represent and in this place in the debate around marriage equality since 2004. This has been at its best, in the community and in the parliament, a journey of understanding—people seeking to understand one another, respecting all people—but not always, with views that are hurtful to people. In this regard I think of some recent commentary in the media and by members of parliament around the alleged impact of marriage equality on children. Firstly, it is very clear this is a red herring; marriage is not a prerequisite to having children. Secondly, it is simply disrespectful to these loving, happy families. Yesterday I was privileged to hear directly from some adult children of same-sex parents, and I would like to acknowledge Kate Burns, Raj Wakeling, Pru Bonnen, and Brenner and Andy, who shared their stories with me of growing up—stories distinguished by different generations, different communities, but showing a need to build understanding across the wider community that their families are just as deserving of respect as any other family. I also was privileged to meet with Maya Newell and Charlotte Mars, who are the producer and director of the film Gayby Baby, which is being released shortly. I understand a screening was organised by the Parliamentary Friendship Group for LGBTI Australians, and I acknowledge the work of the member for Leichhardt, the member for Moreton and Senator Janet Rice in facilitating that screening and the conversation I took part in yesterday. In respect of the contributions of Kate, Raj, Pru, Brenner and Andy, I would like to say this: it is one thing for someone to support a matter of principle, another to directly understand how such a principle directly impacts on people's lives. These people told powerful stories about the need to have equality in marriage and equality more broadly, about the need to recognise that what unites happy families is love, not the form of the family. I would like to send a message to them and all other children of same-sex families that I will stand up in this place and in my community for them to be treated with respect and equally. Illicit Drugs 88 10:09 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker I rise to speak about the scourge of the ice epidemic. As a former criminal lawyer, I saw firsthand the devastation of this evil drug. It is a drug that does not discriminate, with people of all ages and all backgrounds potentially at risk of having their lives destroyed. That is why I applaud the leadership shown by the Prime Minister in creating the National Ice Taskforce. Mount Gambier, my hometown, has already hosted two Understanding the Ice Factor forums, with more than 700 people attending across both of them. As well as that Mount Gambier was host to the first National Ice Taskforce regional consultation. Similar forums have taken place in Renmark, where close to 700 people attended, and there have also been forums in Murray Bridge, Millicent and Naracoorte, to name a few. Each forum has confirmed that ice is ruining individual lives, destroying families and hurting communities. I pay tribute to Sergeant Paul Scicluna who was the 2014 South Australia Police Officer of the Year—awarded particularly for his work to reduce the harm of drugs like ice—and other members of the Limestone Coast Drug Action Team. I also wish to acknowledge those members in the northern areas of my electorate who are doing excellent work around the Riverland Community Service Alliance. Can I also take this opportunity to praise newspapers in my electorate, amongst them are The Border Watch, the Naracoorte Herald, the Murray Pioneer, The Murray Valley Standard and the Barossa and Light Herald, to name a few, which have been playing an important part in this issue in raising awareness. I also include ABC radio, particularly the work of Narelle Graham and Stuart Stansfield. The story of 'Riley', not his real name, from the Riverland forum, was particularly heartbreaking. Riley was 14 when his dad gave him a bag of methamphetamine and told him, 'Here, have that. I don't need it, I've had too much.' His drug use grew to the point where he involved himself in crime. Thankfully, he has ameliorated the effects of the drug and his life is on track. 'Lola' was another who said that the drug was destroying her from the inside. On one occasion she fell over when she was high, knocked herself out and nearly choked to death on her own vomit. Whilst the story of the ice scourge is an ugly one, it has caused communities to come together to battle this evil and to deal with the insidious groups that pedal this misery. I congratulate the Prime Minister and the coalition for going about dealing with this scourge, not just via the National Ice Taskforce but also with other practical measures that are being announced, including a $1 million boost to Crime Stoppers to encourage people to 'dob in a dealer'. Chisholm Electorate: Housing 89 10:14 Ms BURKE 83S Chisholm I rise yet again to talk about the overdevelopment of my electorate and the concerns that my constituents are raising, in particular to the Hay Street development. This is an issue that continues to go on and on. This is about the loss of open space in suburbia. We are all seeing it. My electorate can grow and can expand. Indeed, it is predicted that we will need an extra 12,997 dwellings over the next coming years. It is a place that can expand because we are serviced well by facilities such as schools, transport and other amenities. But it needs to be done in the way that actually adapts to the fact that we are already a very crowded suburb, that we are already a very busy place to live and play. Whilst we do have terrific schools, several of our high schools are now at capacity. Box Hill High School is now telling residents that they will not be in the zone anymore. They are simply unable to cope with the demand. If current existing open space becomes dwellings, where are these children going to go to school? We do not have any land to build a new school. Indeed, the site is an old school that is earmarked to become residential—it was a private school, so it is complicated. Also, on the cards, right next door to what was the old St Leo's site is Box Hill golf course, a magnificent private golf course. Again, that is being touted as maybe being sold off for residential land. People have enjoyed the amenity of the open space, from the ovals and the golf course surrounding Gardeners Creek for a long time. No, it is not theirs, and it is private property. But once you have moved into the leafy green suburbs and paid the house prices you have to pay to live in my electorate, that is the amenity you are expecting to be able to enjoy. So residents are, again, very concerned about council's proposal—mooted; it has not gone through—to deal with various parts of the Hay Street development. Indeed, the panel understood that existing residents have become accustomed to vacant adjacent sites and associated amenity adjoining Gardiners Creek. Of course they have—they have been there for the entire time that they lived in the suburbs. I am certainly calling upon Whitehorse council to look at this in a reasonable way—come up with a strategic plan for this area. Let us not continue to have knee-jerk reaction after knee-jerk reaction to every application that comes in. This is a very big site. There is potential for development of it. The residents understand that but it needs to be done in a way that accepts there will be issues of traffic, there will be issues of parking and there will be a need for greater access to public transport. Box Hill has not grown as rapidly as the rest of Melbourne but we are seeing that change dramatically now—let us do this in a substantial way that everybody can live with. Hasluck Electorate: Lyme Disease 89 10:15 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck I rise to speak on a health issue faced by a number of my constituents. I will read an email I have received: I have Lyme disease and I would greatly appreciate your patience and time in reading this email. The physical and psychological impact on my life has been enormous. I lost my job as a school principal on March 2014 and have since been living on long service leave; pay in lieu of notice, newstart allowance and currently income protection. After a blood sample was sent to Infectolab in Germany, I tested positive to borrelia (borrelia blot IgG p41, borrelien blot IgM p41, and borrelia burgdoferi elispot). I have heard of false positives and overseas labs fudging results, so I was sceptical myself until my wife tested positive to tests at Australian Biologics in Sydney. There are many strains of borrelia, but hers were positive to borrelia blot IgM p41, blot IgM p18 and blot IgG p41. …   …   … The cost to the government when Lyme disease reaches a chronic level can be huge in terms of Medicare rebates (medication and GP visits) and government assistance (newstart allowance and parenting payments). Diagnosing this illness early would significantly reduce these costs. Losing my job and later moving my family into my parents' house until my income protection was approved had a major psychological impact on me. Laboratories can test for Lyme, but most GPs do not recognise and even criticise Lyme disease. Antibiotics can treat Lyme disease but the recovery is slow when left for too long. I would greatly appreciate your support in recognising Lyme disease, so we can get faster diagnosis and treatment. I have a number of other constituents within my electorate who have raised similar issues and in fact have sought medical treatment in South Africa, Germany and the USA. There are two constituents who are too ill to travel, so they are not accessing treatment at all. One of the challenges is that we have to have a look at this and not shut our ears to it. The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Health agreed to hold a roundtable hearing in Sydney in reference to its inquiry into chronic disease management and prevention in primary health care, with a focus on Lyme disease. I sincerely hope that out of that inquiry those that we hear from—not only those suffering from Lyme disease but the medical profession—will shed some light on a way forward for those who experience this debilitating health problem. It does cripple people. I have seen vibrant young constituents go from somebody who is active to somebody who is bedridden and whose health is suffering considerably. Fraser Electorate: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation 90 10:19 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fraser Australians owe the CSIRO a debt of gratitude. It has generated dozens of world leading interventions and commercial innovations—among them, wi-fi, the polymer banknote and the Hendra virus vaccine. But the CSIRO, Australia's premier research agency, has been forced to turn property developer to make up for the Abbott government's deep funding cuts to science. Yesterday the CSIRO announced that it is seeking approval to redevelop a major tract of land in my electorate that had previously been used for agricultural research. The CSIRO has asked the National Capital Authority to rezone the Ginninderra Field Station site on the Barton Highway as urban area in the next amendment to the National Capital Plan, due out next year. It would allow the CSIRO to sell or build on the site for commercial development. Plainly, this has occurred because the Abbott government slashed $115 million from the CSIRO's funding in its 2014-15 budget. The agency has lost 1,200 science and support staff in the last two years, the largest job cuts in the organisation's history. This is from a government which came to office without a science minister—the first time that had happened in Australia since the 1930s. When CSIRO staff rallied last year, some of them told me that they never imagined that they would be taking part in a political rally. They never wanted to be dragged into politics. It was the Abbott government's savage cuts to science which had forced them to do so. The CSIRO has been forced to close or merge several of its research sites, including eliminating a world-class irrigation research team at Griffith in New South Wales and consolidating sites in Canberra. Australia spends less on scientific research than the OECD average, and the federal government's investment in knowledge and innovation as a share of our national income has slipped to the lowest level in 30 years. This is short sighted at a time when the economy is transitioning from the mining boom and we need more ideas and innovation, not less. And yet, just to go through some of the Abbott government's $900 million cuts to science and research, they include $80 million from the Cooperative Research Centres program, $115 million from the CSIRO, $75 million from the Australian Research Council, $27 million from ANSTO, $8 million from AIMS, $16 million from Geoscience Australia, $120 million from DSTO, $174 million from the Research Training Scheme—a literal decimation of that scheme; and the abolition of NICTA from 2016-17, effectively an $84 million cut. The latest budget saw further cuts—another $327 million cut from Australian science and research. (Time expired) Gilmore Electorate: Shoalhaven Homelessness Shark Tank 90 10:22 Mrs SUDMALIS 241586 Gilmore On 5 August the Shoalhaven Homelessness Shark Tank took place to coincide with the national Homelessness Prevention Week. The Shoalhaven Homelessness and Good Living Conditions Interagency was the key organisation that invited local service providers to pitch their ideas on how to assist homeless people in their local community. Prior to the event, a number of businesses were sent an invitation to participate and nominate an amount that they might be prepared to donate. I too was invited to attend. As the community knows, I am deeply concerned about this issue. I chose to join one of the shark tank groupings, affectionately called a tiger shark. We were then all given a bidding card saying 'I'm biting'. The service providers then gave a short PowerPoint display or performance art presentation and described how the sharks could assist them. These projects varied from sponsorship for veggie garden plots to special mats for the children's play equipment at the women's refuge, to spare sleeping bags and tents, to scholarships for change, to community barbecues on Friday night for the homeless. It was an eclectic collection of suggestions and ideas. In one afternoon, the sharks contributed more than $35,000 in cash for great, forward-thinking community organisations including Southern Youth and Family Services, CareSouth, Nowra Family Support Service, Waminda, Personal Helpers and Mentors, Mission Australia, Southern Shoalhaven Youth Services, St Vincent de Paul, Salvation Army, Shoalhaven Women's Health Centre, Essential Personnel, Southern Cross Community Housing, Supported Accommodation and Homelessness Services Shoalhaven Illawarra, Uniting Church and the Nowra Youthie. However, sometimes to help homeless people you need more than money and at this event that is exactly what happened. One young man, Michael, who has struggled with homelessness for some time, ended up with a job at Classic Removals, and 14 other local businesses offered to mentor our young people at risk. I commend the other local sharks: Dave Bennett from Shoalhaven Garage Doors, Geoff O'Connell from Kinghorn Ford, Brendan Faulkner from Assured Locksmiths, Jamie Strong from Strongbuild, John Saunig from Real Aussie Sheds, Heather Darlington from Bendigo Bank, Jared Cochrane from Raine and Horne Real Estate, ANZ mobile lending manager Terry Rayner, Commonwealth Bank's Daniel Arthur, Nowra Kmart's Kyme Wiffen, Vicki Chalain from Nowra Seventh Day Adventist Church, Chance Hanlon from Hanlon Windows, Scott Baxter from Ray White Real Estate, Leigh Burrows from South Nowra Bunnings, John Lamont from Nowra Chemicals, Jane Donald photography, Alan Hawkes from Shoal Bus, Gaynor Peters Property, Steve from Classic Removals, Sam Price from Bomaderry Printing, Jervis Bay Lions, IT Base Camp, Nowra Harvey Norman, FACS, Nowra Picture Framing, Burton Watersports, That's Good Biz, Juniper Hearth, CWA, Mission Australia, Sussex Inlet Anglican Church, the Salvation Army Family Store and the Huskisson op shop. I was overwhelmed by the generosity of my shark mates in the tank. The afternoon was an invaluable and moving experience and I hope to be involved in another shark tank in the future. Traise, Mr Eric 91 10:25 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra I rise today to pay tribute to a great Canberran, Eric Traise. In doing so, I would like to acknowledge members of Eric's family who are sitting with us in the chamber, his wife, and members from the Tuggeranong Community Council. He was a very much loved member of the Canberra community, and today's presence of so many friends and colleagues highlights that. I welcome them to the chamber today. Not only was Eric a great Canberran but he was also a very active member of the Tuggeranong community and, as I said, he was a much loved member of the Tuggeranong community. He was dedicated to improving our community and working tirelessly to make Tuggeranong and Canberra a better place. Eric was born in Newcastle and was the youngest of five children. He attended Newcastle High and then joined the RAAF as an engineering cadet after high school. He was posted to Malaysia and then later to the US. He had a fabulous 21-year career in the military. Eric later worked with what is now CASA and Airservices Australia, where he upgraded and maintained radars. This work led to a love of radars and a love, I understand, of taking photos of radars. Eric and his wife, Carole, moved to the Sunshine Coast to retire but were brought back to Canberra when they learned they were going to be grandparents. During his retirement, I found out the other day, Eric found Winny. Eric was crazy about Winny. Winny had a strange effect on Eric and his wife. He loved Winny. Carole, I think, hated Winny. By the way, Winny was a Winnebago. Later on in his life, Eric served on the Tuggeranong Community Council for many years as a general member, as a treasurer and as president in 2013, and, despite his illness, he stood and was re-elected for a second term in September 2014. I was fortunate enough to hear about Eric's life at a memorial service last Friday at the ANU. It was heart-warming to see hundreds of people turn out for the service, but it was not surprising, because he had such respect from the Canberra community and a positive influence on so many Canberrans. I noted some of the ways that people described Eric and I want to recount those today: 'He was truly one of a kind.' 'He firmly believed in living a life that matters.' 'He was a patient and understanding parent.' 'No problem was insurmountable.' 'He was a man of integrity.' 'He set high standards.' 'He added value to everything he did.' 'Everyone turned to him in their time of need.' Eric made an enormous contribution to Canberra and his legacy will live on in so many ways. I send my deepest condolences to his family: his wife, Carole; his children, Melinda, Sheriden and Matthew and his grandchildren, Matthew, Riley and Myah. He will be greatly missed. May he rest in peace. Vale Eric Traise. Trade with China 92 10:28 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn Earlier this week my Gladstone office was picketed by trade unions protesting the China free trade agreement. They claimed it will cost Australian jobs. They claimed it will lead to an overflow of Chinese immigrants. But they are wrong and they are definitely barking up the wrong tree with these ridiculous claims. I want to be clear when I say that the China free trade agreement is not intended to threaten Australian jobs. The FTA is intended to boost jobs and opportunities for Australians. We want to encourage investment to help industry. It is important that we improve the trade relationship between Australia and China. China is one of our biggest trading partners. It will also encourage investment in Australia and reduce tariffs on industries that includes tourism, agriculture and the energy and resources sector. Australia has eight other free trade agreements in place, which all have similar provisions to the Chinese-Australian agreement, and there are still jobs for Australians, and plenty of jobs in most cases. Since the coalition has been in government there has been a 20 per cent decrease in the rate of V-457s being issued—yes, 20 per cent. This is not the first attack they have launched and I am sure it will not be the last. But we plan to counter their attacks with the truth. The FTA will not reduce immigration safeguards. It will not permit overseas workers from working in Australia below any standard that we have already set. It will not put Australians out of work. We are not changing the required skill levels for Chinese visa holders to work in Australia. We are streamlining and improving access to skill assessments. We have been clear on our position from the start, but what is Labor's position? The Leader of the Opposition spoke in favour of the free trade agreements with the Chinese premier. What is his stand now? What are they telling the unions? We want to know where the opposition stands on free trade agreements with China or anyone else. They have not clearly stated their policy and I would like to hear that. The silence from the Labor Party has been deafening on this. Come out and be heard. 10:30 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 In accordance with standing order 193 the time for constituency statements has concluded. ADJOURNMENT 92 ADJOURNMENT National Disability Insurance Scheme 92 10:31 Ms KING 00AMR Ballarat I rise today to speak on behalf of some of the most vulnerable people in my community: those with a disability; the families, the carers and all those affected by the impacts of disabilities. The launch of the National Disability Insurance Scheme in 2013 saw the beginning of a scheme which would not only give people with a disability, their families and their carers some kind of certainty but would also provide the basis for a new approach to disability in this country. Not only would access to support and funding be improved but these services would be provided from a perspective informed by the idea that people with a disability could strive to contribute. That, with just a little more assistance and more understanding, our community and our government would help to lift the barriers disability puts in place, rather than reinforcing it as an obstacle. Disability can affect us all. Whether through illness or injury, every one of us is only a small step away from relying on the government's disability scheme. In my electorate there are people in dire circumstances whose hope rests on the promise of the National Disability Insurance Scheme being fulfilled. I want and my community wants Ballarat to be one of the next locations for the National Disability Insurance Scheme in Victoria. Our community is well placed to be able to implement the National Disability Insurance Scheme and it is greatly anticipated in our community. Frankly, we cannot afford to wait any longer. I understand the government is set to announce the new locations in August and I would hope very much—and the expectation is high in my community—that Ballarat will be one of those. As I said, we cannot afford to wait. One young man in my electorate, who was recently featured in papers, is in desperate need of around-the-clock care, suffering a condition known as Friedreich's Ataxia. He is confined to a wheelchair and is legally blind. Most importantly, he also suffers severe sleep apnoea and requires overnight care in case of a fatal incident. His access to funding and support is so lacking that his carers are staying overnight at his house as volunteers, giving their time for free. That is why I am deeply concerned by the division in the Abbott government about delaying the NDIS rollout. Our most vulnerable people have been promised better treatment, better care and better control over that care. We cannot accept any delay and those people should not have to endure it. Members of my community are giving their time and effort to support those waiting for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. The Abbott government needs to understand that any delay is going to harm some of the most vulnerable people in communities across the country. Already, some 17,300 Australians with disability are getting the support they need from the NDIS. Other Australians with disability, their carers and families should not be forced to wait further. There is no reason for a delay. The recent National Disability Insurance Agency's quarterly report, Report on the Sustainability of the scheme, shows it is delivering in trial sites on time and on budget. Attempts by the Abbott government, and the Treasurer in particular, to slow down the National Disability Insurance Scheme rollout are a direct attack on the most vulnerable people who desperately need this funding. It is inexplicable given how the early National Disability Insurance Scheme trials appear to be a success beyond all expectation. Again, as the government makes its deliberations and its negotiations with states and territories about the next locations for the National Disability Insurance Scheme—and remember that these are not trial sites for the initial schemes; they are launch sites, and it is meant to be progressively rolled out across the country, and we are now talking about the next phase of progressive rollout—I call on both state and federal governments to make sure that Ballarat is in that next phase of location. We have a very strong disability community in Ballarat, and I note today that the disability sector across the country has said very clearly to the Abbott government, 'If you delay this, if you stall this, we will be out there campaigning in the streets and in electorates on this issue.' So I hope the government has heard that warning. Certainly our disability communities in Ballarat do a fantastic job. They have been positioning themselves. They have been working to change the way in which they practise to be able to offer people with disability much more choice in the support and the care that they receive. As I said, Ballarat is well placed to become the next location for the National Disability Insurance Scheme rollout in Victoria. I understand there are some delays occurring at the moment, but I hope with some anticipation that, when the announcements are made in August, Ballarat will be one of the communities that get the National Disability Insurance Scheme. We have waited too long. People with disabilities in my community deserve to have the NDIS, and they deserve to have it now. Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, Solomon Electorate: Palmerston Regional Hospital 93 10:36 Mrs GRIGGS 220370 Solomon I rise today to update the House on some of the things that are occurring in my electorate. I feel it particularly important to put the truth on the public record, because my constituents have been bombarded with a union and Labor funded campaign of misinformation. Make no mistake: despite the contents of these mail-outs, robocalls and speeches covering free trade agreements, coastal shipping and the Palmerston Regional Hospital, this is all about politics. This is about the Australian Labor Party using money raised from levies on funds from union members to try to win more seats here in this place. It is about the CFMEU and the MUA targeting marginal seats such as yours, Madam Deputy Speaker Wicks, and mine around the country in an attempt to get more union people in this place. We know that the unions are the puppet masters for the Labor members over there on that side of the chamber. Recently a flyer has been dropped through the mailboxes of many of my constituents across Darwin and Palmerston. The flyer was authorised by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union leader, Michael O'Connor. Mr O'Connor and the CFMEU make three claims on this brochure. Each is branded as a real big red fact. Well, I would like to offer, as a donation or a loan to the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, a dictionary, because it is clear from reading this pamphlet that they do not know what the word 'fact' means. None of these claims that they have made are true. None of them are even close to the truth. There will be no boatloads of overseas workers rushing to Australia to take local jobs, there will be no flood of goods coming in without safety checks, and there will be no abolition of labour and environmental laws for Chinese companies in Australia. I add that perhaps in putting together this brochure they could have used a thesaurus and not a dictionary. Perhaps they could have looked up the word 'true'. Instead of using a synonym, they used an antonym. Recently my Northern Territory colleague the health minister, John Elferink, addressed a public meeting to update the community on the progress towards Palmerston Regional Hospital. During the Q&A part of the meeting, a Labor staffer who has worked for the member for Lingiari and currently works for Senator Peris got to his feet and actually claimed credit for funding the Palmerston Regional Hospital. It was just hilarious, apparently. I was not there, because I was here in Canberra for sittings. I am told that his claim was met with a hearty laugh from the crowd and that there were a few unparliamentary words muttered by the Minister for Health, because he knew the truth: that that funding was achieved because of me; the health minister at the time, Peter Dutton; and the current Prime Minister. The Palmerston Regional Hospital is on track and it will be treating people in Darwin and Palmerston in 2018. Recently, Lend Lease was appointed managing contractor for the project, and they have the equipment and the machinery already on site and are preparing to pour the slab in October. By way of summary, I would encourage my constituents who receive any pamphlets or calls from the Labor Party or a union to treat them with healthy scepticism. Remember: in the case of unions, they are not out to represent the workers; they are out to claim seats in the House of Representatives for the Labor Party. If you have any concerns about any brochures that pop up in the letter boxes, please do not hesitate to contact me. I will be happy to tell you the truth. I do not have a union pulling my strings, telling me what I need to say here in this place. I represent the views of the people of Darwin and Palmerston. I do not represent the views of the Labor Party or the unions. I think that this needs to be called out for what it is—the union members on that site are being held to ransom and told what to say by the unions across this nation. The unions have declared war on 30 marginal seats. You know what? The people of Darwin and Palmerston are smarter than the unions give them credit for. Bosnia-Herzegovina, Chifley Electorate: Learning Ground 94 10:41 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley The eleventh of July this year marked 20 years since the world witnessed one of the worst chapters of modern history. Back then, in a place few people outside of Bosnia-Herzegovina would know, over 8,000 men and boys were massacred and separated from wives, mothers and sisters—women eventually forced to endure depravity and bear years of pain and emotional scarring. All this occurred because people were singled out for their ethnicity and faith. The events of this place propelled Srebrenica into the memories of many for all the wrong reasons. What happened here was so heinous and on such a grand scale that it was labelled genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Court of Justice. Last month, I was able to join Sydney's Bosnian and Herzegovinian community for a moving commemoration held at Sydney Town Hall. A hundred people gathered to mark a solemn respect for those who lost their lives 20 years previously. Amongst those present were many who lost family members or were in Srebrenica when the massacre occurred. I had the chance to meet with survivors like Dzevad Smajic. Dzevad lost both his parents and several other family members, and it was only in 2008 that his father's body was discovered in a mass grave beneath a hill near the town. He and his orphaned siblings are yet to find the body of their mother, who had gone missing and was presumed killed when she went out looking for food. It is hard to imagine having to bear the pain of a loss and then the emptiness that comes with being unable to lay kin to final rest. No-one should be forced to shoulder such pain. Later that night the community held a commemoration ceremony at the Bosnian Centre in Bringelly hosted by survivor Mirsada Helac and Omer Ayan. We heard heartbreaking stories, including a touching letter read by Nihada Alemic to her grandmother, whose body is yet to be discovered. She read: As much as I wish you were alive, I do not know if you would have lived knowing they killed your sons and your grandchildren. These are the stories of only a few. I presented the community with a message from opposition leader Bill Shorten, who concluded with comments made by Paddy Ashdown earlier that week: We could have prevented this horror … We chose not to … We should therefore remember Srebrenica, not just to bear witness to those who suffered, but also as a warning to us all of what happens when we turn our back. I would like to thank the Australian Bosnian-Herzegovinian community association for their continued efforts, in particular Secretary Safet Alispahic, and thank colleagues and friends Walt Secord and Jeremy Jones who attended the commemoration ceremony. My thanks also to the Bosnian ambassador, Bakir Sadovic, who was in Srebrenica at the time of the genocide, and to our Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition, Michael Danby, who represented Labor at the official commemorations in Srebrenica. I cannot speak today without expressing one final note on this matter. I wish to register profound and deep disappointment that the Prime Minister of this country and its foreign minister were unable to pay a modest respect to those who suffered and continue to be marked by this terrible event. Despite repeated efforts to determine if a statement was issued to recognise the 20th anniversary, it appears none was made by the Prime Minister or the foreign minister. I simply cannot fathom why the Australian government was unable to issue words of comfort and respect to those 8,000 Bosnian Muslims who lost their lives in the space of a few days. But let them be judged for their actions—or, in this case, inaction. If they have issued such a statement, I will immediately issue my own apology for an oversight of that nature. Finally, I wish to speak up for a group performing a vital service in our area, Mt Druitt Learning Ground. Learning Ground gives hope to those who are sometimes written off, or judged by others to have little prospect of an engaged and meaningful community contribution. Led by a team of community-minded people, the service has delivered life skills and training for vulnerable youth in our area for the last 10 years, funded by small donations, philanthropic grants and modest federal government input. It costs a lot to help each family, but through their work they have helped take young people off a probable pathway to prison or a bleaker future. Right now, the funding to Learning Ground is under threat. The Baird government has failed to extend support to the group, and this stands as a complete and utter disgrace and is a disservice to our area. The federal government, however, is considering an application to fund Learning Ground, and I, on behalf of those in need in our community, ask that this request be urgently met, because by doing so they will be helping hundreds of families to ensure that they can make a full, rich and proper contribution to our local area. Lawfare 95 10:45 Mr WHITELEY 207800 Braddon Members, I do not think you would be surprised to learn that Australia continues to have among the most stringent and effective environmental laws in the world. But the coalition government will not stand by and allow jobs and investment in our community and the development and building of our economy to be threatened by activist litigation, which is also now known as 'lawfare'. The question for Labor is: does it stand for jobs and workers or not? This government knows where it stands. I am not sure about those opposite. We know where we stand on jobs and growth and development of infrastructure and resources in this country. But where does Labor stand? The Abbott coalition government wants the highest environmental standards to apply. But here is the kicker: once the tests have been applied and approval has been given for projects to go ahead, courts should not be turned into a means of endlessly delaying vital national projects that are playing by the rules. Local jobs and projects will be protected from vigilante litigants by removing from the EPBC Act 1999 the provision that allows radical activists to continually disrupt and sabotage important projects through the courts. Removing radical activists from the process will allow projects to stand on their own merits, as they should, while ensuring that they meet stringent environmental standards—some of the strongest environmental laws in the world. This change will not affect any person legitimately affected by development. Let me say that again: this proposed change will not affect any person legitimately affected by development—they will still be able to challenge projects. But there is no place for radical green activists to push their political agendas on the north-west and west coast communities of Tasmania—or across the nation, for that matter. This provision is what allowed Save the Tarkine in my electorate to challenge and delay and challenge and delay both the Venture Minerals project at Riley Creek and Shree Minerals Nelson Bay River project. Delays in these projects have cost the Tasmanian economy millions of dollars and have cost or delayed hundreds of direct jobs and many more indirect jobs. Once again, it sends ongoing negative messages to investors around the world. I have had enough of it, and my community have had enough of it, and it is time to stand up and make the legislative changes that are required to remove these radical activists from the process. These delays have cost jobs. They have affected families and communities. At a time when the mining sector is struggling, groups like Save the Tarkine engage in vigilante lawfare, in an attempt to bludgeon projects and mining companies out of existence. They know they do not need to have money; they have inner-city green law firms doing their work on the tick, until the worldwide donations roll in. But we are their experiment. In Braddon in Tasmania, we continue to be their experiment, where they have no care—they are careless—for the jobs, families and communities of the electorate of Braddon. They know that, if they appeal decisions, it is unlikely they will need to pay any assurance and, if they do, it will be smaller than the total cost for the previous lost appeal. This is economic terrorism by judiciary. Let me say that again: this is economic terrorism by judiciary. Radical green activist groups are using the judiciary to wreak havoc on the very companies that provide much-needed employment and investment in my beautiful state of Tasmania. They know, but they just do not care. Tasmanians are well aware of these tactics and, unless the government takes action now, groups like Save the Tarkine and other green activist groups will not stop. There are no limits to their carelessness. There are a number of large proposed job-creating projects in Tasmania that are in the sights of green groups. This government is proposing to take action now to prevent future economic terrorism. Very shortly the Senate will welcome its newest senator, Nick McKim—a member of the Greens party and a person opposed to development in Tasmania. He has form. He was a minister in the worst performing government in Tasmania's history. But the pressure is on Labor senators. Whether it be Senator Urquhart, Bilyk, Brown, Polley or Singh, they need to stand up, back local jobs in Tasmania, back families and back Tasmanian communities. Loddon Murray Community Leadership Program 96 10:50 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo There is always lots of talk in this place about what is going on in our regions. Some are quite alarmist and say our regions are dying. It could not be further from the truth. Our regions are vibrant. We have community leadership; we have community energy; we have community heart. We had representatives from my own electorate of Bendigo, from the three shires that I proudly represent, come and meet with many people this week in Canberra, in Parliament House. I am talking, of course, about this year's participants in the Loddon Murray Community Leadership Program. This program aims to develop leaders of vibrant, sustainable communities by engaging, encouraging and empowering members of the community in leadership roles. The program, which runs every year from February to November, aims to develop and build the participants' skills, knowledge, abilities, understanding and networks. It assists them in becoming effective community leaders—engaged with their political leaders, engaged with their business leaders and engaged with their own communities. The program in my part of the world has operated since 1998 and has had almost 400 graduates over that time. The region that it covers is not just my electorate. It covers 11 local government areas. It also covers the electorates of Murray and Mallee. Its aim is basically to dispel the myth about our small towns. Its aim is also to develop and encourage the participants and the strong community will that exists within their own home towns. Every year the program accepts up to 25 participants and they are engaged in a number of programs and projects, not just locally but also nationally. That is why this week the program's participants were in Canberra. It feels like a lifetime ago now, but I met with them on Monday, here in this place. In a short discussion I asked them: 'If you were the federal member for Bendigo, if you were the Prime Minister, what would you do for our region? What are some of your ideas that I can share with the House and with my colleagues about what would make our small towns in our part of the world that much stronger?' The list is not only inspiring but a good task list for any local member or any government that wants to see small regional towns in Victoria grow. It includes job creation and making sure that we have a diverse range of jobs available. We cannot forget about the need to create white-collar jobs, not only so that professionals will stay in the region but to give some of the graduates from our local university a reason to stay. The list also includes youth engagement and youth unemployment—tackling the youth unemployment crisis by having entry-level jobs but ensuring that we have a strong, inclusive youth engagement program from the grassroots, learning from young people what they care about. One of the participants said that we need to celebrate what is positive and be positive. We need to stop talking negatively, stop talking down our towns, be positive and encourage people to share the good stories of our small communities. The environment featured, as did making sure that we were promoting environmental outcomes, not just economic outcomes—making sure in every conversation we were having about economic growth that it was not at the expense of the environment. A strong recommendation from one participant was constitutional recognition for Australia's first people, acknowledging in our Constitution that there were people—proud owners of this land—before the rest of us came. There was also a strong discussion about the need to decentralise, about the need to build our transport systems in the region, about fast rail, about having freight rail so that we can get produce from our country areas to port quickly for exports. In fact, there was a very strong focus on food: the celebration of food and the foodie culture, which is taking off in our part of the world. There were so many ideas coming from this group, and it is great to be able to share those and place them on the record. These are amazing community leaders who do our community proud and will continue to do our community proud as they continue on this program. Green Army Program 96 10:56 Mrs MARKUS E07 Macquarie I rise to speak on the coalition's wonderful Green Army initiative, which continues to deliver positive outcomes for our young people and environment in the electorate of Macquarie and indeed across the nation. With projects regularly occurring across the electorate, we are seeing firsthand the benefits of the program on the ground in both the Hawkesbury and the Blue Mountains. While supporting local environmental work and heritage conservation projects across Australia, the Green Army initiative is engaging young people aged 17 to 24 years and providing them with opportunities to learn new skills to prepare them for a career path they may not have considered before having been given this opportunity and gaining experience. With more than $700 million committed to Green Army projects across Australia for four years, it is making a real difference to environmental assets by restoring and protecting habitat, weeding, planting, cleaning up creeks and rivers and restoring cultural heritage places. Some of the many projects currently underway in the Hawkesbury and Blue Mountains include the accessible World Heritage experience grand clifftop walk project, which will improve and link existing upper mountains heritage listed walking tracks from Wentworth Falls to Katoomba. The Blue Mountains is a beautiful World Heritage listed region, and there are many tourists and locals who use the picnic areas and walking tracks to go birdwatching and bushwalking. It is important to keep these tracks maintained and accessible for all to enjoy while still protecting the environment. While that project is ongoing and successful in the Blue Mountains, in the Hawkesbury region a group of volunteers have been working on the Bushells Lagoon habitat restoration project in Wilberforce. Many of those working on the project have also brought a wealth of knowledge on board through university degrees in natural resource management, water quality, riparian management and animal science, which is incredibly valuable. Over six months the Bushells Lagoon team will be on the ground, working on restoring the degraded lagoon by testing water quality, removing invasive weeds and growing indigenous plants. I value the commitment and dedication of the many Green Army volunteers who are having a go and providing great outcomes for the environment, which will now be sustained for current and future generations. Dr Andy Marks from the University of Western Sydney's Hawkesbury campus, who will be involved in six recently announced projects, said the UWS is a very enthusiastic supporter of the Green Army Program, which is an example of critically important environmental action initiatives. The six projects will involve the management of bushland and wetland enrichment in Hobartville, which contains Cumberland Plain bushland. It has been wonderful to have the opportunity to visit the sites where the conservation work is being carried out and to meet the wonderful young volunteers involved. A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of attending the graduation and farewell of two Green Army projects from the Hawkesbury which will be completed this month. Sponsored by the Hawkesbury Environmental Network, the volunteers spoke of the project's success, the experience they gained in leadership and learning about precious environment and ecosystems as well as developing camaraderie. The volunteers also mentioned that it had opened up doorways to a career path. Some of them are actually already in work as a result of being part of the Green Army project. The two Green Army projects involved the restoration of Little Wheeny Creek and Yellomundee Regional Park bushland, and the regeneration of Redbank Creek, Grose Vale and the University of Western Sydney's EarthCare Centre. The Redbank Creek project involved the removal of the cat's claw creeper, a weed which was rapidly spreading into endangered ecological communities and other bushland areas of Grose Vale. The Little Wheeny Creek and Yellomundee project involved the removal of environmental weeds to regenerate native species. I would like to particularly thank HEN, UWS, Blue Mountains City Council and others who have been involved in projects across the electorate of Macquarie for their support and initiative. I encourage young people to consider becoming involved in round 4 of the program, which closes in September, as well as local groups who feel they may have projects which need to be addressed. Together we can work towards better environmental outcomes for our communities and sustain our beauty while also providing opportunities for our young people and pathways and doorways for them to step into a career. Medicare 97 11:01 Mr GRAY 8W5 Brand I would like today to talk about the government's continued assault on Medicare and the negative impact that this is having on families in my electorate of Brand. For the fourth time in just a year, the Liberal Party is again going after Medicare. Yesterday I sat in the old House of Representatives chamber in Old Parliament House, the chamber where the Liberal Party mounted its very first attacks on Medicare. If the government get their way, no-one will be bulk-billed in my electorate of Brand. Everyone will have to pay regardless of their personal circumstances. The government have never supported Medicare. They opposed its introduction and now they want to make it harder, by charging an extra fee, for people to see the doctor. People in Rockingham, Kwinana and Mandurah deserve the health care they need, and our country can afford that. Medicare is not a consumable product. It is not made unattractive by high price. A price signal only delays people from seeking medical advice, leading to poorer health outcomes and greater expense to both the Commonwealth exchequer and state governments. My community is concerned about the relentless and ongoing reviews aimed at cutting Medicare. The Abbott government is not being transparent or fair dinkum with the electorate in regard to its plans. Recently I have had many conversations with people in my electorate about health care and about Medicare. Emma from Baldivis told me about her husband's fight with Crohn's disease, lumbar radiculopathy and reactive depression. They are struggling to pay increased prices for consultations and medications. She has described the government's plans to me as 'attacks on the most vulnerable people in our society'. Jacqueline, a single mother from Rockingham with a compressed vertebra, has told me, 'If I have to pay every time I go to the doctor's, well, I won't be going, so my back won't get the treatment it needs.' That will make it harder for her family, her friends and her community. William and his wife, of Lakelands, are both self employed. They have three teenage boys, and they say: 'We rely on Medicare. Without it, we certainly would not be able to afford the minimum standards of medical care that we need.' Dan from Parmelia suffers from kidney cancer and chronic pain and needs to be managed through fortnightly visits to his GP. Dan is unable to afford these regular doctor visits, but without them he says he faces increased pain and the fear of death. Paul of Bertram is 35 per cent disabled due to a workplace injury. He is now out of work and finding it difficult to pay his mortgage. He said: 'Now Tony Abbott wants to restrict my ability to manage my daily pain levels. Walk in my shoes, Tony Abbott, for just a week, and see what your outlook is like then.' Margaret of Warnbro said: 'If the doctor visit was not bulk-billed, the likelihood of me receiving timely medical advice would be zero. I simply cannot afford to pay to see a GP.' Wendy of Warnbro is concerned that cutting Medicare will multiply the health burden on the disadvantaged. She says: 'The disadvantaged with multiple chronic conditions will not become healthier or cheaper to deal with after limiting their primary health care. Cutting Medicare will only pass on the huge financial burden of their health care on to other taxpayers and other community members.' Amanda of Safety Bay and her two children live with a rare disease. She told me, 'We already spend a large amount of money on health care and medication.' Amanda, along with many in my community, cannot afford a GP tax. Having a rare disease is part of her family life, and she cannot avoid that. Hayley of Warnbro tells me that, after the downturn in the mining and construction industry, she was made redundant. This is a story that, unfortunately, I am hearing more and more in recent months when talking to people in my home state of Western Australia. Hayley, like many of my constituents recently made redundant, is struggling. Her childcare fees and costs of living have continued to go up. She asked me: 'What is this current government doing, going after Medicare, cutting health care for our community members? Have they opened their eyes? Do they understand what's happening in our country and in our community?' Jennifer of Secret Harbour told me that she regularly has to see her local GP with her eldest son to help manage his generalised anxiety, trichotillomania, disturbance of activity and attention, and depression. She regularly needs to see a GP to get referrals to specialists. These are real people dealing with real-life problems in their community that have been made harder by the way in which the government are addressing the public policy, public administration and public side of health care through the uncertainty that they create for Medicare. I say to the government that, with another year left before the election, there is time to calm this down. There is time to place primary health care as the primary focus of this government and to care for members of our community and not make them feel like they are expenses to be borne by an unhappy government. Live Animal Exports 98 11:06 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie One of the reasons why I put my name forward to run in the last federal election was the previous government's decision to shut down the live cattle industry overnight. I thought it was a terrible decision. It affected farmers. It affected exports. I had firsthand experience of its effects. At the time, I was travelling with my family up in Western Australia—on a six-month journey in a caravan—and I came across some of the farmers and exporters up there who were, overnight, dramatically affected income-wise by that decision. The only good thing that came out of that decision is that industry standards in this area have improved dramatically since then. Some of the main issues that people write to me as the federal member for Petrie about are Australian agriculture, farming and animal welfare. Although we do not have a lot of farming, so to speak, in the Petrie electorate, people are concerned about our Queensland farmers, and Australian farmers generally, and the adversities they face, as well as animal welfare. I love animals. I have always been interested in the sector; I really am interested in what they do. But I do understand that animals are a vital food source for not just Australians but people all over the world. Over the winter break, I had the opportunity to visit some people who are involved in the live cattle export industry and to find out a little bit more about it. It was a great experience. I visited Frontier International Agri, which was established just two years ago. They are a partnership focused primarily on live exports, bringing together a group of experienced meat and livestock people with many years of industry experience. I want to particularly thank Ashley James, who made himself available to me to take me out to the cattle yards to look at how the cattle are kept whilst they are in quarantine. I also had the chance to meet one of the vets who inspect the cattle before they are shipped overseas. He explained to me that, on journeys of above 10 days, the vet goes with them. On shorter journeys of two or three days, they have an accredited stockman. I thank Ashley James for taking the time to give me a better understanding of the industry. I also had the chance to board the Gelbray Express, which is a ship basically built for live exports. I had a good chance to look at the conditions that cattle and other animals are placed in for these voyages. It was very good. It is a custom-made ship. There were food and water facilities, of course, and very good ventilation pumping through the ship on all levels all the time. It was a very interesting experience and I am pleased to say that, at least from the Australian point of view, we are world leaders when it comes to live animal export. The Australian live export industry is one of our most regulated industries. In fact, we have a world-class system and procedures in place which extend to every point of the supply chain. I want to quickly touch on Animals Australia, on their billboards and so forth—the campaign that they use to put fear into people's minds that the industry is no good. I support Animals Australia in relation to free-range eggs, hens and so forth and also around piggeries, but this attack on live exports is dreadful because Australia is keeping conditions and standards high for the rest of the world. It is also a great export opportunity for our farmers. When drought is happening, we are able to ship cattle overseas at a weight of about 350 kilo. When there are good conditions here, we are able to fatten them up and make a lot more profit here. But it is also helping other countries like Indonesia. When they get the cattle, they are able to fatten them up to about 550 kilo and make a little bit of extra profit. I also want to particularly acknowledge the Minister for Agriculture, Barnaby Joyce, who has doubled this industry and more since becoming the minister. He basically has a big 'F' for farmers engraved on his head, and 'E' for exports. He has the best interests of Australians at heart and I am sure the opposition also support the industry. (Time expired) Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 99 11:11 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton The Attorney-General, Australia's first law officer, has decided in his wisdom that organisations whose purpose includes protection or conservation of the environment or research into the environment should not be allowed to take any legal action if they notice the government failing to do its job. Senator Brandis wants to amend a law that allowed an environmental group, the Mackay Conservation Group, to bring a successful application before the Federal Court in Sydney to have set aside the decision of the Minister for the Environment to allow the development of a coalmine in Central Queensland. The legal application by the group has been described by the Prime Minister as 'sabotage', and Senator Brandis has been reported as saying he was appalled by the decision. I will come to that word 'decision' in a minute. What seems to have slipped the grasp of the government is that their minister did not properly make the decision, the job that he is paid to do. He did not properly consider the two threatened species, the yakka skink and the ornamental snake, that would be affected by the proposed coalmine. It was imperative that he consider that fact before he made the decision, as per the law—the law that John Howard introduced. The comments from the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General are even more bizarre given that the minister's decision was not set aside by the decision of the Federal Court judge in this case. This was a consent order. The respondents in this case—the Commonwealth of Australia, the Commonwealth Minister for the Environment and Adani Mining Pty Ltd—decided themselves that proper ministerial processes had not occurred and that the decision should be set aside. So it was not a decision; it was a consent order. This is simply the result of an incompetent government. The Attorney-General saw this as a horrendous miscarriage of justice so now wishes to amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act so that similar organisations to the Mackay Conservation Group cannot again hold the government to account and ensure that they make decisions properly, as they are required to do by the law—John Howard's law. They propose to amend the EPBC's extended standing provisions, which currently allow environmental organisations to bring these challenges. Let's think this through logically. If that conservation group did not have standing to bring the action, who would? Would it be the ornamental snake? Would it be the yakka skink? I have been studying law or a lawyer for over 20 years and I have seen a few snakes around the place, but I have never actually seen a legally qualified snake or skink. The mischief that the application was brought to correct was that a threatened species may become extinct by the development and the minister had not properly considered that. Certainly the yakka skink and the ornamental snake would not have standing, nor any legal training, as I have said. That is the very reason that the Howard government brought in the extended standing provisions. Those conservation groups are the only groups who have standing to protect these endangered species. This is simply another scaremongering campaign by a desperate, disorganised government. Since July 2000, there have been 5,500 projects that have gone through the same approval process that the Adani coalmining project went through. Out of those 5,500 projects, how many challenges were successful? Six out of 5,500. It is a complete overstatement by the Attorney-General when he said: … the provision that allows radical green activists to engage in vigilante litigation to stop important economic projects. Six out of 5,500—do the maths. It is an outrageous statement completely without merit. In 15 years there have only been six successful challenges to these projects. The most recent challenge could have been avoided altogether if Mr Hunt, the so-called environment minister, were doing his job properly. This is not about Australian jobs; this is about the jobs of the Prime Minister, the Attorney-General and the environment minister. This is political opportunism and wedge politics seen at the extreme. For the Prime Minister of the land, the guy that is supposed to provide us with a bit of vision, the Attorney-General, the nation's first law officer, and the environment minister—that is his title, the environment minister—to engage in such behaviour, they obviously must be lower than the belly of a Denisonia maculata to not think of what this piece of legislation was introduced for. John Howard—'not exactly a radical green activist', to quote the Attorney-General—brought in this safeguard. This is all about creating a fear campaign and a straw man to target, because the government has run out of ideas. We have seen it with its legislative agenda this week and last week here in parliament. If we look at the cabinet agenda, a blank piece of paper, this is a government that has run out of ideas and is now trying to create fear and division in the Australian community, and it should be condemned for it. Stronger Communities Program 100 11:16 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes I appreciate the contribution by the ornamental member for Moreton, who truly could be endangered—but we will see how we go. I would like to speak about something far more grounded and important to the people of Parkes and, indeed, of Australia, and that is a program of the federal government that has opened up now, the Stronger Communities Program. I am very pleased that my government has decided to roll out this $45 million program over the two years to fund small capital projects in local communities in each of the 150 federal electorates around Australia. It is not a lot of money, but this program is designed to improve community participation and encourage that large number of unsung heroes in our community, the volunteer sector. In the Parkes electorate, close to 50 per cent of my constituents are volunteers, in one way or another. Many of these groups are involved in maintaining local parks, in running local shows and football clubs, or in volunteering at golf courses and tennis courts—a whole range of facilities like that which just a few thousand dollars would help, whether it buys a net for the tennis court or an upgrade of equipment in the local park that the community maintains. These grants are between $5,000 and $20,000. They must be matched not only by cash but in kind, so the contribution of labour and other equipment that might go towards these programs will be taken into account. They must not be a state government owned organisation and they have to have an ABN or be involved as a subcommittee or part of a local council or not-for-profit—but it cannot be state owned. These programs are designed to improve community participation. The New South Wales government has had a program very similar to this for a couple of years. I might just use an example of how this program may work. Last year, my hometown of Gravesend—a magnificent village on the Gwydir Highway in north-west New South Wales—had a project involving a park. Indeed, that part is the same park I played in as a child while I was waiting for my father to attend farmers' meetings in the local hall, and maybe a bit later on while he was catching up with a few mates at the pub. My children always saw this as a special treat on a Sunday—to go to Gravesend and play in the park. But it was very tired and it was full of burrs and the equipment was old and shabby. So the local community there, led by Dan Van Velthuizen and his wife Jodie, with the help of a state government community grant and other assistance, with Gwydir Shire Council renovated this park, and we now have something that is a focal point for that community. That is the sort of project that the Stronger Communities Program is designed for. I have heard of some members of parliament who are reluctant to take this up because it might be too much work or they see it as a problem. I think this is a wonderful opportunity for members of parliament to connect with their local communities and with their local volunteer organisations across a whole range of issues. What is different about this program from what we have seen from the previous government is that this one is completely bipartisan. It has the same conditions for every electorate, regardless of who or which party represents that seat. I believe that is something that should be embraced by all. I am very proud to be part of a government that thinks of the community and understands that, while the things that go on in this beltway that we work in might seem terribly important to us, to the people out in the community a few thousand dollars to help them upgrade a local facility that is important to them probably means more than some of the issues that we may deal with in this place. National Science Week 101 11:21 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra I rise today to speak about one of my passions, and that is science—particularly, women in science. It is completely fitting, given that this is National Science Week. It was fantastic to visit Canberra College this morning with the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Minister for Education. We spoke to inspiring young students, in their science class, who showed us their experiments and spoke to us about their plans to study science or engineering when they leave school. Their excitement for science was contagious. I too share in the excitement for science because it runs in my family. My middle sister, Meg, is one of only 60 winemakers from around the world who have just been selected to take part in the Ningxia Winemakers Challenge in China, and her husband is another. Meg has a Bachelor of Science with honours from Monash University. She is a former AIDS researcher and is now a winemaker and Australia's first female Master of Wine. She has spent a decade working and living in Europe and in South America. My little sister Amy is the successful recipient of one of only six NHMRC dementia research grants worth $6.4 million. Through the Florey Institute, Amy will lead a team of 14 national and international researchers to explore the impact of stroke on brain degeneration. Amy is a neurologist with a medical degree and a PhD from Melbourne University and is one of the world's most respected stroke researchers. She has studied, worked and lived in the United States and Europe. These vastly different careers highlight the endless opportunities and possibilities of the science discipline. Labor recognises these endless opportunities within the science discipline and we recognise the need to invest in training to create the jobs of the future. Our plan is to build beyond the mining boom to capitalise on the imagination, adaptability and innovation of our people. We want to invest in digital technologies and computer science, and to ensure that coding is taught in every primary and secondary school in Australia. We want to write off the HECS debt of 100,000 science, technology, engineering and maths students. We want to encourage more women to study, teach and work in STEM fields. We want to reduce the small business company tax rate from 30 to 25 per cent, which will help people who are in the science area. We want to establish a new $500 million Smart Investment Fund to partner with venture capitalists and licensed fund managers to co-invest in early stage and high potential companies. Many of those companies are in innovative scientific areas. As it stands, not enough high school students are studying science and related subjects. According to Australia's Chief Scientist, Ian Chubb, participation rates in science subjects, as well as top-level mathematics, are at a 20 year low. At the same time, Australia currently spends less on scientific research than the OECD average. The Abbott government has no vision when it comes to investing in our future leaders. Its answer is just to cut funding and to cut jobs. In fact, the Abbott government's record on science, innovation and research has been appalling. We just have to look in our own backyard to see how short-sighted this government's approach to research and science is. CSIRO has had its funding slashed by $115 million in the 2014 budget. As a result, it has been forced to let go of 1,200 science and support staff in the last two years, the largest job cuts in the organisation's history. And it is not just limited to CSIRO. Geoscience, the Bureau of Meteorology, NICTA and many other areas of scientific research and innovation in this country have been affected. I fought against that funding cut, and I will continue to fight for scientists everywhere so that they receive the funding and the respect that they deserve. Just look at my little sister, with that extraordinary, very large grant to benefit stroke research and also dementia. Finally, I want to congratulate the ANU's Colin Jackson, who is the ACT's inaugural Scientist of the Year. He works at the Research School of Chemistry at the ANU. He has done work on insecticide resistance and also how people learn that also benefits Alzheimer's, and he also wants to increase science literacy. I also want to congratulate Brian Schmidt, who is to be the new Vice-Chancellor for the ANU. He is a Nobel Prize winner and an extraordinary addition to Canberra's academic community. Finally, I want to say, 'Happy National Science Week,' to the Australian community and to echo the sentiments that I saw on a T-shirt just recently: 'Come to the nerd side. We have pi.' (Time expired) O'Connor Electorate: Health Services 102 11:26 Mr WILSON 198084 O'Connor Today I rise to report that on 16 July the federal health minister, the Hon. Sussan Ley, made a flying visit to the Goldfields-Esperance area to meet with local health professionals to discuss difficulties encountered delivering health services in regional and remote areas. The day started in Kalgoorlie with a visit to the Royal Flying Doctor Service to tour their impressive facility and to announce a grant of $2.5 million to support the purchase of a Pilatus PC-12 aircraft to service the Aboriginal communities and more remote areas of my electorate of O'Connor. Minister Ley also discussed the $20 million in increased funding to the RFDS announced in this year's budget. This additional funding will take the Commonwealth government's contribution to the RFDS to $68 million per annum for the financial years 2015-16 and 2016-17. This increased capacity also ties in with a campaign I am spearheading to expand the Norseman Airport capacity to an all-weather strip to allow the RFDS to access the strategic three-way junction between Highway 1 crossing the Nullarbor and the Goldfields-Esperance Highway on any given day of the year. Another great initiative we shared with Minister Ley was the telehealth facility at the Kalgoorlie Hospital, where we participated in a real-time consultation with Leonora doctor Leo Winslow. WA Country Health Service recently completed a successful pilot trial of telehealth delivery, which proved of considerable value when the Laverton Hospital was without a doctor. Telehealth currently allows for emergency and 11 different specialist consultations from remote outposts. Minster Ley showed great interest in the current delivery of telehealth and is excited about the prospects for future delivery of a greater suite of services through this technology. This year's budget added an MBS item for telehealth and ophthalmology services in regional Australia, and the current MBS review will look at removing outdated services and replacing them with innovative services like telehealth going forward. We also took the opportunity to visit the dialysis ward and inspected some of the new seven new chairs funded by this Commonwealth government. It was great to see the patients so comfortable while being cared for by the wonderful staff on this ward. Given that many of the patients are Indigenous and most have travelled from the Ngaanyatjarra lands to receive treatment three days per week, it is very exciting to hear that a 19-bed hostel on Brown Avenue is ready to begin construction—once again, funded by the Commonwealth government. While on the Kalgoorlie Health Campus, the minister and I hosted a roundtable discussion with health professionals from across the Goldfields at the Rural Clinical School. This was a great opportunity for Minister Ley to hear about the unique challenges faced by health service providers who work in remote and very remote communities. This is a summary of some of the people who attended the roundtable and some of their contributions: pharmacist John Coufos—and I thank John for making the trip down from Leonora—and Kalgoorlie pharmacists Brooke and Oliver Dziubak. The pharmacists in general were very happy with pharmacy agreement No. 6, but in relation to Goldfields there was some concern over the delivery of the S100 drug and medicine mechanism for Aboriginal communities. Paediatrician Christine Jeffries-Stokes raised the issue of Indigenous young people not getting access to good health services and she raised, very strongly, her opposition to the state government's proposal to close down remote communities. Primary Health Network CEO, Andy Barnes, was there to reassure that health providers across Goldfields were transitioned into the new Primary Health Networks from the old Medicare Locals. Manager of Goldfields Rehabilitation Services, Jane Fajardo, highlighted the lack of rehab facilities and detox facilities across Goldfields, particularly for people addicted to ice. Kylie Sterry, who is an obstetrician GP and principal at Plaza Medical Service and also lectures at the Rural Clinical School, provided us with her amazing range of expertise across the board. I thank the minister for the time that she took to sit down with local health providers to brainstorm innovative ways forward for O'Connor. After the visit to Kalgoorlie we made a very quick trip to Esperance where we met with half a dozen GPs. Their issue primarily revolved around providing internship places in regional areas, particularly in towns like Esperance, so that young GPs can receive training in situ in regional areas. Next week I will have the pleasure of representing the minister in Kalgoorlie to open the newly refurbished block 1 at the Kalgoorlie Health Campus. This block is being completed as part of a $55.8 million redevelopment of the Kalgoorlie Health Campus, including $15.8 million funding from the Western Australian government. It houses outpatients, allied health, patient assisted travel schemes and a $3.8 million Commonwealth funded cancer centre. Broadband 102 11:32 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway One of the continuous complaints that I receive from local residents in Greenway, and in particular in the suburb of Glenwood, is the lack of reliable broadband services. I draw the House's attention to this week's Rouse Hill Courier headline 'It's 2015—residents would like reliable internet'. It reads: Frustrated residents living in Glenwood are dealing with almost non-existent internet access at peak times. Residents say they have experienced unsustainable connection speeds since the launch of the Netflix video-on-demand streaming service in March. "Between 4pm and 6pm the internet gets very slow—sites like YouTube won't even work," IT worker Neil Caldwell said. I can attest to this. As a long-time resident of Glenwood, this situation has been getting worse and worse, despite all the promises from this government and in particular Minister Turnbull, who has talked a big game on delivering broadband to our communities, but has failed to deliver. Do not take it from me; take it from these local residents. I again quote Neil Caldwell: I would like to work from home but I can't. If more people could work from home it would help a great deal because Glenwood is very congested at peak times. Chris Winslow, President of the Glenwood Community Association, said: The slow broadband speeds available to people in Glenwood is a significant concern to the members of the association. Glenn Latch, another resident of Glenwood, said: My understanding was we were in the medium term roll-out plan for the NBN, but it looks like we are just not on the plan anymore. Telstra is saying there are no congestion problems, but when I'm at home and my mobile operates through my Wi-Fi, I can't even browse websites. This is very true. Look at the comments of Kent, for example. Kent emailed me, saying: I'm eagerly awaiting the NBN as it will allow me to work from home for a couple of days each week, resulting in less travel ... and more time with our new baby boy. I was disappointed when first learning of the mixed FTTP/FTTN roll-out and feel that it is extremely short sighted. A significant infrastructure project designed to meet needs for many decades has been watered down almost to the point where it completely misses the needs of current and future generations. Andy, in Glenwood, said: It is a number one concern that Glenwood never had a good deals and reliable services from existing ISP. Our lines are on the Kellyville sub exchange and it means that by the time the internet speed reaches our home, the speed has been discounted heavily. Paying the same price but not getting the speed promised is not on! We deserve better. For school kids, a lot of school works needed to be completed online. Internet speed is vital!! I cannot stress it enough how NBN is so important for Glenwood residents. Ian in Glenwood said: I could buy better internet in sub-Saharan Africa! Ian said a Telstra representative said to him that: … he has a lot of people from Glenwood come in, but it's a basket case for them. He said that Telstra simply won't invest in Glenwood until there is clarity around the NBN. So in short, Turnbull and Abbott's nonsense leave me with an inadequate service due to their political games. …   …   … This is a fiasco. … I work from home, and this disrupts my ability to do so. It's simply not good enough that a first world country has a third world internet. Those examples are from real constituents who want the NBN. Let us have a look at the progress. Today, Ken Tsang, someone who has done a lot of analysis in this area and is known to many, noted that NBN fibre-to-the-node had been delayed for 164,000 premises. He wrote: Analysis of nbn's monthly rollout schedule has revealed that the ambitious Fibre to the Node switch-on has been delayed for hundreds of thousands of premises by up to four months. So, even in this much-touted FTTN, Expected Ready for Service dates are slipping, again, under this minister. And I am not surprised that they are slipping. As we noted last week, MyRepublic slammed this government's 'fraudband' plans. Ovum Research Director David Kennedy was quoted as saying that MyRepublic was: … a serious company making significant inroads in the Singaporean market. and that: NBN hasn't even completed its technical trials for FTTN and we're not sure what technology they'll use. What has this minister being doing, going around and announcing all of these sites that are going to get connected? They have not even completed their technical trials yet. So I am not surprised by the slip in dates, continuously, under this minister—this minister who talked the biggest game on earth when it came to the NBN. He said that the fibre-to-the-node rollout would be 'at scale' by now. He promised every home and business would have access to 25 megabits per second by the end of 2016—a promise broken. He promised that the NBN under him would be built for under $30 billion. He now says it is going to cost $42 billion. This is a minister under whom the NBN is rolling out slower than promised and is costing more. Bruce Highway 104 11:37 WYATT ROY M2X Longman Madam Deputy Speaker Prentice, as somebody who, I am sure, proudly represents many areas around Brisbane, you can understand and share my concern around the Bruce Highway as you head north. I know you love the capital city, but I think it only gets better as you head further north. It is incredibly important that we have a Bruce Highway that is planned for generations to come. Everyone wants to move to our part of the world. And I cannot blame them. I think it is the best place in the world. But it is important that governments plan for that long-term growth that our region will see. We have made a significant start in that space. The federal government is spending $6.7 billion upgrading the Bruce Highway. I think that is an important initiative. I think that is something that should be congratulated. It was not easy to get to that point, particularly in a difficult budgetary circumstance. Of that $6.7 billion, over $3 billion is being spent upgrading the Bruce Highway between the Pine River and Gympie. As you drive along the highway, you can already see those works happening. Most of the intersections are getting a very significant upgrade. But I think it is important that we have that longer-term vision and that we plan for that next stage. That is why, I am really excited to say, I am working with many colleagues in this place to have that vision for South-East Queensland around the Bruce Highway. I have joined forces with Mal Brough, the member for Fisher to my north, Peter Dutton, to the south, Luke Howarth, a little bit further down; and Senator James McGrath, who represents all of Queensland, to launch our Boost the Bruce campaign. This is about that next stage—that long-term vision to Boost the Bruce. I think this is a very exciting thing. As part of this campaign we have managed to secure $8 million from the federal government to begin that design and planning work so that we know where those upgrades are and how much they will cost. For what it is worth, we think that some of the really important things include increasing the number of lanes from the Sunshine Coast down to Caboolture, where there is already an increased number of lanes. Also, at King John Creek, it often floods on that stretch, and the highway becomes cut off. That is a pretty remarkable thing to happen not far north of Brisbane. Flooding has caused huge dramas. We want to see the highway lifted at that point to mitigate that flooding risk. And, obviously, where the highway comes into the Gateway Motorway, a real bottleneck occurs at that point. This government is already spending over a billion dollars in upgrading the Gateway Motorway. I think that will make a big difference, but inevitably there will be that bottleneck as we connect to the Bruce Highway. Across those initiatives we have put $8 million on the table for the design, planning and engineering work so that we can get a costing around how much that next stage, large-scale upgrade for the future of the Bruce Highway will cost. I think that is easy to say that the responsibility for this simply falls to politicians, but of course we live in an environment where there are budgetary constraints. I have always said that when more people speak up it is more likely that we will have an outcome, so my colleagues and I are calling on locals to go to www.boostthebruce.com.au and add their names to the petition calling for this vital upgrade to the highway. If we all speak up, I think we can make this the No. 1 infrastructure priority for Queensland, certainly South-East Queensland, and that is incredibly important. We want to do this in a bipartisan way as well, or at least extend the arm of bipartisanship. I do not want to make a political point of this, but it is a reality that, with the new state Labor government in Queensland not proceeding with asset sales, we have lost $8½ billion worth of investment. They are currently developing an infrastructure plan. That is money that could have been spent on projects like this. I met with Mark Ryan, the local state Labor member. He has also committed to lobby the state Labor government for these funds, because with these long-term-vision projects we should try and rise above the political fray and actually get something done. I think the state Labor Party have put themselves in a difficult situation to do that, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt and let's all call on each other to do this. These highway initiatives in metropolitan areas are usually funded fifty-fifty state and federal. Outside of the city it is eighty-twenty. I commit to lobby this government, and any government of the day, for that 80 per cent funding in our area. I think it is important that the state government puts forward the other 20 per cent. So get behind our campaign and go to www.boostthebruce.com.au. National Science Week 105 11:42 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne This week we are celebrating National Science Week across the country. On Tuesday some scientists and researchers doing incredible projects which are being funded by the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, ARENA, came to Parliament House to show all parliamentarians their outstanding, world-changing work. While I was there I met many of the dedicated scientists and researchers who are in the middle of launching projects that could fundamentally disrupt and change the way our cities and our towns source energy within our lifetimes, potentially within the next decade. CSIRO, Monash University and Melbourne University are part of a consortium which can print solar cells; printable solar cells are rolling off the line right now. Just imagine: when you are able to print solar cells directly onto rooftop materials—onto corrugated iron— you will not need to install a new solar panel; the roof will be the solar panel. There were incredible advancements going on in energy storage from UltraBattery and Ecoult, where there is the great prospect of being able to store the energy the sun produces during the day so that every home or every business can use it overnight. We saw great companies like Reposit Power, who were looking at how to integrate that back into the grid so that every household can have some freedom from energy companies. We saw the great work being done by NICTA, who are putting together a national map of renewable energy so that anyone can go online and find out where the best place is to generate renewable energy and to build a new wind farm or put up new solar panels. Standing in that room, I felt incredibly proud knowing that in the last government, when we had a power-sharing arrangement, it was the Greens who came up with the idea of ARENA and secured its existence and its ongoing funding. But, as I stood there, the Minister for Industry and Science took to the microphone and spoke of his support for ARENA, for their researchers and their projects, but what he did not say was that it is this government's policy to shut ARENA down and to take funding away from it. Everyone in the room knew that, as soon as the minister left the room, he would get back to work on trying to close down these important and incredible projects—to act as though there had been no technological advancements in the field of energy production since the combustion engine in the 18th century. Instead, we have this incredible brainpower and innovation happening right here, in this country, that needs support and that needs innovation. But it is not getting it, and the people in that room and the scientists and researchers knew that this government's proposal was to shut down organisations like ARENA. Last night I met a woman who told me her husband was working as a renewable energy researcher and that they were about to move to the UK because they could no longer be guaranteed secure funding here in Australia. These tales are being told right across the country. In my electorate I have met with PhD student Jess, who came up here to parliament. She wants to stay working in her field, but she feels that she needs to step away from research if she wants to stay in Melbourne and to have any sort of job security that will enable her and her partner to take on a mortgage. I met with George, who was very recently forced to hang up his lab coat and move into the business world after a very successful 12 years in the School of Chemistry at the University of Melbourne because of the limited opportunities in science and research in this country. At the moment, scientists and researchers feel that the funding for science and research is just living from budget cycle to budget cycle and that, every time governments get into trouble, every time they feel they need to balance the budget, they treat science and research as a honey pot to dip into. As a result of that uncertainty, we are witnessing a brain drain. People are saying, 'We will go overseas to other places where they secure funding for science and research and where young researchers know that they can have a long career.' Sadly, under this government we have the percentage of spending on science and research at its lowest levels since we started keeping records. We are at a 30-year low on spending on research and development in this country. We need to boost it up to at least three per cent, which is where many of our trading partners are, and hopefully up to four or five as some other countries have. There are some green shoots in this country. Already over 20,000 people have signed up at respectresearch.com.au for the Respect Research campaign. They are putting up stickers like this one here all over their workplaces around the country because people know that Australia's future depends on science, research and innovation, and that means governments from across the political spectrum need to stop chopping and changing science funding and instead commit to securing it for the long term and lifting it to at least the levels that our trading partners have. 11:47 Mr VARVARIS 250077 Barton This morning I would like to speak on an issue that has affected too many families yet few may be aware of. I am referring to football related heart attacks. To put it simply: we must stop soccer players dying on football fields because a defibrillator was not available. We should be especially concerned given the number of lives it has taken over the last two years alone. In 2014 there were five deaths on football fields in Sydney, with another four already this year when we are only two months into the season. Just imagine: you are playing soccer with your friends on a local field or training with a team you joined. You start feeling unwell. You head over to the sidelines. Then you collapse. The coach or a bystander desperately tries to revive you. They perform CPR but to no avail, because you have gone into cardiac arrest. They try to find a defibrillator, but there isn't one. An ambulance is called, but it is too late. As rare as it sounds, the statistics reveal the sad truth. We can only imagine the devastation amongst teammates, friends and family as they all struggle to comprehend why, as a society that is so conscious of health and safety, a lifesaving defibrillator is not mandatory on sporting fields. During the winter recess, I met with Andy Paschalidis, former SBS presented and player for the Forest Rangers Football Club, who is spearheading the Heartbeat of Football campaign because he also has been personally touched by this issue. He was at Gannons Park in Peakhurst, Sydney last year when his best friend, Matt Richardson, collapsed and died on the field. Matt was just 43 and left behind a wife and three young children. It is just devastating. Sadly, Matt was not the first or the last. As I mentioned previously, there have now been nine people who have died on the sporting field, four of them from my electorate of Barton. Ante Bosnjak was the first. He passed away during an annual six-a-side preseason tournament. It was a cruel irony because Ante died during a game that was held to honour another player who died of a heart attack several years earlier. Kodjo Etonam Adjassou was only 24 when he collapsed and died whilst playing for the Bankstown City Lions. Kodjo had settled in Australia after spending 10 years in a Ghanaian refugee camp, before his soccer talent was spotted. John Annas collapsed and died at Rudd Park in front of his dad and teammates, leaving behind a wife and four children. None of them knew he had a heart condition. Emin Rufati was a St Ives Football Club veteran who collapsed and passed away suddenly, leaving behind a wife and two young children. Mrs Rufati has said she never expected to be a widow at the age of 46. Similarly, Ash Ariyaratnam left behind his wife and two children, after collapsing on an oval in April this year. In May, Col Green, a player and coach of the over-45s for Avalon, died during a game. He left behind his wife and daughter. Perhaps the saddest case was the one of Marc John Arcuri. Marc started to feel unwell before collapsing and going into cardiac arrest. CPR was performed, but he could not be revived. Marc was only 15. Just recently, a Central Coast man, Mickey Dean, died in similar circumstances. Mickey was playing in an over-45s match when he felt chest pains. A paramedic on the team rushed to help him, but he could not be revived. He left behind a wife and two children. I know that some of my colleagues have been made aware of this issue, notably the member for Robertson, Lucy Wicks; the member for Bowman, Andrew Laming; and the Minister for Human Services, Senator the Hon. Marise Payne. They have all met with Andy to discuss the aforementioned issues. I know this matter has bipartisan support, and it should because this is a clear health concern for anyone partaking in sporting activities. Awareness of this issue is a key driver for change, and that change is to have mandatory defibrillators on every sporting field right around Australia. The cost of defibrillators ranges from $2,000 to $3,000, but it can double the chance of surviving a cardiac arrest. CPR, combined with early defibrillation, can be life saving. This statement has been confirmed by the acting CEO of the Heart Foundation, Mark Dupe: for every minute that passes, there is a 10 per cent less chance of revival. Victoria recently spent $3 million rolling out 1,000 defibrillators across the state. My hope is that New South Wales and every other state can follow suit. Calwell Electorate: Sicilian Association of Australia 106 11:52 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell I recently attended the Sicilian Association of Australia's 2015 annual gala evening held in my electorate at the Melrose reception centre in Tullamarine. It was a great pleasure to be there and also to represent the Leader of the Opposition at what has now become an annual celebration of Sicilian heritage and culture. I begin by thanking the Sicilian Association's president, Mr Massimo 'Max' Petterlin, who was a very gracious host and made the evening very enjoyable and insightful. The aim of the association is to promote Sicilian heritage and culture in Australia, and there were some 250 members of the wider Australian Sicilian community present at this gala dinner. Many of them, of course, live in my electorate of Calwell in the suburbs of Greenvale, Keilor, Taylors Lakes, Mickleham and Campbellfield, making the Australian-Italian Sicilian community one of the largest in the federal seat of Calwell. Italians and, indeed, Sicilians were one of the first groups of migrants from southern Europe to settle in Australia in the post-World War II period. Many settled in Melbourne's northern suburbs and have remained there through the first and second generations, and many third generation children have too. The Sicilian Association of Australia was officially inaugurated on 24 October 2010. The inaugural president was Supreme Court judge the Hon. Justice Tony Pagone, who is now a patron of the association. Justice Pagone is a great example of a successful Italian Sicilian migrant who has made an impressive and outstanding contribution to the wider Australian community. Initially, a large number of Italian Sicilian migrants went into the fruit and vegetable business when they first arrived in Australia. They used their flair and their love for agriculture and gardening, combined it with their infamous entrepreneurial acumen and created employment and a livelihood for themselves and their families. Later, they created jobs for many others as they began to expand their small businesses into what are today some iconic food and beverage outlets. Whilst the second and third generations, such as Justice Pagone, have gone on to become lawyers, judges, doctors and a whole range of other professionals, there are still many members of the community who choose to progress and develop their original family businesses. Melbourne's northern suburbs are awash with Italian food and drink products: products that have enriched Australian food culture and products that are now eclectic, niche markets for export and significant additions to the growth and development of Australia's food manufacturing industry. I note and welcome the opening of the Melbourne wholesale market which has finally opened in Whittlesea in the federal seat of Scullin. Five thousand new jobs will be created. It boasts 40 per cent greenhouse savings and 80 per cent waste recycling and is a wonderful addition to Melbourne's northern suburbs. This and many other exciting developments in the Australian economy are powered by the Sicilian Association's key objectives, which include a focus on the promotion of Sicilian food products and business activity, and there will be many Italian products available at Melbourne's wholesale markets. Some of these eclectic Sicilian food producers were also the proud sponsors of the gala dinner, and I was lucky enough to take home some of their products in my show bag. The products included Diavoletti's smoked mozzarella with olive and chilli scented cheese, the romanello cherry tomato sauce and the Antico slowly roasted coffee; those are familiar brands to many of us. These products are authentically Sicilian and are available on our supermarket and delicatessen shelves. They form a part of our great, uniquely Australian, multicultural food palette. I would like to note one particular example of an Australian-Sicilian family that has had great success in the food industry: the iconic Piedimonte's Supermarkets. The Piedimonte family, originally from Sicily, own two large supermarkets in Melbourne's north. They have developed a successful business that is known for its great food and great service. And whilst many first generation Italians have moved to the outer northern and eastern suburbs of Melbourne, many still return to Piedimonte's to do their grocery shopping. Piedimonte's Supermarket is also the preferred place to shop for members of Melbourne's wider multicultural community who enjoy the many European delicacies. Sharing culture through food is one of the most effective ways for migrants to engage in our community. In addition to their business and intellectual acumen, Australian Sicilians are also highly creative and artistic, and on display that evening was the artwork of 81-year-old Maria Agricola, a first generation Italian migrant; she is also a breast cancer survivor, and was able to go on and complete a university degree and pursue her gift of painting, while simultaneously adjusting to and bringing up a family in a new and foreign country. Lyons Electorate: Community Breakfast 107 11:57 Mr HUTCHINSON 212585 Lyons It gave me great pleasure to welcome the Prime Minister to my electorate on Friday a week ago in the south-east part of Tasmania, in the town of Sorell. Sorell is the capital of south-east Tasmania, indeed, and I was very pleased to host the Prime Minister at a community breakfast that was attended by nearly 100 people from the Tasman; from Sorell municipality, obviously; from Glamorgan Spring Bay; from Brighton; and from the Derwent Valley, the Central Highlands and the Southern Midlands. So it was a wonderful opportunity for President Tim Weir at the RSL club and Sue Birch, the Secretary of the RSL club, Rodney Dean and Stephen Pears, the Vice Presidents, and Treasurer Michael Itchens to showcase what a wonderful facility the RSL is for such an event. Community members, as I say, from all around south-east Tasmania were particularly represented by fire brigades from Primrose Sands, from Midway Point and from Wattle Hill, and there were representatives from the Coal River group of fire brigades. There was the Dunalley fire brigade, of course, that was so instrumental in fighting the terrible bushfires of January of 2013. I was particularly pleased to see that Brad Westcott was able to join us; he was the brigade chief during that terrible time. There were also representatives from east coast fire brigades. There were other community members there. I thank Yve Earnshaw from the Dunalley Tasman Neighbourhood House for attending; they do fantastic work in that part of the community. There were many councillors there. From the Sorell Council there was Deb De Williams AM, and Kerry Degrassi, who is a wonderful contributor to her council. Mayors were represented by Roseanne Heyward from the Tasman, Tony Foster from Brighton, Martyn Evans from the Derwent Valley, and, of course, Kerry Vincent, the Mayor of Sorell, as well as the Deputy Mayor of the Central Highlands, Andrew Downie. Following the community breakfast, we visited with the Prime Minister to Houston's farm, just down the road. Their processing factory is actually in the electorate of Franklin, but they have farm production facilities in and around the Sorell and Forcett areas. It was an opportunity to see a business that is benefitting very much from the expansion that we have been able to deliver in terms of the Freight Equalisation Scheme, as well as the irrigation schemes in south-east Tasmania. If you go into pretty much any Woolworths supermarket along all of the eastern seaboard you will find products from Houston's farm. It truly is an extraordinary story, where a family business that started as chicken farmers over a hundred years ago is now supplying much of Australia with lettuce product, and increasingly looking towards those export opportunities that have been opened up through the free trade agreements that we have signed in Japan, in South Korea and hopefully soon also in China. Following a visit to Houston's farm, the Prime Minister, the Treasurer, the Premier and the state Treasurer met at the Sorell Council chambers, where the Joint Commonwealth and Tasmanian Economic Council meeting was held for the reminder of the day. This was an election commitment. Indeed, there has been a forum chaired by Dale Elphinstone, a very well-respected businessman from the north-west coast of Tasmania. He has chaired the Economic Council and already, through that mechanism, we have delivered an expansion of the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme, to the tune of $204 million over the forward estimates. It effectively puts Tasmania, in terms of exports, on a level playing field with other parts of Australia. We have delivered $60 million for the expansion of the tranche 2 irrigation schemes in our state, which is really an enabler to expanding agricultural production in areas that are typically dry areas. At the end of the day our agenda as federal members in this place, combining with our state colleagues, is about jobs. Our agenda is about invigorating small business, it is about delivering opportunities for business more broadly in Tasmania to open up to markets to our north, through the free trade agreements. It is through infrastructure, such as the Mobile Phone Blackspot Program, that we have delivered the sort of infrastructure that regional Tasmania very much needs. Question agreed to. Federation Chamber adjourned at 12:02.