2017-02-13 45 1 2 House of Reps 0 1

Monday, 13 February 2017

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 10:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Petitions Committee 1 Report 1 10:01 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner I present the sixth report of the Petitions Committee for the 45th Parliament together with 37 petitions and 21 ministerial responses to petitions previously presented. The terms of the petitions and the ministerial responses will be printed in Hansard. PETITIONS 1 PETITIONS Middle East 1 Immigration Detention 1 Middle East 1 Immigration Detention 1 Kentish Health Centre 2 Bass Strait Ferry 2 National Library of Australia Trove Archive 2 Falun Gong 2 Veterans' Review Board 3 Federal commission against corruption 3 Death Penalty 3 Family Court 3 Racial Discrimination Act 4 Kangaroo Island 4 Aged Care 4 Arts in the VET sector 4 Cigarettes 4 Housing Prices 4 Firearm Violence 5 Timor Gap 5 Refugees 5 Refugees 5 Medicare 5 Federal commission against corruption 6 Women-only beach 6 Law Enforcement 6 Human Rights Commission 6 Racial Discrimination Act 6 Racial Discrimination Act 6 Queen's Birthday Public Holiday 7 Australian Defence Force 7 Community Television 7 Humanitarian Visas 7 Aged Care 8 Charter of Budget Honesty 8 Asylum Seekers 8 Health Insurance 8 Gambling 8 PETITIONS 9 PETITIONS Superannuation Complaints Tribunal 9 Falun Gong 9 Mobile Black Spot 9 Member for Warringah Citizenship Status 10 Ecotourism Development 10 Dairy Industry 10 Dairy Industry 11 Dairy Industry 12 Dairy Industry 13 Dairy Industry 13 Rural and Regional Roads Package 14 Asylum Seekers 14 Asylum Seekers 15 Ingram, Mr Clive 16 Marriage 17 Marriage 17 Papua provinces 17 Marriage 18 Public Holiday 18 Asylum Seekers 18 Labour Hire Casualisation 19 PETITIONS 19 PETITIONS Statements 19 10:04 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner The act of citizens petitioning parliament about their grievances is centuries old. The practice came to Australia as part of our Westminster inheritance and remains as an important democratic function connecting people to the parliament. While modern petitioning might look very different to its early ancestors it remains relevant to citizens, the parliament and its members. In many modern parliaments the right to petition is much more than a historical remanent and many parliaments have introduced systems that facilitate and improve citizens abilities to exercise this right, such as electronic petitioning. For citizens, petitioning the House of Representatives remains relevant as it can provide an opportunity for community engagement on important issues when gathering signatures, an avenue for the public to raise their grievances directly with the House, a mechanism for having the petitions terms considered by referral to a relevant minister and, in many cases, a response from a minister addressing the matters raised in the petition. Other citizens not involved as a principal petitioner or signatory can also become better informed about matters of significance to them by accessing petition terms, any hearings on the topic and ministers' responses on the parliament's website. Members have an important role to play in assisting prospective petitioners to access the petitions system and through this engagement are informed about the issues that are important to their constituents or to Australians more broadly. For ministers who receive petition terms for consideration this can be a useful mechanism for getting an appreciation of certain issues that are of significance to Australians and clarifying government policy and action on these matters for the information of petitioner and the wider community. As always, I encourage Australians to learn about the petitions process and to engage with the parliament in this way when there is a significant issue that they feel needs to be brought to the attention of this House. Similarly, I encourage members and ministers to continue to support the petitions process and help ensure that the Australian community receives the full benefits of petitioning their parliament. BILLS 20 BILLS Social Security Legislation Amendment (Fair Debt Recovery) Bill 2017 20

Social Security Legislation Amendment (Fair Debt Recovery) Bill 2017

First Reading 20 Second Reading 20 10:05 Mr WILKIE C2T Denison I move: That this bill be now read a second time. There has obviously been a considerable amount of controversy over the last few months over what is being widely described as the Centrelink debt recovery debacle or fiasco. There should have been much controversy over this because we have known for a long time now that Centrelink is sending out in the order of 20,000 debt notices each and every week and something like 4,000 of those, about 20 per cent or about one in five, are wrong. We know they are wrong, the government knows they are wrong and the department knows they are wrong but they are still being sent out. We also know that this is not a problem that has virtually run its course and will go away, and the government will be grateful for that. In fact, the fiasco is set to get a whole lot worse because this year the data matching to achieve debt recovery will be expanded to include recipients of the age pension and the disability support pension. So this fiasco, which is already of great significance and causing great hurt, is about to become a whole lot more significant and cause a whole lot more hurt in the community. In this place about a week ago when I spoke about these matters the minister assured the community that all is well, that these are simply 'please explain' letters and that all that is needed is for the recipients of these letters to get in touch with Centrelink—easily done—and explain what the problem is and there will be no further action taken against those members of the community. But the fact is that what the government has had to say about these matters so far has been plain wrong and sometimes misleading. The fact is that a great many people are struggling mightily to even get in touch with Centrelink. They are waiting for an hour or two hours. It is simply not the case that you get on that 1800 number and someone will pick up the phone straight away. We are still hearing stories about people who are waiting an hour and giving up with exasperation. Those trying to deal with this through the online portal are finding it just does not work and does not allow them to communicate with Centrelink. We know for a fact that a great many people are simply unable to find the historic paperwork that is often required to clear up the matter. When I spoke last week and gave the example of a woman who had had five jobs over the last seven years it was dismissed by the minister, I regret to say. One of those employers is not even in business any more. She has no hope of finding the paperwork back seven years. Heavens, the ATO expects you to keep the paperwork for only five years. We know many people are scared when they get these letters. It is a scary thing to get an official looking letter from the government. No wonder some people are scared deeply and are just paying the bill. They assume that the government knows better, they assume that the government is right or they just do not assume anything but are so scared they pay it. Perhaps they pay the money that is in the debt letter because they are scared about putting at risk any future payments from Centrelink. When other crossbenchers and members of the Labor Party have raised examples in the parliament or have raised them publicly at press conferences we have seen the awful practice of the government demonising the people we are talking about. They are very quick to say that those people are wrong so we are wrong and the government is right. This is a terrible, terrible episode. No wonder the Commonwealth Ombudsman is investigating; no wonder the Senate has decided to set up an inquiry into these matters. I just hope that the Ombudsman and the Senate inquiry make good and speedy progress so that more and more of a light can be shone on this debacle and more and more pressure can be put on the government to axe the system and to put in place a timely, an accurate and a fair debt recovery system. No-one is disputing the fact that any genuine overpayments should be paid back. But let's do it in a timely manner, an accurate manner and a fair manner. This current, clunky system that has been put in place is not timely, is not accurate and is not fair. The major parties wonder why members of the community—why voters—are shifting their support to minor parties, microparties and independents. Mr Speaker, I will tell you why some people are shifting their support from the government right now: when it comes to the Centrelink fiasco, the government is looking incompetent, cruel, uncaring and unresponsive. This is not the job of the opposition; it should not be up to the Labor opposition or to the crossbench, week after week, to have to come in here and make the case, and keep making the case. It is the job of a competent and caring government, a government with integrity, to see there is a problem, to admit there is a problem and to fix it. That is how you improve your poll numbers, I say to the members of the government. On a positive note—there is one little positive note here. I was pleased to see, a few weeks ago now, that the minister did acknowledge that it would be helpful if in future no debt recovery action would proceed while people were having their alleged debts examined and any concerns examined and reviewed. That is a good thing. And that brings me to the substantive matter here, and that is the private member's bill which I now have before the parliament, which in essence seeks to formalise and legislate that commitment from the government—to formalise and to legislate that from now on if anyone is disputing an alleged debt then, in law, no debt recovery action will proceed while that review is occurring. I think that is an entirely reasonable thing, and it is entirely consistent with what the minister said only a few weeks ago. Now, I am disappointed that the minister is not in the chamber for this important bill. He, or at least his staff, would know that I am in here trying to progress this matter. If he is fair dinkum about that commitment he made, that people would be left alone while their matters are being reviewed, I think he would be in here. Hopefully, he is at least watching my little 10 minutes of talking on his television or, hopefully, one of his senior staff is doing that, because I can see absolutely no reason—no reason whatsoever—why the government would not support this bill. If the government does not arrange for this bill to progress to a full debate and to a vote, and if the government does not support this bill then, frankly, it will mean that everything the minister said a few weeks ago was hollow or false. The fact is that a few weeks ago he did say that from now on all debt recovery action against a member of the community would be put on hold while their matters were being reviewed, and that is all this bill seeks to do. So I am actually quite hopeful that the government will see fit to support this bill. I suspect the opposition and the crossbench will support this bill. I do not mind if it is amended; I do not mind if it is improved. I do not mind if the government actually grabs it and puts its name on it and progress it as its own bill. All I want is the outcome. The public interest would be best served by the outcome. So I say to the minister: get behind this bill, or at least progress your own bill in its likeness. And let's not forget why we are doing this. Let's not forget why so many of us are trying to keep the pressure up on the government to axe the debt recovery program and to put in place a timely, an accurate and a fair replacement system. It is because this is not about statistics—it is not about just big numbers: 20,000 letters, 4,000 letters—this is about real people. This is about people who we walk past in the street; this is about our mums and our dads and our brothers and our sisters, or our sons and our daughters or our friends—or the people we are supposed to be serving. None of them deserve to be treated like this. Remember that the most important role of government is to look after the most disadvantaged members of the community. This is an example of bad public policy that is targeting the most disadvantaged and vulnerable members of the community. I call again on the government to support this bill. I am hopeful that the opposition and crossbench will support this bill to at least formalise and enshrine in law the commitment that the minister gave only a few weeks ago. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? Ms McGowan 123674 Yes, I am happy to second this motion and support all the comments of my colleague on the crossbench. The SPEAKER 00APG The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Donation Reform and Transparency) Bill 2017 22

Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Donation Reform and Transparency) Bill 2017

First Reading 22 Second Reading 22 10:16 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Australians are telling us that our political system, the quality of our democracy and all of us here need to lift our game. What turns Australians off politics is the consistent bickering and meaningless daily squabbles. What turns Australians off politics is the perception that politicians are purely in it for themselves and their own interests. These are the reasons that too many Australians feel that our system is broken, that what happens here is cut off from their lives and, to quote Katharine Murphy from The Guardian, that politics has become 'little more than a series of arbitrations with cashed-up rent seekers'. As long as this perception holds we will continue to see the rise of fringe movements and false prophets who convert their anti-Canberra, antipolitics message into seats in the parliament for them. This is a challenge for all of us who have come to this place to speak up for our communities and to deliver for Australians who call this their home a better standard of living. We all have a responsibility for restoring trust and confidence in our system. What the people of Australia want is leaders and leadership; when leaders say what they will do they mean it and they just get on and do it. This is why Labor is just getting on and doing it. This year we have outlined a three-point plan to restore confidence in the political process—not because we think that that in and of itself will change the daily lives of Australians but because it is the green fee for credibility, for Australians to say, 'Hey, this mob are taking us seriously and our concerns seriously.' Our three-point plan includes: one, last week in the Senate introducing an inquiry into the merits of a national integrity commission; two, tomorrow voting for long overdue reform of the expenses system; and, three, today presenting to the House our plan for stricter donation rules, stronger transparency and accountability, because secrecy and reform cannot coexist. Secrecy and reform do not go together. The Australian people have a right to know. The health of our elections, our democracy and people's faith in our political process depend upon setting and meeting the highest standards. This is why this legislation is so important. This legislation is about that great old-fashioned concept that Australians have a right to know, about making sure that voters, shareholders and consumers are aware of who donates to which party and how much they give. This legislation will also include loopholes that vested interests currently use to hide their donations and conceal their influence. This begins with a long overdue reduction of the disclosure threshold from $13,200 to $1,000. I am very proud of Labor's record on this question. I genuinely believe we make a very strong case. In 2006 we opposed then Prime Minister Howard raising the threshold from $1,000 to $10,000. When last in government we sought to lower it back to $1,000 but we were prevented from doing so by the Liberal-Nationals. Now, yet again, we are rising to the challenge in opposition. This is not a hypothetical for us. The standard we are seeking to write into law is one that we have nationally voluntarily met for the last five years. Since 2011 federal Labor has had a policy that every donation over $1,000 should be declared. I believe it is time for the government to step up and show the same commitment to transparency and the same respect for the Australian people—not just complying with the legal minimum but meeting the best ethical standard, not just complying with the legal minimum but meeting the best practice standard. Lowering the threshold is just the start. Labor's reforms will also stop donation splitting. When groups with deep pockets spread their donations out across different states they can sneak under the bar in every jurisdiction. It is wrong that an individual or company can write nine $13,000 cheques to nine different branches of a political party and the Australian people would never know about it. That is over $110,000 off the books in a year, $330,000 across the term of a government. We will also put a stop to the convenient fiction that donating to an associated entity is different to donating to a party. The legislation makes some other common sense changes to the integrity of the system. Foreign citizens do not get a vote in Australian elections. And foreign companies should not be allowed to donate to Australian campaigns. Transparency in our donation system is critical for protecting against state or non-state actors who seek to influence our political system for advantage. Labor's legislation will ban foreign donations—full stop. I recognise there are other problems in this area to which we do not collectively have the answer. This legislation does not solve the challenge of foreign money being washed through Australian entities. We need to work with our agencies, including our security agencies, to look at the full transaction chain. This is a difficult issue, and jurisdictions grapple with this around the world. Our legislation will stop direct foreign donations, but what we need to do is not just tick the box of a technical test; we need to thoroughly evaluate the origin of a donation. And where there is genuine apprehension, we need to act on it. This is vital to maintaining public confidence in our system. No-one can seriously talk about tackling foreign donations unless they acknowledge this issue which I have just outlined today in the parliament. The coalition has not caused this problem but I invite them to work with us to help solve it. If the leaders of this country know that there is a risk that foreign governments or non-state actors will wash money through Australian entities, then it is not good enough to say that we have not yet so far come up with a mechanism to solve it. We must solve this soft-influence problem. Under our legislation the upper limit for anonymous donations will be restricted to $50. If you want to buy a new 'It's time' T-shirt for your parents without giving your name—fine. But that is where it stops. And of course with public funding allocated according to votes received—it is one of the key components of our democratic system—the legislation will keep that strong and relevant. If we are to use taxpayer funds in public funding of elections to help defray the reliance upon private donations, citizens can expect their taxes to be used transparently, not as a business model to be opportunistically exploited by some who seek to run parliament. This is how—and our measure will do this by tying funding to declared campaign expenditure—we prevent serial candidates from putting their name on the ballot paper but not putting in the effort to seek office. No-one should be running for the houses of parliament just to gain a windfall at taxpayers' expense. Making these changes in law is one step: upholding and enforcing these laws is the next. It is why this legislation also contains tougher penalties for failures to disclose. It should not be a calculated risk to take the cash up-front and debate the consequences later. Disclosure should be in-built, automatic and instinctive, and it should be as close to real time as possible. This means as close to instantaneous as the technology in accounting allows. This has to be the next step because when we say the Australian people have a right to know, they have a right to know before they cast their vote. Australians should not have to wait until the election is a distant memory to find out who gave what. Our rules apply to business, banks, unions and wealthy individuals. Of course, no party is without fault on this issue. None of us can say that we have always been saints. Everyone has talked about cleaning up the system. This legislation, though, is a chance to go beyond talk; it is a chance for the government to work with Labor and for the parliament to work together to put the right to know into law. If the government stand in the way—if they block this reform—they will give every single Australian another reason to be cynical about politics. If they want to be happy to be part of the problem, as long as they profit from it, people will mark them down. It is this simple: secrecy or reform—part of the solution or part of the problem. We want to make the system stronger and fairer, and just get on with it. In the Labor Party, we know where we stand: more transparency, more accountability, tougher penalties and a better system. We need to respect the Australian people; they are the ones we are here to serve. We all need to do better. I have absolute faith in the Australian people—they will recognise this legislation for what it is: an important first step to rebuilding confidence in the whole system. I ask the government to work with us for the sake of the nation. The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 10:27 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I am very pleased to second the motion and I reserve my right to speak. Debate adjourned. Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Social Sustainability) Bill 2017 23

Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Social Sustainability) Bill 2017

First Reading 23 Second Reading 23 10:28 Ms McGOWAN 123674 Indi I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This, for me, is important legislation, and I call on the government to bring it on for debate. Transport, and particularly rail transport, together with telecommunications, are central tenets for those of us who live outside the regional cities in terms of infrastructure. In my electorate, after years of being a safe seat and political inaction, it is very hard for us to manage the two problems we have with public transport, particularly our rail, and our telecommunications. So, as an effective local and independent member of parliament, I am very pleased to be able to represent my community with this private member's bill. Today, I present this particular legislation in this place. Later on, in the Federation Chamber, I am going to be talking about another aspect of public transport: the problems we have with the Australian Rail Track Corporation and its maintenance of our Melbourne to Albury train line. Last week I spoke about the importance of a vision and the need for high-speed rail connecting Australia. And a couple of weeks ago, when we were last here last year, I talked about the need for a charter of budget honesty so that when government brings legislation to this House it actually pays attention to the impact on rural and regional Australia. So today's legislation is a very specific example, when I ask the government to pay particular attention to its infrastructure and how that impacts on rural and regional people. In presenting this legislation, it is an amendment to the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008. The purpose of the bill is to strengthen the social and community benefit considerations that are assessed when Infrastructure Australia looks at the value of infrastructure projects, audits existing infrastructure, complies lists of infrastructure priorities and develops infrastructure plans. The amendment requires Infrastructure Australia to consult with the community when developing corporate plans and to consider the future needs of users when providing advice to the minister; the Commonwealth; state, territory and local governments; investors in infrastructure and owners of infrastructure. One would think this was obvious. One would think that people are at the centre of everything we do. It used to be that way in rural and regional Australia. It used to be that we had strong governments and oppositions that put people first. But we have moved to a case where money, return on investment, the finances and the market drives us, rather than putting people first. What I am proposing in this legislation is that we bring the two together. Of course, the market is important and, of course, the economy is important, but equally so are people are. We are skilled and clever enough to be able to join it at the hip. That is what this infrastructure bill is about. We do the economics, we do the finance, we consult with people and we make sure that, in the long term, the people's needs are addressed in exactly the same way as we make sure that the economic roles are addressed. The role of Infrastructure Australia is to provide advice on nationally significant infrastructure priorities. The current act has a strong focus on the economic and productivity considerations of infrastructure. However, little attention paid to the social benefits of these proposals. This bill amends the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008 to require Infrastructure Australia to evaluate the social and community benefits of infrastructure projects and to give equal treatment to the economic and productivity gains. The intent is that, by Infrastructure Australia assessing the social benefits of infrastructure projects, benefit connectivity—including public transport—would be considered a priority for rural and regional Australia as well as for freight movement. I just want to say that again, because it is really, really important: connectivity. The current proposal on the list for Infrastructure Australia is that we build an inland rail route, which has got great support and is really important. But what we need to understand is the connection between freight rail and passenger rail. The real concern that I have is that freight rail, because of its economic consequences, will get precedence and priority over passenger rail. We already have enough problems in my electorate in Northern Victoria with passenger rail. We do not want to see it become worse because freight rail gets priority. Under the current arrangements, Infrastructure Australia's consideration is heavily weighted towards the economic productivity gains of infrastructure and does not fully account for the social and community needs. The current infrastructure priorities list includes many rail projects. Among those in rural and regional Australia, the focus is only on improving freight movement and not providing passenger services. The driver for infrastructure outside of capital cities is measured in economic terms and not in social good. This is unlike projects in the cities, which largely focus on easing urban congestion, for example, or other clear social benefits. We need the same level of judgement for our country people as we do for our city people. The example that I bring before the House is the Inland Rail project, which is currently on the priority list. It should deliver improved passenger services as part of its social benefit, as well as improved economic services. In bringing this to the House and in bringing this bill on, it is part of what I am calling on the government to pay attention to. What is its vision for rural and regional Australia? What is the legacy that this particular government wants to leave when it has finished its term in parliament? Sure, we want economic development. But it is much, more important than just doing the economy: we want an enhanced social and community environment and we want an environment where the people of Australia, just like the opposition speaker has just said, trust the government because we believe that the government has got our social and community needs driving at the centre of its policy. Part of my work as a local Independent, and effective member of parliament, is to bring to this parliament private members' bills that say, 'Government, when you're doing legislation, consult with the community and then tell the community that you have actually understood how this impacts on us.' There are two particular examples that I want to briefly touch on. Later on this week, the government is going to be talking about its childcare legislation—the omnibus legislation. There are so many examples within that omnibus legislation where rural and regional issues have not been taken care of and where the government has not done its homework to look at the unintended consequences on rural and regional Australia. I have to say that what makes me so frustrated is when I see really important legislation that is going to help us with our inland freight that nobody in the system has integrated—I particularly call on the board of Infrastructure Australia to do a report, to talk to our communities about how you have worked out the connectivity with our communities and how inland freight is going to work with passenger rail, to give us in 50, 60 and maybe even 100 years an integrated system of transport that works for us. In bringing my comments to a close, I in my office and my staff—I acknowledge my staff who are here today and thank them for their work—can see the problem and we are amateurs in this. I ask the professionals, those in Infrastructure Australia, and the board to bring your expertise to this particular issue. And in your designing of rural and regional infrastructure make sure that you put the people at the centre, that you measure it, and that you do your audits for the long term to make sure that there is true and real benefit for those of us who are going to benefit from the economics. We also want to benefit throughout our community life and through our, in this case, public transport. I am delighted to present this private members' bill. I look forward to working with the minister and bringing it for debate at a later time. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the motion seconded? 10:36 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Competition and Consumer Amendment (Exploitation of Indigenous Culture) Bill 2017 25

Competition and Consumer Amendment (Exploitation of Indigenous Culture) Bill 2017

First Reading 25 Second Reading 25 10:37 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I would first like to acknowledge the people who initiated this bill: Banduk Marika, a First Australian artist, who travelled a long way to be with us today, and we thank her as one of the fighters here; Christina Davidson, CEO of the Association of Northern, Kimberley and Arnhem Aboriginal Artists, who has travelled a very great distance to be here today; Gabrielle Sullivan, the CEO of Indigenous Art Code; Robyn Ayres, CEO of Arts Law; and Leesa Watego, Copyright Agency/Viscopy director. I must emphasise to the House that my colleague the member for Mayo and myself are only acting today as agents for these people in bringing this bill forward, and we do so with very great pride in moving for a betterment of a situation for First Australians. There are those amongst Australia's First Australians who say, 'The Europeans came here and took our land and now they are taking our culture.' In the last election campaign, my political party went to the polls on 'Australia not for sale'. But there can be nothing more that demonstrates that your country is for sale than when my senior staffer, my media chief, went to four souvenir shops in Cairns and found that over 95 per cent of the supposed Aboriginal souvenirs were not Aboriginal at all; they were from overseas. I would ask the member for Mayo to hold up an example of what we are talking about. One looks genuine, and it is made in? Ms Sharkie 265980 Thailand. Mr KATTER HX4 Yes. And the one on the far side from me is made in Australia; it is a genuine artefact. If you are selling souvenir rubbish, you will get paid a couple of dollars. If you are selling a genuine Australian artefact from the oldest culture on earth—as you will find it says on arrival at Cairns airport—then you deserve a hell of a lot more than 10 bucks for a bit of rubbish churned out by a manufacturer in China, Indonesia, India or wherever. When I was minister with these responsibilities for the Queensland government, as I was for a number of years, it came almost within two months of me being appointed to the position that the first problem we had was on the 21 per cent of Australia. We first First Australians—and excuse me for identifying, as I often do, as a First Australian—are supposed to own 21 per cent of Australia but since we cannot get a title deed, we do not actually own anything. That 21 per cent of Australia is just a glorified national park. I have case after case in my office where people have applied for a title deed—sometimes it is possible; some governments move some legislation and make it possible—but it is so difficult that it just does not happen. I do not want to go sideways on the issue of land, but land and culture are inexplicably tied together. In the case of land—magnificent work which should have got a Nobel Prize, and it was very controversial when Hernando de Soto did not get the Nobel Prize—Hernando de Soto wrote a book on why Peru, the Philippines and Egypt, three countries on three different continents, live in grinding poverty and why similar places like Japan are flying forward at 100 miles an hour. The difference is you cannot get a title deed. It is possible in those three countries to get a title deed. The average time period is 6½ years and you go through 237 processes, most of which require a lawyer. Needless to say, there are not too many title deeds being issued. So if we cannot make money from the land—and you say to newcomers to Australia that you own the water and you own the land, that you are the Crown—I remind you, Mr European, that you come from England. We stood up in 1215, we Englishmen, and told the king that we own the land not you, Mr King. When the king disagreed, we had a very good habit of cutting his head off. We are here today to talk about our culture and the theft of our culture by a government that has sat idly by and done absolutely nothing about this. In fairness to Minister Scullion, he has shown a very positive response, but we would hope that this legislation is taken up by the minister and taken forward by the government. I think the member for Mayo would agree with me on this. If you want to have a look, I am going to demonstrate the difference. I am sick of buying for the kids clap sticks that do not clap, bullroarers that do not roar, boomerangs that do not come back and woomeras that will not mount a spear. I ask the House to listen to the sound here. This is from Indonesia or China; I cannot remember which. The instrument was then play ed— Mr KATTER HX4 That is imported. This is the genuine article. The instrument was then play ed— Mr KATTER HX4 The poem that we were taught at school when I went to school in Queensland was: 'Didjeridu, didjeridu, blackfella blows through a length of bamboo; to the regular beat of an ironwood stick, click-click, click-click, click-click; and the sound of his breath is the ghost of a drum with the madness of apathy muffling its thrum; and all that the world ever wanted or knew is dark while you hark to the didjeridu.' With a didjeridu today, made in China, we do not listen to the muffled thrum; we listen to an entirely different sound. In Cairns, in Alice Springs, in Darwin, in Brisbane and in Sydney the vast bulk, 90 per cent, of the stuff being sold is rubbish which our First Australians get nothing out of. In fact, today, the organisations that are represented here today—God bless them—and that we are moving this legislation for pointed out that the kangaroo on all of these artefacts is the same one that was on the Qantas aeroplane. They just got a picture and put it on everything and then said it was Australian. If there be one thing that we First Australians be allowed to keep and own, it is our own culture. There are just some technical issues that I would like to address. The dancing hats, I am told, are not being made on Mornington Island. There are supposed to be two places in the Northern Territory where they are being made, but I cannot establish where they are. So it may be that dancing hats are no longer made in Australia. They are highly technical—you would have all seen the big pyramid-type hat—and very complicated to make. The ones that I have purchased are made out of emu rope, made from emu feathers—part of them is made from emu feathers. But there are none on sale on Mornington Island, and it was the only place selling them. I am told that there are two other places. What is happening is that our cultural inheritance is vanishing. It is vanishing as we speak. I can point out to you the benefits that accrue. The paintings of the Kaiadilt ladies—we know them as the Bentinck Island ladies, but their technical name is the Kaiadilt ladies—were selling, and I think they still are, for $8,000 wholesale. Those six or seven ladies are getting very, very old now. They have made a huge reputation for themselves, and deservedly so, for their world-standard art. They bring maybe $1 million a year into the economy of little tiny Mornington Island. It is the only export earnings that we have. Please do not take it away from us. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the motion seconded? Ms Sharkie 265980 I wholeheartedly second this motion, and I reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 27 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Australia Day Honours 27 10:49 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra I move: That this House: (1) acknowledges the Order of Australia is the highest national honour awarded to Australian citizens for outstanding contributions to our country or humanity at large; (2) notes that since being established by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II in 1975, there have been more than 30,000 recipients of awards in the Order of Australia; (3) recognises the almost one thousand recipients of awards in the General Division of the Order announced in the Australia Day 2017 Honours List who come from an array of fields including science, education, governance, business, community service and sport; and (4) congratulates all the recipients of awards in the 2017 Australia Day Honours List. The Order of Australia was inaugurated in 1975 to recognise Australians who demonstrate outstanding achievement or service. In the past 42 years more than 30,000 people have been received into the order. Today I would like to congratulate the recipients from my electorate who were recognised in this year's Australia Day honours list. From service in education, medicine and music to the welfare of patrons and the wider community, the recipients reflect the ability and diversity of our Berowra community. This service is an inspiration to others. Almost nothing is more valuable than a good education. The minds of the next generation of thinkers, entrepreneurs and leaders are being shaped today by some of the most dedicated members of our community. Awarded a medal in the Order of Australia, Archibald Park from Cheltenham started out as a teacher at Eden High School in 1965. A specialist in industrial arts, since then he has taught students at Glendale, Newcastle technical, Macarthur girls, Northmead and Muirfield high schools. For her work as an educator, teacher and mentor, as well as her work preserving and documenting Australian history and heritage, Associate Professor Carol Liston AO of Beecroft has been recognised. Dr Liston works at Western Sydney University, where she specialises in the early history of New South Wales and is also co-editor of the Journal of the Royal Australian Historical Society. Caroline Xu Yi OAM has also being recognised for her service in education to the Chinese community of New South Wales. Ms Xu Yi is the principal of the Feng Hua Chinese school, a community language school that teaches Mandarin Chinese and helps newly arrived Chinese immigrants adjust to life in Australia. Caroline is also a longstanding member of the Australian Chinese Community Association. Dawn Nettheim OAM of Cheltenham was honoured this year for her service to music. A bassoonist, composer and arranger and a member of both the Golden Kangaroos and Beecroft Orchestra, Dawn Nettheim has also been a member of the Australian Music Centre, a former president of the Music Arrangers' Guild of Australia and a secretary of the Ryde Eisteddfod. As president of the Inorganic Foundation at Sydney University and former president of the Royal Society of New South Wales, the oldest learned society in the Southern Hemisphere, Dr Donald Hector AM of Beecroft was recognised this year for his significant service to science, in the field of chemical engineering, and to business. Dr Hector is a former managing director of Dow and served on the Uniting Church synod and the council of Newington College. Emeritus Professor William Maxwell AM, also of Beecroft, was recognised for his significant service to veterinary science in the field of animal reproductive biology. Professor Maxwell, of Sydney University, formerly served on the Editorial Advisory Committee, Reproduction in Domestic Animals, and received the Urrbrae Award 'for outstanding contributions to science and practice of Australian agriculture'. Unfortunately, many Australian women will experience breast cancer in their lifetime. In 1989 the Australian mastectomy rate for breast cancer sufferers was 70 to 80 per cent. Professor John Boyages AM of Cheltenham reduced this rate through breast screening by setting up the Sunflower breast screening clinics in lingerie departments at Myer stores and in hospitals across Sydney and founded BreastScreen NSW Sydney West. Professor Boyages became the founding executive director of the Westmead Breast Cancer Institute and is now the professor of breast oncology at Macquarie University. Also in the field of medicine, my friend Dr Roberta Chow AM is a GP who has been recognised for her pioneering developments in the use of laser therapy techniques for chronic pain management. Just last week I had a constituent call my office to express how much of a positive impact Dr Chow had had on the treatment of her pain. Dr Chow is the foundation president of the Australian Medical Laser Association. Philip Glendenning AM of Brooklyn, Stewart Bonett OAM of Glenorie, Lynnette Molan OAM of Cherrybrook the Rev. Dr Roger Chilton OAM of Hornsby have each been recognised. Mr Glendenning works with social welfare organisations and is a strong advocate for human rights and education. Mr Bonett served as a flight engineer with the RAAF in Vietnam and has dedicated much of his life to serving veterans and their families. I met Mr Bonnet at the Glenorie markets last year and know of his dedication. Mrs Molan gives her all to the Cherrybrook community, particularly to those mourning the loss of a child and to the local Anglican Church. Dr Chilton has been the senior minister at St Swithun's, Pymble, for over twenty years. I have had the pleasure of meeting many members of the Rural Fire Service in Berowra, particularly over this hot summer. For over 45 years James Fahey has served the communities of Hornsby, Ku-ring-gai and New South Wales with dedication and distinction. He has held many positions throughout the Rural Fire Service including, for the past 26 years, being a district group captain. Mr Fahey's service and leadership have undoubtedly saved many homes and lives. He was awarded the Australian Fire Service Medal. There are many more members of the Berowra electorate deserving recognition for the incredible work they do every day. We should do more to acknowledge our unsung heroes. I encourage anyone who knows an Australian who is doing something special to serve our community to nominate them for recognition within the Order of Australia. 10:55 Ms HUSAR 263328 Lindsay I rise today to congratulate and pay tribute to the exceptional Australians who are recognised on the Australia Day honour roll this year. As has been noted in the motion, the Order of Australia is the highest national honour awarded to Australian citizens for exceptional service and achievement. As illustrated by this year's honours list, we have a nation full of men and women who are doing extraordinary things in their own communities and beyond. They are making a difference to the lives of many and building our country to be a bigger and better place which is more inclusive, more open, more knowledgeable and fairer and kinder for everyone. Looking through the list, we have incredible leaders who have contributed so much to our country and way of life, like former Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard AC, who took out the highest honour; Queensland's Anna Bligh; and, of course, the talented Jimmy Barnes. I spoke in my first speech about the people of Lindsay being our best asset, and I am so proud that two gentlemen from the electorate of Lindsay were awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia for their remarkable contributions to our community: Jim Tiberi from Claremont Meadows and Paul Crofts from Cambridge Gardens. Mr Tiberi, who moved to Australia at the age of eight, has contributed a great deal to the Italian-Australian community in Western Sydney. He was the founder and president of the Penrith Italian Seniors Association, and he broadcasts the Italian program on Wow FM each week, bringing beautiful Italian music and culture to the ears of our community. Before his retirement, Mr Tiberi was a civil engineer and worked on a number of large projects in Sydney, including the Sydney Harbour Tunnel, the M5 East Tunnel, the Cross-city Tunnel and the Lane Cove Tunnel. He also helped to build bridges, highways and power stations across the country and overseas. He had an incredible working life, and in retirement he spends much of his time working with the University of the Third Age in Penrith, tutoring other seniors in Italian language and computer studies and sharing his skills of bonsai growing. Mr Tiberi has been a committee member of the Penrith Valley Seniors Computing Club, and was vice-president of Wow FM. This recognition is well deserved and his service to our community is to be congratulated. Mr Paul Crofts of Cambridge Gardens is a Vietnam veteran who has given nearly three decades of his life to assist other veterans in their unique needs. Mr Crofts was a rifleman in the Vietnam war, serving as part of the 2nd Battalion of the Royal Australian Regiment after being conscripted at the age of 20. He spent 314 days in the jungles of Vietnam defending our country, like so many others. Mr Crofts has been remember of the Returned and Services League Penrith sub-branch since 1991. For a large part of that time he was the welfare and pensions officer responsible for arranging funerals of veterans, reflecting on their lives and supporting their families to navigate the difficult realities of losing their loved one. Mr Crofts received the Medal of the Order of Australia for services to veterans and their families. I thank congratulate him for the work he has done in our community. Of course, reflecting on the incredible men and women in my community who have been recognised with Australia Day awards, I am reminded of how many do their important work day in, day out, year in year out, without fanfare. It reminds me of all the community-minded people in my electorate of Lindsay who are serving in their own way, making our community a better place, creating opportunities for the vulnerable, welcoming and comforting those who need it and building a social network that encourages and supports people. We in Lindsay are lucky to have so many great people who give of their time generously and their energy boundlessly to help others. So this year we thank and congratulate Jim Tiberi and Paul Crofts for their well-deserved honour in being awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia. Their service to our community is an inspiration and we are indebted to their efforts over so many years. May they continue to make an impact for many years to come. 10:59 Mr EVANS 61378 Brisbane The Order of Australia awards: let us pause for a moment to reflect on some of the people who make our country so great. No doubt most of the 30,000 people who have received the awards since 1975 would have performed their community endeavours without seeking this recognition or any celebration of their efforts. But when the times seem so focused on the challenges and the many issues that confront us around the world, it is important that the rest of Australia know of their extraordinary work. I would like to take this opportunity to highlight some examples, some of the recipients who live and work in Brisbane. Queensland University of Technology Professor Raymond Leslie Frost was made an Officer of the Order of Australia for distinguished service to science and higher education, particularly in the field of vibrational spectroscopy. Professor Frost has also been recognised for mentoring young scientists in the field. For those like me who had no clue what vibrational spectroscopy is, I looked it up: it describes some techniques for analysing molecular composition. As best as I can understand it, Professor Frost shoots strong lasers at things and by measuring the results, he derives clues as to the compounds and the molecules contained in those things—which actually is an incredibly promising field of research when you start reading about it—and Professor Frost's contribution to this important field is very significant. Another to be awarded the Officer of the Order of Australia was Professor Peter Gray. Professor Gray was recognised for his distinguished service to science in the field of bioengineering and nanotechnology. Professor Peter Gray is an Australian pioneer of biotechnology research and development. In 2003, he became the director of the Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, and has since overseen the institute going from strength to strength. Professor Gray has been a leading figure in the development of antibodies. He has helped to manufacture an antibody, for instance, against Hendra virus—which I am sorry to say is, unfortunately, named after an otherwise beautiful suburb in Brisbane. Associate Professor William Brett Emmerson was made a Member of the Order of Australia for his significant service to medicine, particularly to psychiatry, medical administration and through his contribution to mental health groups. Associate Professor Emmerson is a psychiatrist and executive director of Metro North Mental Health in Brisbane, one of the largest mental health services in Queensland. He has been managing mental health services now for over 30 years for our community. Dr John Michael Quinn was also made a Member of the Order of Australia for his significant service to medicine in the fields of general and vascular surgery and for his contributions to his professional organisations. Dr Quinn is currently a director of vascular surgery at the Princess Alexandra Hospital in Brisbane. He has also been heavily involved in the training of vascular surgeons through RACS, where he has been chairman of the training board in vascular surgery and, of course, an examiner. Mr Alan Pidgeon, someone I have known for very many years, has been made a Member of the Order of Australia for his significant service to the community. Amongst many other community organisations and contributions, Mr Pidgeon chairs the Australian Flag Association, which is a voluntary community organisation formed to increase appreciation of the history and the significance of a chief national symbol, the Australian flag. Good on you, Pidg. Mr Kristian Wale received a Medal for the Order of Australia for his service to youth and the community. Mr Wale is the founder and chief executive officer of Arethusa College, which provides specialist assistance education and vocational courses for disengaged youth, including agricultural and technical training. I have been there to celebrate one of their graduations and they do remarkable and commendable work. For her service to child safety awareness programs, Kay McGrath has also received a Medal of the Order of Australia. Kay McGrath has been working in the area of child protection for more than four decades, championing for protections in times when the discussion of child abuse and sexual assault was largely taboo. Bronte Campbell, whom I have previously mentioned in this chamber, also received a Medal of the Order of Australia for her outstanding contribution to swimming and sport, including, of course, her recent Olympic gold. Also in the Australian Olympic spirit, John Ferguson received a Medal of the Order of Australia for his significant contribution to the sport of sailing in our local community. He originally competed in the 1968 Mexico City Games. And last but not least, Kevin Yearbury, who I have also met around the Brisbane electorate, has received the Australian Public Service Medal for his many years of distinguished service to public life and administration in Queensland. If you ever attend an event in a Queensland stadium, you will appreciate his work. I wish to add my congratulations, and on behalf of the people of Brisbane, to these very, very worthy recipients and to all of the recipients of the Australia Day Honours List. 11:04 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson I rise today to add my voice in recognition to those wonderful Australians on the 2017 Australia Day Honours List. What a great honour it is to be recognised in this way for service to your community. And what a great service to community these honoured Australians do, indeed, make. Today, I want to make mention of three men in my electorate of Paterson, who were recognised with the Medal of the Order of Australia—all from the Port Stephens area. The first is Colin Edwards of Nelson Bay who was recognised for his service to veterans and their families. Colin is a life member of the Returned and Services League of Australia and has served the Nelson Bay sub-branch since 2001. He was also a director of the Nelson Bay Diggers from 2002 to 2006 and, again, in 2008 and 2009. Since 2006, Mr Edwards has also been a pensions advocate for the Commonwealth Department of Veterans' Affairs. Mr Edwards has been a Justice of the Peace since 2005, was a member of the Rotary Club of Nelson Bay from 2001 to 2013 and a member of Probus since 2013. Next, Len Graff of Nelson Bay earned his Order of Australia medal for service to sports administration and to the community. His service includes being the treasurer of the Regional Academies of Sport of New South Wales since 2011, and the Western Region Academy of Sport delegate since 2008. Mr Graff was Western Region Academy of Sport director from 1994 to 2004 and has been a life member since 2004. In addition, Mr Graff was a board member of Harness Racing New South Wales from 1994 to 1999 and a Harness Racing New South Wales representative. He was also a member of the New South Wales TAB. Ron Swan of Nelson Bay has been awarded an Order of Australia medal for his service to local government and the community of Port Stephens. Mr Swan was the mayor of Port Stephens from 2006 to 2008, deputy mayor from 2004 to 2006 and a councillor from 1999 to 2008. As part of his service to the community, he founded the Clans on the Coast Celtic Festival in 2008 and his medal also recognises his Port Stephens Celtic Association presidency. Mr Swan has also raised funds for cancer research, the Red Cross, the Westpac Rescue Helicopter Service, Nelson Bay Polyclinic and the Police Citizens Youth Club. Congratulations to Colin Edwards, Len Grath and Ron Swan on these Australia Day honours, and thank you for your service to our community. I would also like to take this opportunity to recognise a group of people in my electorate who were on standby on the weekend, during the catastrophic bushfire threat: those people are our incredibly dedicated and courageous firefighters. Miraculously, the Hunter Region was spared , but other parts of the country were not so lucky. My family was driving home from Orange in the firestorm yesterday, and said it looked like nothing they had ever seen. My thoughts and prayers are with those communities who are in harm's way at the moment. Although we were lucky back home this weekend, that was not the case in January, when local firefighters battled three infernos in two weeks very near my home town of Kurri Kurri and, incredibly, managed to protect all but a few outbuildings. Hundreds of Rural Fire Service volunteers, NSW Fire and Rescue crews, and National Parks and Wildlife teams battled blazes, on days when the mercury soared well above 40 and hot winds fanned the flames. My mother and sister were evacuated from their homes in Kurri Kurri to safer ground—my place at Buchanan was their refuge until the danger passed. This was too close for comfort for our community, especially when we learned that these fires, in all likelihood, had been deliberately lit. I want to personally thank the hardworking and dedicated fire crews and other emergency service personnel who fought those fires, on the ground and from the air, to keep us safe on those fierce, fiery days. That gratitude extends to all of the emergency service personnel who are at raging firefronts as we speak—it is just incredible. I know our community is immensely grateful to you. The weather has been incredibly hot, with records broken—it was 47.8 degrees in some parts of the valley over the weekend. I went to Orange, it was 40 degrees there. I have never seen it so hot, even in a place like Orange—which is normally on the cooler side. But again, my thanks extend to those members of our community. 11:09 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein Our Australian honours system consists of a number of orders, decorations and medals, through which this country's sovereign awards its citizens for actions or deeds that benefit our great nation. The Goldstein electorate is excited to celebrate five Order of Australia Medal recipients in the community this Australia Day. Congratulations go to John Knowles OAM for his service to aged-care delivery in Victoria as the managing director of Arcare Aged Care since 1969—and as you are an old friend of mine, John, I want to extend my particular personal congratulations. Congratulations to Michael Lawrence OAM for his service to education, to youth, and to the community for work as president and committee member of The King David School and as a board member of Temple Beth Israel synagogue—a synagogue I visited only recently—as well as for his involvement with the establishment of the Victorian Union for Progressive Judaism and his work with the 10th Caulfield Scout Group. Thank you for your service, Michael. Congratulations to Thomas Morris OAM for service to the building and construction industry: for his work as national president and committee member of the Australian Institute of Building, and as president and committee member of the Victorian Chapter of the Australian Institute of Building, as board member of the Master Builders Association of Victoria, Adjunct Professor of Property and Project Management at RMIT, as chairman and member of St Martin's, Beaumaris Uniting Church Council, and as president and vice-president of the Probus Club of Bayside. Thomas: thank you for your service. Congratulations also to Timothy Smith OAM for service to public administration, and for service to maritime history preservation for work as executive director of Heritage Victoria, as well as his ongoing contributions to the working group on HMAS Submarine AE2 as a maritime archaeologist, including as vice-president and secretary of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology. Finally, congratulations to Ken Wilson OAM for his service to people who are homeless, and for his service to the community in his work as president of the Matthew Talbot Fitzroy Soup Van and Night Leader at Margaret Oates Collingwood Soup Van, and for his work with the St Vincent de Paul Society Victoria—we are so appreciative of your service. The Goldstein electorate is also excited to celebrate awards of Member (AM) in the general division of the Order of Australia. I particularly want to acknowledge:    Kevin Bailey for his significant service to Australia-Timor Leste relations, to philanthropic organisations, to the financial planning sector, and to the community; John Burdett for significant service to community health, through executive roles with medical research institutes, and for service to the financial services sector; Steven Knott for significant service to the resources and energy industries, and for service to the advancement of women and to industrial relations; and Campbell Rose for significant service to sports administration, to infrastructure and transport development, and to the community of the great state of Victoria. However, as the federal member for Goldstein, I want to extend particular congratulations to a previous member for Goldstein: to the Hon. Dr David Kemp for his eminent service to the Parliament of Australia, notably in the areas of employment, education and training, and youth affairs, and for his service to the environment, to institutional reform and public policy development, as well as to the community. As the Member for Goldstein from 1990 to 2004, David consistently provided all of this and more for our community. When he retired from parliament, he did not just rest on his laurels but went about working hard on the history of the Liberal Party, particularly honouring of the enduring legacy of Sir Robert Menzies, our greatest ever Prime Minister. He also served as the president of the Victorian division of the Liberal Party, bringing together people to advance the good cause of Liberalism and our values, not just so that we can prosecute them here in this parliament but also in the Victorian state parliament as well. And more importantly, so that those values can live in the hearts and minds of Australians all across this country—because freedom is only ever one generation away from extinguishment. In his community service and at every point, David has made sure that he stands up for those values and works with people to advance the good cause of Liberalism. Working with young people as the chairman of Scotch College—no matter where there is an opportunity, he has sought to serve. And today we thank him for his incredibly tireless work and service—not just to his community and not just to the great state of Victoria but, more importantly, to this glorious Commonwealth. 11:14 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner In 1975, Gough Whitlam announced the Order of Australia 'for the purpose of according recognition to Australian citizens and other persons for achievement or meritorious service.' In replacing the British honours system, the Order of Australia did two things. They ensured that honours would be based on decisions of Australians, not those of the British, and they ensured that they would be made by Government House, not by parliamentarians. And, with an exception or two, that system has endured in the decades since. I want to acknowledge those who were honoured in this year's awards in the Canberra and Queanbeyan area: Martin Parkinson, for his services to Treasury and then, after a brief pause, to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet; Larry Sitsky, for his services to the arts as a composer and pianist; Alastair Swayn, for services to architecture; Mark Webber, for services to motor sport; Dick Woolcott, one of our great Australian diplomats; Stephen Bradshaw, for services to vascular surgery; Kimberley Brennan, for services to rowing; Hugh Dove, for services to agricultural science; ophthalmologist, Iain Dunlop; lawyer, John Garrisson; community health activist and intellectual leader, Michael Moore; charity worker, James Service; David Ian Stanton, for services to public administration; and, in the military division, Mark Holmes, Rupert Hoskin, Simon Tuckerman, Antony Forestier, Craig Meighan and Scott Winchester. Those recognised in the OAM division were: pharmacist, Gabrielle Cooper; doctor, Mirza Datoo; for services to the community, Donald Gruber; for service to table tennis, Glenys Joliffe; for service to sport, Kathleen Kelly and Scott Reardon; for services to community health, Marion McConnell; for services to education, William Maiden; for services to aged persons, Jeanette Morris; for services to the community through mental health support, Anne Pratt; for services to victims of crime, Frances rose; for services to veterans and their families, Peter Ryan and David Sinclair; for services to the performing arts, William Stephens; for services to the communities of Queanbeyan and Canberra, Brian Walshe; and for meritorious performance of duty in the field of naval mine warfare command and leadership, Steven Reid. As we recognised these great Australian achievers, it is also always important that we have in mind those that we might have forgotten. I note that, while the recipient rate for women this Australia Day rose to 34.7 per cent, up from 30.3 per cent in 2016, and the female nomination rate increased from 31.3 per cent to 32.9 per cent, women are still underrepresented by a significant degree in Australian honours. As honourable members will note from the fact that the nomination rate is lower than the recipient rate, once a woman is nominated, she has a better chance of receiving an award than does a man. So the problem lies, to a large extent, in the nomination process. I know Government House is well aware of this issue, but it can be too challenging for many people to nominate someone for an honour. They may not have the requisite papers in front of them. They may simply not have the time to devote to it. Professional organisations have become expert in ensuring that their past serving members are recognised. But those who toil in a soup kitchen for three decades may not be so lucky. We need to do more to recognise traditionally feminised work, done by the quiet achievers and the community organisations as well as the traditionally male work, such as leading large organisations. We also need to do more to track recipient rates among the overseas born, people with disabilities and Indigenous Australians, because we have to stay true to that great Whitlam legacy of 1975; that of ensuring that our Australian honours system is uniquely ours and uniquely representative and ensures that it recognises everyone who is worthy of such an honour. 11:19 Mrs SUDMALIS 241586 Gilmore It is not often that we get a chance to put on parliamentary record the outstanding efforts of great individuals in our community. Today I have that opportunity to showcase five amazing individuals. Firstly, Robyn Florance, who lives in Bomaderry, and is a dedicated and focussed local historian. She has now been awarded the OAM for her service to community history and heritage preservation. Robyn is a well-known local history writer and committee member of the Shoalhaven Historical Society and Nowra Museum from 1987 to 2015, serving as president from 1996 to 2005. Her work for the Shoalhaven City Council Heritage Study between 1995 and 1998 and the Kiama Municipal Council, Kiama Heritage Study Review in 2000 reflect her love and dedication to history. Robyn also coordinated the Centenary Commemoration of Gallipoli and the 2015-2016 Waratah March, which in this simple one line does not do justice to the inspiring work she did to help the re-enactment come into being with local interest and shops fronts decorated and all joining into the taste of history on the day. Raymond Vincent, a gentle and generous Coolangatta resident and local volunteer, was awarded the OAM for his service to the community with a multitude of organisations, including Berry Apex and the Shellharbour tennis club. Raymond was the fundraising coordinator for the construction of the Shoalhaven Heads Apex Cottage for Kids, SHACK, Foundation, which is a respite accommodation space for families of chronically ill or disabled children. Raymond is currently the chairperson and has been since 1991. Ray has been able to volunteer his building services in a number of other community projects, often in a quiet and unannounced manner. Then we have the dynamic duo, Bruce and Barbara Smith, a husband and wife team from Moruya, both gaining an OAM for their service to the community in the Eurobodalla region. They volunteer in many organisations, including the Country Women's Association and St Vincent De Paul in Moruya. Barbara is a volunteer teacher at Braidwood Central School as well as a tuckshop volunteer at Moruya Public School and Moruya High School. Barbara is an active member in the New South Wales Rural Fire Service—and hopefully she does not have to come into action in these times—including being captain of the Catering Brigade and Call-Out Officer for the Moruya Brigade. Barbara's volunteering includes the Moruya Show Society and day care at Moruya Hospital. Bruce is an active member of the New South Wales Rural Fire Service, and has been since 1996. He has been captain until 2015. His other volunteering includes the Mogo Hot Fire Training Centre and as a new trainee mentor and driver with the vintage Blitz 1942 fire truck. He has been a member since 1961 and has also volunteered with the SES in the past. Bruce also has a string of organisational recognition medals for his dedicated service. John Bennett, now also the recipient of an OAM, has been a dedicated and generous worker in the community, especially the Nowra Show Society. However, John has taken his skills and dedication well beyond the local area, taking his energy to the Royal Agricultural Show in Sydney where he has been a popular and well-respected ring master, but he has also taken young agriculturalists to developing nations to help show them basic agronomy skills, how to care for animals in a different way, talk about the way they get their crops growing and generally assist in the increased levels of productivity in regional areas in these nations. Now John is harnessing the energy of others when addressing issues that he encounters at such places as the Commonwealth Agricultural Conference in Singapore in October, where the coming famine and global food security as the planet heads towards 10 billion people in 2050 is seen as a very, very big issue. Finally, Joanna Gash has been awarded an AM for her service to the Shoalhaven. On the website her list of achievements is impressive and includes federal member for Gilmore from 1996 to 2013. She is my predecessor and current mentor. These listings—shadow parliamentary secretary for tourism, government whip, member, Speaker's panel, Mayor of the City of Shoalhaven, councillor since 2012 and previous councillor on the Wingecarribee Shire Council—do not truly reflect the extent of her service to her community. In her early days as a tourism officer in the Wingecarribee, she develop training modules and connections for New South Wales tourism that still exist today. Joanna has been a part of serving the community since the 1980s and continues still. One incident that comes to mind is that, as a volunteer, she used to drive a busload of kidney dialysis patients to Wollongong for their treatment and helped agitate and advocate for local services to be delivered in the local hospital. She has been the advocate in the parliament to keep HMAS Albatross based in Nowra when it was almost moved to Queensland. Joanna has been a fierce campaigner for local projects to be delivered and her greatest achievement was the delivery of Main Road 92. She is rarely recognised in a public manner for her tireless efforts for the community. Now it is official with the award of an AM, Member of the Order of Australia—more rare than an OAM, but absolutely deserved. 11:24 Mr HAMMOND 80109 Perth I also pay tribute to the Australia Day Award recipients already mentioned by previous members of this place and acknowledge their tremendous and tireless work throughout communities all over the country. A bit closer to home, in my electorate in the federal seat of Perth, I am pleased to say there were six winners of Order of Australia honours: one member in the General Division of the Order of Australia and five medals of the Order of Australia in the General Division. I will briefly set them out. Firstly, Christopher Pye of Mount Lawley was made a member of the General Division of the Order of Australia for his significant service to the tourism and hospitality industry in Western Australia and also to the community. Paul Clarke, also of Mount Lawley, received the Medal of the Order of Australia for his service to international humanitarian healing programs and also the optical profession. Jennifer Davis of Mount Hawthorn was acknowledged for her services to performing arts in Western Australia. Wayne Gardiner RFD of Inglewood was acknowledged for his service to military history and to veterans and their families. Vaughan Harding of Inglewood received a medal for services to aged-care organisations. And last, but certainly not least, Colin Philippson of Embleton was acknowledged for service to the community and also to motor racing. Time sadly does not permit me to speak at length about all of these recipients, but I have written to them all to convey my congratulations to them personally. But the following examples are demonstrative of the sheer quantum of actual service rendered, which is belied by the too-brief citation. Take Mr Christopher Pye, for example. As well as running his own law firm—to keep his hand in, he says—he is the CEO of Hospitality Group, a hotel and motel company, and is a director in his family's chain of cinemas, Ace Cinemas. Members and friends from Perth and the metropolitan area will know that Ace Cinemas is one of Perth's most well-known independent cinema chains. Mr Pye has done much to support the children's charity Variety as well. He is deputy chair of the Tourism Council of WA and he chairs the regional tourism organisation, Australia's Golden Outback. Ms Jennifer Davis was quite rightly given an award for services to performing arts, but this citation does not do justice to what she is achieving in the community through theatre. Her 30-year career working in the industry has focused on youth and seniors' theatre, bringing generations together to tell Western Australian stories. Her oral history programs gather stories from our senior citizens and memorialise them in theatre. She has used the arts to do reminiscence work with dementia sufferers and has been appointed WA's Ambassador for Positive Ageing. Mr Colin Philippson has been acknowledged for services to motor racing, but he was also a Justice of the Peace for 38 years, spending literally thousands of hours helping the community through the justice system. He also served in the Royal Australian Navy for 20 years, including as a medic during the Vietnam War. But his award for services to motor racing is also fascinating, Mr Deputy Speaker Mitchell. I know it is a subject quite close to your heart. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E You've got my attention now! Mr HAMMOND 80109 Mr Philippson was the inaugural president of the Perth TQ Car Club and, utilising his military medical experience, also ran a medical centre at the Wanneroo raceway in the 1970s, setting up a dedicated ambulance service for the track, making sure that the users of that famous raceway in my home town, as well as those who attended to watch the races, were kept safe from harm's way. I pay tribute to these individuals and all the local Australia Day Award recipients in Perth and around the country and I thank them for what they do to make our community richer and more vibrant. 11:29 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey I am extremely proud to stand here today to formally congratulate four of my constituents, who are recipients of the 2017 Australia Day honours, plus one young man who was born and raised in Grey but has made a national headline since moving away. I also congratulate a community leader who has been a great contributor to the Indigenous community. On Australia Day each year, we as a nation officially honour those who have made a significant contribution to our community. It is the Aussie way of saying, 'Thank you.' We recognise people for what they are doing and tell them we appreciate it. In Australia's regional communities, people who are awarded Australia Day honours are very often cornerstones of rural life who have been recognised for their tireless work and dedication. Our honours system recognises Australians from all walks of life who have made a difference to their nation, their region and their community. From contributions to community, business and the arts, to health, research and sport, each and every person who received an award this year deserves our utmost gratitude and respect. I congratulate all the winners, particularly those from Grey, each striving to make their regional communities a better place to live. In particular, I congratulate Sheryl Lewis, of Yunta, who was awarded an Ambulance Service Medal, ASM for her dedication and volunteer service in her community. She has been an ambulance volunteer in the mid-north region of South Australia since 1991, initially in Yunta then Jamestown and then back to Yunta, where she is currently a volunteer team leader. She provides a crucial service in what is a resource-poor environment. Her dedication, leadership and commitment has a significant impact on the region. In a tiny place like Yunta, the ambulance drivers are the front line. The ambulance drivers are the medical service, for all intents and purposes. She assists in the setting up and running of the flying doctor clinics in Yunta, and follows up local patients with routine checks and health monitoring. Duncan Johnstone, of Port Augusta, has also been awarded an ASM. Over 46 years, Duncan has been with the St John Ambulance Service and the South Australia Ambulance Service, first as a cadet, before starting his professional career in 1985. During those years, he moved into the leadership positions of station officer and clinical team leader. Duncan is an invaluable member of the Port Augusta ambulance service. Ian Hatcher, of Moonta Bay, has been recognised with a Medal of the Order of Australia for his significant contribution to lawn bowls. Ian has been a hard and tireless worker, dedicating many years to lawn bowls in a number of capacities. Rosemary Stern, of Tiddy Widdy Beach, was named a Member of the Order of Australia for services to hockey. Rosemary has dedicated many years to the sport as a tournament director, administrator and official. Jan Ferguson, an Outback Communities Authority board member, who resides part time in Beltana, received a Medal of the Order of Australia for her service to the Indigenous communities of the Northern Territory. Jan is also an enthusiastic supporter of preserving the heritage of Beltana. Lastly, I come to a young man who has leapt to international prominence quite recently. Swimming sensation Kyle Chalmers was born and raised in Port Lincoln, but has since moved to Adelaide to follow his sport. He was recognised with an Order of Australia Medal for his services to sport. Kyle became a household name at the Rio de Janeiro Olympics, where he won the gold medal in the premier event, the 100-metre freestyle, the first Australian to do so since Michael Wenden in 1968. Well done to Kyle. I met Kyle just recently, along with his parents, whom I have known for a long time. I will say of Kyle: if he swum like a stone and sank like a brick, he would still be a son that any parent would be extremely proud of. He is extremely humble, well-spoken and well-considered. He would be a success no matter what he was doing. In this particular case, Kyle is the No. 1 swimmer in the world in the premier event. Well done to all his coaches and his schools, and, particularly, well done to his parents for raising such a well-rounded young man. Well done to all of those people for being recognised with the prestigious honour of Australia Day awards. I also commend all the volunteers in my electorate, who work hard to make their communities a better place. Without these volunteers regional communities would be poorer places, and I am proud of every one of them. 11:34 Mr FEENEY I0O Batman Thank you to the member for Berowra for bringing forward this motion and offering us all an opportunity to celebrate and acknowledge the extraordinary members of our community who were recognised on Australia Day in the honours list. In an age of cynicism, it can sometimes be easy to forget the thousands of people out there working every day to make our country a better place. The Australia Day Honours List offers an opportunity to not only recognise extraordinary service but also set a standard, to inspire us all to do better and to be better. Our local Medal of the Order of Australia recipient for 2017 was Dorothy Reading. Dorothy was recognised with this prestigious award for her many years of service to cancer prevention programs such as Quit, PapScreen Victoria and BreastScreen Victoria. Her long-term and ongoing dedication is an inspiration to all those who know her. Despite all her commitments, she always has time to volunteer. She is tireless and offers advice and support to those who need it. I am very proud to know Dorothy. She is a true local community activist and a true comrade. This year four, Batman locals were appointed as Officers of the Order of Australia for their contributions and outstanding service to the community. They are Professor Ian Johnston, Professor David Laurence Vaux, Mr Ahmed Fahour and Mr Roland Elias Jabbour. Their contributions range across work in engineering, medicine, industry and multiculturalism. Professor Johnston was recognised for his distinguished service to engineering as an academic, researcher, practitioner and consultant, particularly in the fields of structural foundation engineering and geothermal energy. Professor Vaux has provided dedicated service to medicine in the field of biomedical cancer research, to higher education as an academic and mentor, and to professional integrity and ethics. Mr Roland Elias Jabbour has provided significant contributions to Australian industry and, indeed, more broadly to Australian-Arab relations. Finally, Ms Helen Norma Evans was appointed a Companion of the Order of Australia for her incredible work in and service to global health as an advocate for the improved treatment of infectious diseases in underprivileged populations, particularly for women and children. Her work has reached well beyond our community, beyond the borders of our nation, to change the lives of others across the globe. I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate those in my local community who were awarded Darebin Australia Day awards. These awards recognise outstanding talent and extraordinary contribution to the local community. Citizen of the Year was awarded to Rossella D'Arienzo. Rossella has been a dedicated volunteer at St Gabriel's Primary School for 17 years, helping students struggling with English to enjoy their time at school and to reach and achieve their potential. In a highly diverse, multicultural electorate, such as my electorate of Batman, it is people like Rossella, committed to helping and welcoming migrants, that make it the best place to live. Young Citizen of the Year was Lucy Grage-Perry, for her work with Parkside Netball Club, while Millbrooke Calisthenics Club was named community club of the year. Congratulation to the recipients of the Order of Australia and the Darebin Australia Day awards. Thank you. Thank you also to all those in the community who volunteer, support, organise, advocate, educate and work tirelessly, often without recognition, for the betterment of our community and our nation. They are the backbone of our community; they are the backbone of every community; and we are grateful. 11:38 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby Compassion, dedication, courage, kindness, civility and service: these are the words that I believe describe the values of recipients of honours under the Order of Australia awarded recently to so many people. They are the true Australian values that have made our nation the best in the world and fostered our great culture of mateship and volunteerism. Today I congratulate all those who were awarded honours in the Order of Australia, our nation's most prestigious means of recognising capable and selfless citizens. In particular I would like to congratulate those honours recipients who I represent in Boothby. The motion today notes the array of fields that honours recipients may have contributed to, and I think it speaks to the calibre of my community that we cover the majority of those fields, with service in science, education, sport and community service. In the fields of science and education, I congratulate Emeritus Professor John Bowie AM for his significant contribution to our understanding of mass spectrometry and for passing that knowledge on to others. Professor Bowie was made a member of the Order of Australia for this service. Professor Bowie has held many positions at the University of Adelaide, including dean of the Faculty of Sciences, and has served as an emeritus professor of chemistry since 2012. Published in many international journals, Professor Bowie has also received a number of awards, most recently receiving the Australian and New Zealand Society for Mass Spectrometry Medal in 2010. Contributing to community sport is Mr Phillip Davis OAM, who has supported the Adelaide and Suburban Cricket Association, of which he has been president since 1989. Mr Davis has also served as president of the Mitchell Park Cricket Club—which is right near my electorate office—and played himself from 1977 until 1993. For service to veterans and their families, I extend my heartfelt congratulations to Mr Walter Beale OAM—better known to us locally as Wally—of the Mitcham RAAF Association for his work to support veterans and their families. Few can truly understand the trials for veterans and their loved ones once they have returned home from active service. Mr Beale served as a committee member from 1988 until 2015, and he has also been involved in the Brown Hill Creek Probus Club as president, vice-president and editor of their newsletter. He has also served as a justice of the peace for 33 years. The Reverend Neale Michael RFD OAM received his honour for extensive work in the Uniting Church of Australia and the community generally. Reverend Michael served as a reserve chaplain in the Australian Air Force for 15 years, as well as in many other roles, including for Lifeline Australia and for other Uniting Church bodies. On behalf of all those who Reverend Michael has helped over the years, I wish to thank him and congratulate him on his service. Mr Matthew Linn OAM received his award for service to the community through refugee support organisations. He has been the president of the Australian Refugee Association between 2002 and 2015 and, prior to that, their secretary; He has also been a board member since 1989. He is the chair of the Retired Engineers Group, South Australia Division of Engineers Australia and is also an active member of the Uniting Church. Mr Ian Steel OAM received his award for service to children through social welfare programs. He was the founder of KickStart for Kids, a significant program in South Australia which has been running since 2009 and is a volunteer based organisation that provides breakfast, lunch, mentoring and vacation programs for disadvantaged and at-risk children in 300 schools, with some 500 volunteers. I would also like to recognise Dr Jennifer Gardner OAM who has made a wonderful contribution to Urrbrae House and the Waite Arboretum since 1986. Her award was for service to conservation and the environment and, by chance, I ran into one of her dedicated volunteers during my listening post at the Mitcham shopping centre on Saturday morning, who told me that Dr Gardner is actually retiring this year from Adelaide university after so many years of dedicated service. She has been the curator of the Waite Arboretum since 1986 and the manager of Urrbrae house and gardens, and she founded the Friends of the Waite Conservation Reserve and also the Friends of the Waite Arboretum—truly a wonderful contribution. I wish her all the very best in her retirement. 11:43 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon I am very pleased to be speaking on this motion today, not only as a recipient of the Order of Australia but also as a member of the executive committee of the Order of Australia Association, Northern Territory Branch, but, most importantly, as a proud Territorian—someone who is very proud to acknowledge those wonderful Territorians who have recently been awarded. They include Emeritus Professor MaryAnn Bin-Sallik AO, for distinguished service to tertiary education; Allan McGill AM, for significant service to local government in the Northern Territory and to sport and the Tiwi Bombers in particular; Ann Sheldon AM, for service to the community, particularly through Indigenous employment; Constance Lynne Spencer AM for her work for the environment and in research in the Northern Territory, an incredibly important contribution; Mr Michael Foley OAM for service to our community in the Territory; and Dr Albert Foreman OAM, for service to medicine, particularly in rural and remote areas. Other awards in the recent lot of Australia Day awards went to Superintendent Charles Robert Farmer and Senior Aboriginal Community Police Officer Betty Herbert, who each received an Australian Police Medal. Mark Spain received an award for his service to the fire services of the Territory. Keith Hutton received an Emergency Services Medal. Captain Lomas received a Conspicuous Service Medal, a military medal. I have left one name out, and that is because I want to make particular mention of him: our Administrator of the Northern Territory, His Honour the Honourable John Hardy. I would like to congratulate the selection panel for the Order of Australia on the brilliant decision to upgrade his Order of Australia award from OAM to AO; it is much deserved. For those who do not know what an administrator is, it is the Territory's equivalent of a governor. I was very pleased to personally congratulate John Hardy on his award at the Chinese New Year dinner on the weekend. At that same event, I caught up with one of my colleagues from the Order of Australia Association of the NT, Dominic Fracaro, who has been a very generous man in the Territory over a number of years. It was great to catch up with Dom. Also on our executive committee are Wendy James, OAM, and Nora Lewis, AM. I want to particularly thank our chairman, Mr Tom Lewis, OAM, a naval officer and military historian. I thank Tom for his assistance in the event we are putting together here in Parliament House this Thursday to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the bombing of Darwin. I also want to acknowledge the ever reliable and untiring Michael Martin, OAM, our secretary treasurer, and thank him for his support. We have written to all the NT members of the order who have recently been given their awards to invite them to become a part of the association. I think it is worth commenting on some of the things the association does. Firstly, I thank them for their support to take this story of the 75th anniversary of the bombing of Darwin to the nation here in Parliament House on Thursday. I also want to acknowledge our grassroots work where we take kids from disadvantaged schools out and give them an experience in the bush over a weekend. They are great events. We also mentor some of the scholarship winners so that they can have a life-changing study experience at the Charles Darwin University. These are just a couple of the things that the Order of Australia Association NT branch have been doing. I again want to congratulate not only all those who were awarded in this last round but also all those people in the community who have not been given an award in the Order of Australia but who day in, day out are giving of their time, their heart, their spirit and their generosity. I encourage people: if you see someone in the community that is doing outstanding work, giving of themselves in an amazing way, please nominate them for an award in the Order of Australia. Well done again to all those Territorians; we are proud of you. 11:48 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler I rise this morning to congratulate two people in my community who, through their extraordinary efforts, were recognised and awarded an Order of Australia. Both of these gentlemen were refugees to this country. I would like to begin by speaking about a good friend of mine, Mr Vincent Kong, OAM. Vincent is a very humble man and a most deserving person. He came to Australia with nothing, but today he is the managing director of one of the largest Asian grocery providers in Australia. In the early 1980s, Vincent and his family set out on a vessel from a small fishing village in war-torn Vietnam fleeing oppression. They battled extreme weather conditions and outran pirates, eventually arriving in Australia, where they were granted asylum. Vincent has never forgotten the kindness that he and his family received from Australia and was determined to give back to this community. Vincent is now the president of the Australian Chinese Buddhist Society at the Mingyue Lay Temple in Bonnyrigg. He has been responsible for substantial fundraising efforts, including the raising of many, many thousands of dollars for Australians in need. He has used his own resources to help acquire property for various community organisations. Vincent is also involved in fundraising activities for schools, donating significant amounts of food and produce each year. With the Australian Chinese Buddhist Society, he has raised substantial funds for St Vincent's Hospital and the Red Cross. Vincent is never one for shying away from genuine charitable causes. Vincent is devoted to his wife, Elaine, and his three children but has always made time for families in crisis in my community. That brings me to another friend, Dr Vinh Binh Lieu, OAM, who was recently recognised for his exceptional commitment to the provision of health care services to both the Vietnamese and the broader Australian community. Dr Lieu, together with his wife and a daughter, fled Vietnam in early 1979. In a small fishing vessel, with over 300 people on board, he and his family spent two weeks at sea, risking the elements and outrunning pirates, with very little food and water on board. Eventually making it to Thailand, they were processed by the UNHCR and then, later that year, settled in Australia with nothing except a dream for freedom. Dr Lieu has been a general practitioner in Bankstown since 1986. His dedication to the community earnt him the Citizen of the Year award in Bankstown in 2012. Dr Lieu is chair of the Bankstown Primary Health Network committee and holds a position on the board of directors for the Sydney South West GP Link. He was formerly a vice president of Vietnamese Community in Australia. Dr Lieu is also the founder and editor of a national bilingual Vietnamese-English medical magazine providing the community with valuable information about issues affecting Australian health care, clinical research and general good health and wellbeing. He also established the Vietnamese-Australian Medical Association, allowing medical practitioners of Vietnamese descent to work together to provide the best quality of health care for patients in our community. Dr Lieu has worked tirelessly to organise a large number of health conferences in our local community, such as a lung cancer seminar for the Cancer Institute New South Wales. Dr Lieu is also passionate about raising funds for communities in need. One example of this is a charity dinner that he organised in January 2011 as part of the Queensland Premier's Flood Relief Appeal, where his efforts raised $120,000. There is so much more I would like to say about Mr Kong and Dr Lieu, with their immense contributions to our community, demonstrating the true value of Australia's multiculturalism. I conclude by acknowledging the many individuals that have come to Australia as refugees, contributing much to our nation. I congratulate the broad range of award recipients who were honoured and who continue to excel and serve our community and our nation with a wide range of skills. It is such examples which make me extremely proud to be working within such a strong, diverse and vibrant community. Debate adjourned. COMMITTEES 37 COMMITTEES Public Works Committee 37 Report 37 11:53 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the report of the committee relating to referrals made in October and November 2016. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 by leave—On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's first report for 2017 on four proposals referred in October 2016. The first proposal is the construction and upgrade of indirect fire support facilities for a Defence project. This involves replacement of some artillery and related systems at eight locations around Australia. The proposed facilities include simulators, repair parts stores, shelters and hard stands. The project cost estimate is $57.1 million exclusive of GST. The committee heard concerns that the proposal may lead to potential contamination from firefighting foams previously used at RAAF Base Williamtown, Puckapunyal and Lavarack Barracks. The committee is satisfied that Defence has taken adequate prevention measures, but has recommended improving its consultation processes with affected communities. The second proposal is the enhancement of security at Australian Federal Police facilities around Australia. Recent incidents at state police stations led the AFP to assess the vulnerability of its own premises. Eight locations have been selected for upgrades. The project cost estimate is $39.4 million exclusive of GST. The report notes that some works were undertaken prior to the committee's inquiry. The commencement of works prior to parliamentary approval would normally be regarded as a serious matter. In this case, these works had a degree of urgency due to concerns for officer safety. The committee is satisfied that the works occurred in good faith. The third proposal examined is the construction of a building for electronic warfare operation support at Defence's RAAF Base Edinburgh in South Australia. The works include laboratories, workshop areas, storage, some office space, a hard-stand area and car parking. The project cost estimate is $24.91 million exclusive of GST. The final project examined is the Woomera range remediation facilities project. There are several aspects to this project—a new range control centre, a communications interface building, a maintenance and storage facility and 17 instrumentation and communication sites. The project cost estimate is $48.64 million exclusive of GST. The committee recommends that the four proposed projects should proceed. I commend the report to the House. MOTIONS 38 MOTIONS Housing Affordability 38 11:56 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I seek leave to move the following motion: I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for McMahon from moving the following motion forthwith— That the House: (1) notes that: (a) ordinary Australians are being locked out of the housing market, with only one in seven homes in Australia now purchased by first home buyers; (b) the national housing affordability crisis has worsened over the last year with house prices increasing by 16 per cent in Sydney and 12 per cent in Melbourne; (c) the Prime Minister has worsened the housing affordability crisis by: (i) failing to appoint a Minister for Housing; (ii) abolishing the National Housing Supply Council; (iii) shutting down the National Rental Affordability Scheme; (iv) cutting funding for homelessness services; and (v) refusing to reform Australia’s generous tax concessions that favour property investors over first home buyers; and (d) today is the one-year anniversary of Labor’s plan to improve housing affordability by reforming negative gearing and capital gains tax – reforms which have been criticised by the Government despite the fact the Treasurer has previously argued there were “excesses” in negative gearing; and (2) therefore, calls on the Prime Minister to act on housing affordability by adopting Labor’s plan to reform negative gearing and capital gains tax. Leave not granted. Mr BOWEN DZS I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member for McMahon from moving the following motion forthwith: I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for McMahon from moving the following motion forthwith— That the House: (1) notes that: (a) ordinary Australians are being locked out of the housing market, with only one in seven homes in Australia now purchased by first home buyers; (b) the national housing affordability crisis has worsened over the last year with house prices increasing by 16 per cent in Sydney and 12 per cent in Melbourne; (c) the Prime Minister has worsened the housing affordability crisis by: (i) failing to appoint a Minister for Housing; (ii) abolishing the National Housing Supply Council; (iii) shutting down the National Rental Affordability Scheme; (iv) cutting funding for homelessness services; and (v) refusing to reform Australia’s generous tax concessions that favour property investors over first home buyers; and (d) today is the one-year anniversary of Labor’s plan to improve housing affordability by reforming negative gearing and capital gains tax – reforms which have been criticised by the Government despite the fact the Treasurer has previously argued there were “excesses” in negative gearing; and (2) therefore, calls on the Prime Minister to act on housing affordability by adopting Labor’s plan to reform negative gearing and capital gains tax. It has been 12 months since Labor took the decision to reform negative gearing and capital gains tax and we have seen 12 months of paralysis from the government on housing affordability. We have had twelve months of policy paralysis from the government of Australia on the issue of housing affordability, as right around Australia young people wonder when the government will stand up for them. When will their government give them a level playing field when it comes to the great Australian dream? The answer is: not on their watch! Not while this Prime Minister is in his chair, because this Prime Minister's plan is to get rich parents if you want to get into the housing market. And the Deputy Prime Minister's plan is to move to the bush. That is the entire extent of the vision we get from this government— Mr Pyne 9V5 Mr Speaker, I move: That the member no longer be heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the House has moved that the member be no further heard. The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? Mr Burke DYW I second the motion, Mr Speaker. They will prefer the investor over the first-home buyer. Mr Pyne 9V5 I move: That the Manager of Opposition Business be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the Manager of Opposition Business be no further heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the member for McMahon be agreed to.

The House divided. [12:04]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 73 AYES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR (teller) Ciobo, SM Coleman, DB Coulton, M Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Henderson, SM Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Laundy, C Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 70 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Feeney, D Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hammond, TJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Keay, JT Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Lamb, S Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM McGowan, C Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

[The House divided. [12:12]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 73 AYES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR (teller) Ciobo, SM Coleman, DB Coulton, M Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Henderson, SM Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Laundy, C Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 70 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Feeney, D Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hammond, TJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Keay, JT Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Lamb, S Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM McGowan, C Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

[Question agreed to.]

[The House divided. [12:14]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)]

 69 AYES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Ellis, KM Feeney, D Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hammond, TJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Keay, JT Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Lamb, S Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 75 NOES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR (teller) Ciobo, SM Coleman, DB Coulton, M Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Henderson, SM Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Laundy, C Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McGowan, C McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 0 PAIRS

[Question negatived.]

 BILLS 43 BILLS Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016 43

Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016

Second Reading 43 12:20 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I rise somewhat belatedly because it has taken some time for the Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016 to get to a debate in this chamber. To that end, I move an amendment that has been circulated in my name, which reads as follows: That all the words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes that the Government failed to articulate a policy for the aviation or maritime sectors at the 2016 Federal election; (2) notes the Turnbull Government's failed WorkChoices On Water legislation would have seriously undermined the Australian maritime sector; (3) notes in particular that the Government has: (a) failed to rule out further laws in coastal shipping that would aid the displacement of Australian crews on the Australian coast with foreign crews doing the same work for reduced wages and conditions; (b) failed to outline its response to the High Court's decision to overturn the Government's attempt to circumvent Parliament's intention to give priority to Australian jobs in our offshore oil and gas sector; (c) actively worked to facilitate the replacement of Australian maritime crews by foreign crews for permanent work in Australia, by arranging rapid visas, skills recognition and access to ports in cases such as the MV Portland in January 2016; and (d) previously considered relaxing air cabotage arrangements that could have the effect of displacing Australian flight and cabin crews with foreign crews on lower wages and conditions while working in Australia; and (4) notes that the Government and its expert agencies have repeatedly acknowledged the obvious point that criminal and security vetting of foreign aviation and maritime workers is much harder than for Australian workers; and (5) calls on the Federal Government to develop as a matter of urgency aviation and maritime policies, ensuring that such policies prioritise jobs and skills for Australians while also facilitating more reliable background checks". Security standards in Australia's maritime and aviation sector should have nothing to do with politics. Public safety should be the only priority. For most of the time, that is the case, whether the Labor Party is in government or the coalition parties are in government. Laws and regulations relating to the security of ports and airports need to be tough and clear so that Australians and criminals who might wish us harm are in no doubt of the strength of our resolve to keep our nation safe. The legislation which is before us today would toughen background checks on workers in airports and in the maritime sector. Under existing arrangements, people applying for aviation security identification cards, or ASICs, and maritime security identification cards, or MSICs, undergo background checks, and those checks are designed to establish whether applicants have links with terrorist organisations. This bill would add an extra layer of checking, to ensure that applicants have no links to serious and organised crime. Therefore the opposition will not oppose this bill, but we will be proposing amendments to this legislation, both in the form of the second reading amendment that I have just moved and in the form of consideration-in-detail amendments, because we certainly take security seriously. I have had the privilege of serving as the transport minister, and, when that was the case, we introduced a range of legislation to ensure that security was maintained at our ports and airports. We have quite an enviable record in this country, and it is appropriate that we take advice from experts when it comes to aviation and maritime security. We are, however, very deeply concerned indeed about the glaring inconsistencies in the government's approach, particularly when it comes to maritime security but also, of course, aviation security, and that is the point of the second reading amendment that I have moved. When it comes to ideology before common sense, what happened during the last term of government, in both the aviation and the maritime sectors, was that various people, some of whom have moved on—I speak of Andrew Robb, the former minister for trade—had a real flat-earth approach to competition in the sector. They refused to acknowledge that both aviation and transport are global industries that have within them, however, national interests and that governments around the world understand the importance of having either a domestic aviation industry or a domestic shipping industry and therefore put in place regulations that ensure that that can occur. If we have unilateral disarmament, if you like, in the form of regulation unlike the rest of the world, there is the potential for Australia, as an island continent located where we are in the world, to not have an aviation or a maritime sector. When it came to aviation, the former minister had a view that I know was opposed by many—particularly in the National Party and regional members—which was that you could open up cabotage, remove the preference for Australian aviation, in the northern part of Australia, as a first step, and foreign carriers could come in, and that would somehow solve problems by providing reduced airfares. Of course, what Qantas and Virgin—and the various subsidiary airlines that they operate—stated would happen was that you would have a withdrawal of those sectors that rely upon cross-subsidy, if you like, within the aviation sector from operating in northern Australia. So you would have a withdrawal of Qantas and Virgin, effectively, from those regional airline routes and they would just concentrate on the highly profitable Sydney-Melbourne and Sydney-Brisbane and other major routes. So routes to and from places like Mount Isa, Cloncurry, Charleville and Bundaberg, and other routes in regional Queensland, in particular, would stop. Roma is the first step on the way to further destinations. In New South Wales, the same thing happens with routes like Taree and Grafton and other routes; you would have a withdrawal. Then, of course, the next step would be to just allow them to fly to Adelaide. And, because the Australian companies could not compete with those airlines offering fares based upon, essentially, Third World wages and Third World conditions and safety checks—safety checks that are not of the same standard that we have here in Australia—you would have a competitive disadvantage for Australian carriers and they would withdraw. That would lead to ongoing consequences for the people and the economies of regional Australia. But in the end, that proposal was resisted and defeated in the early period of the Abbott government. It was defeated because of the principled actions of some people in the coalition and of the Labor Party, but also, of course, from those regional communities, themselves, who understood what the consequences were. There are also consequences for national security because the truth is you cannot have the same level of checks that are required with ASIC and MSIC in the transport sector as you have for foreign employees. The same thing has happened with the government's Work Choices on water legislation in the maritime sector: legislation that was defeated in the parliament. The explanatory memorandum for the bill outlined that it would result in the replacement of the Australian flagged vessels with foreign flagged vessels and Australian crews with foreign crews being paid cheaper wages and conditions. And that, indeed, was the advice that the department was giving out to people like Mr Milby, the cruise ship operator in the Kimberley who gave evidence before the Senate committee which led, in part, to that legislation been defeated. But what has happened is that the government has circumvented its own legislation and has ignored the national security implications behind that, let alone the issues of safety. The national security implications were completely dismissed when the government, for ideological reasons, agreed to a temporary licence to replace the MV Portland. The MV Portland operated between the smelter at Portland and the Western Australian coast. It picked up the natural resources and went around Portland—one top and then back again. It was anything but temporary. For more than a decade, that ship went from one location to another, to and fro, employing Australians—Australians who lived in the local community and people down on that southern coast of Victoria. Yet, on the replacement vessel, people were granted special migration visas and cleared to take that ship to Singapore to be sold off. It was replaced by a foreign vessel without any clear indication about what the implications were for our national security. That move destroyed Australian jobs. And today, we are being asked with this legislation to toughen the background check on Australian mariners in the name of security but, on the other hand in practice, this government is allowing for temporary licences to be issued with minimal checks—a free-for-all around our coasts. Where do these ships go around our coasts? They go into our ports and into our harbours. The idea that there are not national security implications! I say this in the sincerest way possible, we have not sought to engage in a campaign that is provocative about these sorts of issues. When a ship is in Sydney Harbour or in Brisbane port or in Port Phillip—and many of our harbours located in the most densely populated areas of Australia—you want to be pretty clear and pretty sure that the security of those people who would seek to do us harm is looked at. Do not say on the one hand, 'We want a free-for-all, we want to get rid of the Australian flag, we want to get rid of the Australian crews around our coastlines,' and say on the other hand, 'If you're an Australian working at a port, we're going to further toughen up even further the security clearances that you have to go through.' So I say to the government, and I say to the minister who is here in the chamber, with respect: Minister, you have a great responsibility. I know that you have taken these issues seriously and have been prepared to sit down and engage with people in the sector and that is to your credit. But put the ideology of the free market aside because it does not work for Australia's economic interests. It does not work for our environmental interests because every one of the major incidents around our coastlines—the Shen Neng and the other disasters that have occurred—have all had something in common: they have all had a foreign flag on the back of the ship. They have all had a mariner who has said that they were not aware that they had to turn through the reef at the appropriate time, and they have crashed into the reef causing a great deal of damage. Australian mariners know the coastline, they have the skills, they have the training and they have the long-term commitment to the national interests. But it is also in our national security interests to have an Australian maritime sector. I offer again to work with the government in the national interest to get outcomes that would see a growth in the Australian flag—rather than a reduction in the Australian flag—around our coasts. Because—and you do not have to spell it out; common sense tells you—there are people in the world who seek to do us harm, who seek to cause incidents. We know that our security agencies work very hard, and they are doing a great job. I am someone who has been prepared to call it out as I see it; our infrastructure is obviously an area of vulnerability. That is why it is fine to toughen up MSIC cards and ASIC cards—and we will respond constructively to any proposals that come forward. But you cannot do that on the one hand—say we are going to have increased checks of Australians—and on the other hand actually replace those Australians with people who cannot possibly have undergone the same level of checking. That is why this amendment also refers to the High Court decision which overturned the government's legislation seeking to undermine the priority to be given to Australians working in the offshore oil and gas sector. It is almost at the point where it just defies common sense—when the court decision came down, we had Senator Cash give an ideological statement in the Senate, opposing the court's actions—what could go wrong in the oil and gas sector in terms of security! I mean seriously; if people do not understand that, then there is something very, very wrong. In the last campaign, Labor put forward a comprehensive shipping policy. It covered the full range of maritime issues including security, industry taxation arrangements, workforce planning, cruise shipping, ports, the Australian International Shipping Register and Labor's approach to coastal trading. We have an aviation policy that sets out all of our policy principles for that sector. Indeed, we have put in place mechanisms that have seen a considerable growth in the Australian aviation sector, and I think the success of Virgin and Qantas, as the two major carriers—particularly Qantas as our major international carrier—has been something of which we can all be proud. When it comes to issues of aviation and shipping, that—in part—is how the world sees us as well. I think it is important that the flying kangaroo on the back of a plane is seen in Los Angeles, Beijing or London, or in Johannesburg, Bangkok or Tokyo—anywhere in our region. That really says to people: this is an iconic Australian company. That has a great deal to do with promoting our nation. And we know also that one of the things we can point to in that sector is security and safety, and our proud record. Australian carriers and Australian ships have an extraordinary record, second to none in the world, We should make sure that we recognise that. This bill would amend the Transport Security Assessment Act and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Act. These acts concern the issuance of MSICs and ASICs. It comes to us as a response to a recommendation from the National Ice Taskforce for greater rigour in guarding against drug smuggling in ports and airports through a toughening of background checks. The opposition agrees strongly with the need to secure our borders against drug smugglers. We would also like to see the government increase its focus on the treatment of people whose lives are being ruined by drug addiction. Drug abuse is a serious problem affecting tens of thousands of Australians. Law enforcement is important, but so is helping the victims of dealers of hard drugs to recover from their addiction, so they can improve their own lives and make positive contributions to our community. This legislation came to the House in the 44th Parliament, and I noted then the opposition's concern about whether the addition of an organised crime check to the existing terrorism check might inadvertently reduce the level of rigour that applies to the terrorism check. That remains our concern, and we put that on the record. For example, when people are engaged in security checks through our airports, they are concerned with a very narrow task—which is keeping people on those planes, in those airports and in those areas safe. That is their one priority. They concentrate on what they are looking for because, if they were looking for everything then, by definition, they would be diluting the concentration on the issues at hand—and when it comes to the threats to our airports and ports, the main issue at hand has to be terrorism. It has to be. And so we seek assurance from the government that this broadening of the definition will not dilute that concentration. For many years, the number of Australian flagged vessels operating in coastal trade has been an issue. Labor tried to arrest the decline by having the Revitalising Australian Shipping package; a series of mechanisms working with industry, with unions and with the sector, including the Navy, around those issues. We think that is particularly important. There is a security element to the importance of our national legislation as well. In a submission to a Senate inquiry into the increasing use of flag of convenience vessels in Australian waters, the Department of Immigration and Border Protection rang alarm bells about the use of overseas vessels. It said: There are features of FOC registration, regulation and practice that organised crime syndicates or terrorists may seek to exploit. This is the government's own department. It went on to say that in many flag of convenience nations, there was limited transparency about the identity of the owners of vessels. It said: Reduced transparency or secrecy surrounding complex financial and ownership arrangements are factors that can make FOC ships more attractive for use in illegal activity, including by organised crime or terrorist groups. This means that FOC ships may be used in a range of illegal activities including illegal exploitation of natural resources, illegal activity in protected areas, people smuggling and facilitating prohibited imports. The security advisers, the Department of Immigration and Border Security, under the coalition government, could not have been any clearer in their advice to the government. There is greater security risk in using overseas vessels whose crews have not been properly vetted, than it is to use Australian vessels, with clear ownership lines of accountability, crewed by Australians whose backgrounds have been carefully examined by the authorities. The government chose to ignore this advice about the growth of flags of convenience rather than Australian flagged vessels, yet today it wants our support to toughen checks on Australian transport workers. In the words of the great John McEnroe: 'You cannot be serious.' You have to look at both. You have to look at proper checks on Australian workers but also take account of those alarm bells. I note that this minister is conscious of those issues, and I hope that we can work together to get reforms. The amendment that I have moved is very important in addressing these issues. A High Court judgement last August exposed the government's zeal for facilitating the replacement of Australian workers with cheap overseas labour. In December 2015, the government granted working visa exemptions to overseas workers on oil and gas rigs in Australian waters. The government argued that oil rigs were vessels; they were not rigs at all. It wanted to help employers to cut costs by hiring overseas workers instead of Australians. In August, the High Court ruled the exemption invalid and declared that the minister for immigration had exceeded his authority. The government has made no formal response to the judgement. But, in comments to The Guardian, reported on 31 August last year, the minister for immigration made no apologies for exceeding his authority to put Australians out of work. Instead, he complained that requiring overseas workers to go through the working visa process would increase costs. Given these comments, it is clear that we need to do much better. The temporary licences for vessels such as the replacement of the MV Portland with a foreign vessel crewed by overseas mariners should not happen again. The government should rule out changes to air cabotage, because it is very clear that that is not an appropriate change at all. Also, the government has exceeded the changes which are in the bill. This arises from the National Ice Taskforce. There is a big change here. Instead of having the recommendation as 'serious and organised crime' the legislation refers to 'serious or organised crime'. That is a very important legal distinction to draw. I will be moving an amendment to change this back to the original intention of the experts that were put forward, and I would ask the minister to seriously consider supporting that amendment in the spirit in which it is moved. We are not moving amendments to legislation such as this just for the sake of it. The minister would know that, in the area of transport and security, I have a record of more than a decade in this place of not attempting to just play politics with it. The amendment that we will move is to bring the legislation in line with the expert recommendations. If you expand it to 'serious or organised crime' as opposed to 'serious and organised crime' you really widen what you are looking at in terms of the impact on the workforce. Overzealous consideration—with the greatest intention—of what that means means that, if you are looking at things that are not serious, you, by definition, are undermining the intent of the bill. So, when it comes to the consideration-in-detail debate we will move that amendment and hope to get the government's support. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Is the amendment seconded? Ms Chesters 249710 I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Grayndler has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form that the amendment be agreed to. The question now is that the amendment be agreed to. 12:51 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes I am pleased this afternoon to rise to speak on the Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016. Just before I start on the notes I had prepared, I would like to make a quick comment on the member for Grayndler. I welcome his concern about the seriousness of terrorism and the issues that this nation faces, but there is one thing that I would like to point out. The member for Grayndler talked about the highly profitable Sydney and Melbourne airway route. That may very well be true, but I would note that someone flying from Sydney to Melbourne tomorrow could get a flight for $102 on Tiger. If they were prepared to not have any check-in luggage, they could get that price down to $89. You can even do better than that. If you went on Jetstar and you had luggage, you could travel from Sydney to Melbourne tomorrow for the princely sum of $86. And if you were able to get away with just your hand luggage for an overnight stay, you could fly from Sydney to Melbourne tomorrow for $69, including GST. If you were coming back from Melbourne to Sydney the next day without any check-in luggage—with just your hand luggage—you could get back for $69. This is what competition does and it is something that we should never forget. So, although it may be a highly profitable route—and I hope it is, because we need highly profitable companies—to be able to get a return fare today, in 2017, from Sydney to Melbourne and back for $138 is what competition does and we should never, ever forget that. So many people think that when you deregulate things the prices go up. The airline industry is a classic example of what happens when you allow the forces of competition into markets. I go back to the specifics of the bill. The coalition government has made a specific commitment to ensure that people with a history of serious or organised crime would not receive security clearance to work at Australian airports or seaports, and that is exactly what this bill addresses. The purpose of the Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill is to amend the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and also the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 in order to reduce criminal influence at Australia's airports and seaports by strengthening what is known as the aviation security identification card and also the maritime security identification card. Those are identification cards that are issued to people, including foreign nationals, who legitimately require unescorted access to secure aviation and maritime areas, including offshore oil and gas facilities, and have successfully undergone background checks. The problem that this legislation attacks is that currently there are different eligibility criteria applied to the aviation security identification card and the maritime security identification card. This can result in persons convicted of the same criminal offence being treated differently in the aviation and maritime sectors. It is that anomaly that this legislation addresses. There are five specific things that the bill does. Firstly, it creates an additional purpose in the aviation and maritime acts in relation to access to aviation and maritime areas and zones to prevent the use of aviation and maritime transport or offshore facilities in connection with serious or organised crime. Of course, serious crime does not have to be organised. Secondly, it establishes a regulatory framework supporting the implementation of harmonised eligibility criteria for both cards which will better target serious or organised crime related offences. Thirdly, it will clarify and align the legislative basis for undertaking security checking of both cards for applicants and holders. Fourthly, it will allow for regulations to be made prescribing penalties for offences against the new serious or organised crime requirements that are consistent with existing penalty provisions across both schemes. Fifthly, it will insert an additional severability provision to provide guidance to a court as to the parliament’s intentions. These amendments taken together provide for the implementation of new eligibility criteria for both cards that better target serious and organised crime. The new eligibility criteria will be specific to the aviation and maritime regulations, will introduce new offence categories, such as offences under the anti criminal organisation legislation, foreign incursion and recruitment offences, the illegal importation of goods, and interfering with goods under border control. Further, this bill will continue to give effect to Australia's international obligations under the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, and the international ship and port facility security codes. It will also improve the government's ability to combat transnational and organised crime. Importantly, this bill implements one of the government's key strategies: to fight the dreaded menace of the drug ice. Last December, when it released its final report, the National Ice Taskforce, which was commissioned by this government and is chaired by Ken Lay, made 38 separate recommendations. In response to the final report, one of the recommendations is adopted in this legislation, and that is to continue to protect the aviation and maritime environments against organised crime by strengthening the eligibility criteria for holders of both cards. This bill gives effect to the element of the government's comprehensive action across these five priority areas, which together intend to tackle Australia's ice problem head on. There is another area of specific concern regarding our nation's borders and the exportation and importation of goods. I draw your attention to the issue of car thefts in Australia. Firstly, when it comes to car thefts there has been some good news. There has been, over the last decade, a significant reduction in the number of cars stolen in Australia. In fact, in New South Wales we have seen a greater than 50 per cent decline in the number of cars stolen per head of population. We should be truly thankful to the New South Wales Police and the New South Wales government for the work that they have done in reducing that rate of car theft. But what is of concern is that over the last 12 months, we have seen that trend reverse. Over the last 12 months, we have seen car thefts across the nation increase by 8.4 per cent. Last year, across the nation we had 55,571 cars stolen. That is almost 1,000 cars a week, six cars every hour or one car stolen in this nation every 10 minutes. If we were to speak for just an hour on this piece of legislation, there would be six cars across the nation that are stolen. A real concern is the breakdown of what is happening with car thefts across the nation. Over the last 12 months, we have seen another decline in car thefts in New South Wales. According to the official figures, over the last 12 months there has been an 11.7 per cent decline in New South Wales. Car thefts are down from 13,465 in the previous 12 months to 11,893. But in contrast to New South Wales, in Victoria we have seen a truly remarkable increase in car thefts. We have seen a 31.4 per cent increase in Victoria in 12 months alone. They have gone from 14,371 to 18,884. If we compare figures from New South Wales, a larger state with a greater population and more cars on the road, there were just over 11,000 cars stolen, but Victoria is approaching 19,000 cars stolen. If someone with a car registered in New South Wales were to drive across the border into Victoria, on the latest numbers they are 66 per cent more likely to have their car stolen there than in New South Wales. With such similarities between those two great states, something is seriously amiss in Victoria. Along with this recent increase in car thefts, also of concern is the very large increase in the number of cars that vanish completely. A decade ago, only 15 per cent of stolen vehicles were never recovered; so 85 per cent were recovered. But this year, 31 per cent of stolen vehicles were never recovered. We have doubled the number of cars that are never recovered after they are stolen. Again, those numbers are most dramatic in Victoria. In New South Wales, over the last 12 months, we have seen a decline of 18.6 per cent for vehicles that are never recovered. Again, that is a tremendous effort by the New South Wales government and the New South Wales police. But in contrast, in Victoria we have seen an increase of 35.9 per cent—virtually a 36 per cent increase—of cars stolen and never recovered. What is also of concern is that the value of cars that are never recovered is increasing. The cars never recovered are now worth $20,500 each, and it gets worse. It is now shown that in years gone by most cars were stolen from shopping centre car parks, but now it is reported that up to 70 per cent of cars are stolen from outside someone's residence, and many times the car thief breaks into the house. Not only do we have the cost of the car theft and the violation it involves, the breaking into of someone's house is an added crime. In fact, the estimated annual cost of car theft in this nation was $763 million—that was from the National Motor Vehicle Theft Reduction Council—but that excluded the cost to the community associated with police investigations, court costs and corrections. So we are looking at over $1 billion in costs to this nation from car theft. One of the issues we need to look at is our borders. There are many reports that many of these cars that are stolen and disappear are actually being exported. It was noted back in 2005 that one upstanding citizen was jailed for almost two years for stealing 48 cars, mostly Toyotas, for the export of parts to Lebanon under his business. He made a profit of between $2½ thousand and $5,000 per car. That is a $400,000 theft, and yet he only got two years. One of the concerns pointed out is our export process practices for cars. I quote from Peter McRae, who is an internationally recognised customs broker and senior lecturer in customs banking, who says we have black holes in our export process. He said: Exporting a car in this country is a simple matter. The exporter calls a shipping company or a freight forwarder directly and advises that they wish to export a motor vehicle from Australia. The booking is made, the car/s are secured inside the container, the Export Declaration Number is processed through Border Force [Customs] before the container is loaded onto the vessel and exits our shores. He also said: The paperwork does not require the exporter to record a VIN/Chassis number for the vehicle/s and even if the VIN/Chassis are recorded, there is no requirement from the state levels … that the registration be cancelled, produced … or verified prior to exporting … Secondly, there is no requirement from the federal level … that the VIN/Chassis be entered, recorded, saved or retained to verify against police registers … as being stolen. This growing problem is something we need to tackle on our borders. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 The question now is that the amendment be agreed to. 13:06 Ms BUTLER 248006 Griffith Of course the amendment should be agreed to, because the shadow minister, in moving it, is absolutely correct to criticise this government for their failure to articulate any sort of policy, really, for the aviation or maritime sectors at the recent federal election. This government has been completely hopeless when it comes to taking any action on maritime and aviation security. If you want any proof of that, just take a look at this bill that we are finally debating that was first tabled in this parliament back in February 2016. It has taken a year for us even to be in a position to debate this supposedly very important bill that the government is claiming implements a recommendation from the ice taskforce report from December 2015. They have dragged their heels on getting this bill to a point where it can be debated in this House, and no doubt that is because they know how exposed they are on aviation and maritime security matters, and how hopeless they have been for their entire period of government, since 2013. I think they are probably also quite worried about debating this bill because it does shine a very clear light on what this government has tried to do when it comes to people working on the water, and that has been to seek to implement Work Choices on water. This is a government so committed to its ideological attacks on employment security for Australian workers that it has supported a situation where you can have people working on the water able to not have the same entitlements to Australian wages as people working on land. If you want an example of that, just look at what happened with the MV Portland last year. In the middle of the night, 30 or so security guards, according to eyewitness reports, went on to that ship. In the middle of the night, they dragged people out of their beds and walked them down the gangplank, to replace that Australian crew with a foreign crew—to say, 'We don't want an Australian crew getting paid Australian wages; we want this firm to have a foreign crew being paid foreign wages.' It was an absolute disgrace. But what it proved is that under a Liberal government you cannot expect the government to stand up for Australian jobs, for Australian wages or for Australian conditions. The Liberal government will always sell Australian workers down the river. The Liberal government will always support attacks on Australian working conditions. Look at what they did when they had the chance during Work Choices in 2006. Look at what we saw, as a consequence of those law changes back then: Australian workplace agreements where conditions and pay were completely undermined, where conditions were lost, where people were pitted against each other—where Australian workers were pitted against Australian workers. Look also at what they have done with their failure to crack down on exploitation and misuse of subclass 457 visas and other foreign-worker visas. Labor supports firms having the ability to use foreign labour where there is a skills shortage or for other proper purposes, but this government has allowed the exploitation of 457 visa workers to be rampant on its watch. Look at the Work-Choices-on-water provisions that were debated in the last parliament. It is absolutely right for the shadow minister to have moved this amendment to highlight the fact that, when you look at all of those things, this government's credibility on working people and on Australian jobs and Australian wages is seriously in doubt, and also to highlight the fact that the government's credibility on transport security is seriously in doubt. This is the situation that we are in. The Turnbull government has failed to rule out further laws on coastal shipping that would aid the displacement of Australian crews on the Australian coast with foreign crews in that same location doing the work for lower wages. That is what we are actually talking about here. There is a pretty stark difference between the coalition's approach and Labor's approach. Labor believes in Australian jobs. Labor believes in Australian jobs with Australian wages. Labor will always stand up for working people and for Australian pay and conditions. On the other hand, the coalition will always do whatever they can to attack working conditions, to weaken workers, to make workers less powerful, and to seek to take away the protections that people have fought for for more than 100 years in this country. We have done this very clearly. If you want to see another example of the difference in approaches between Labor and the coalition, the Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, has been very forthright in defending penalty rates in this country. On the other hand, one of the first things that the Liberals did on coming into government was to decide to commission the Productivity Commission to look at the workplace relations framework with a view to looking at, among other things, penalty rates. The Liberals set up an inquiry that had the aim of undermining penalty rates. They do not believe in penalty rates. In fact, a number of Liberal members of this House, past and present, have made public comments calling for Sunday rates to be scrapped, for example. On the other hand, Labor has very steadfastly and publicly stood by the rights of working people to be paid fair compensation for working unsociable hours. It is absolutely the case that working on a Sunday is different from working on any other day. And if any member of this House thinks differently, they can think about all of those Sunday morning church services. They can think about all of those Mother's Day events or Father's Day events that they have been able to go to. They can think about all of the time that they have spent with family on Sundays. Why should anyone who is missing those opportunities not be compensated fairly for doing the work that they are asked to do on a Sunday, I ask you, Mr Deputy Speaker? And of course the answer is: they should be compensated fairly. It is different working on a Sunday from working on a Tuesday morning; it absolutely is. And Labor understands this. It is a shame that the coalition absolutely does not understand it and is prepared to continue to attack the working conditions and pay of people that it purports to represent—as was the case with Work Choices on water that this coalition government brought forward in the last term of parliament. I do not want to see another MV Portland. I do not want to see another situation where you have people who are doing nothing but defending Australian jobs being escorted in the middle of the night down gangplanks. I do not think Australians want to see that either. I do not think Australians want to see Australian workers being replaced with foreign workers. I do not think people want to see Australian wages being undercut by foreign wages. I also do not think people want to see situations where people like the crew of the Portland are left unemployed, in a country where unemployment is a problem and underemployment is a significant problem. I met some of the crew of the Portland. They came to Brisbane last year and were speaking with people there to tell us about what had happened to them. And of course I met some of them when they were having their jobs embassy outside of this parliament in February last year. When I went down to that embassy, I have to say, I did not see many coalition MPs down there talking to the Australian workers who had had their jobs and conditions displaced because of policies of this government and because of the behaviour of unscrupulous employers. I did not see any of the coalition MPs down there speaking with people who did not know whether they were going to be able to get another job in the industry in which they had worked since they were in their late teens or early 20s. I did not see the coalition criticising the MV Portland or expressing any concern at all about the future of those crew members and their families now that they had been in this position where they were walked down a gangplank in the middle of the night, having lost their jobs. And I certainly do not hear much concern from coalition members and senators about the serious problems that we have in this country with Australian jobs. Deputy Speaker Goodenough, as you and I know, it is the case that while there are hundreds of thousands of people on the unemployment queue there are a million more who are on the underemployment statistics. Those million more people have an hour of work a week, but they want more and they cannot get it. It is a disgrace in this country that so many people are struggling to find work. We are a wealthy nation, we are a nation that is highly skilled, we are a nation that needs to do better in relation to making sure that people do have the skills that they need for the work that is available and we are a nation that needs to do something about the fact that we are still having to import foreign skilled labour because of skills shortages here. There are two problems with that. Firstly, if there are genuine skills shortages, then what is this nation doing about those skills shortages? What is Prime Minister Turnbull doing about making sure that people have the skills which they need for the jobs that exist now and in the future? The Labor opposition have been very clear. We have announced that we will be holding a skills summit and that we will be working with the vocational education sector, universities, business, unions and the community to work through this problem which we have in relation to skills shortages. The other aspect of the issue with bringing in foreign labour is that it is simply not clear that there is always a genuine skills shortage. When you have got the occupation of bricklayer on the list of occupations for which we are importing skilled labour and it has been on that list of occupations for longer than it takes to train bricklayers, that is an obvious problem. It is an obvious problem for our migration system and it is an obvious problem for our skills system here in Australia. Unfortunately, this is a government which is more preoccupied with frolics, with fighting amongst itself, with arguments about who should be the leader and with arguments about matters that are of absolutely no interest to people sitting around the kitchen table wondering how they are going to pay their bills. It has been too preoccupied to do the hard work that is needed to create jobs here in Australia, to facilitate the conditions for the creation of jobs here in Australia, to grapple with the underemployment problem that we have as a nation and to face up to the fact that we do need to do something about making sure that people have the skills they need for the jobs that exist now and the jobs that will exist in the future. These are some of the hard problems that this government should be spending its time on, but it is simply not. I am very pleased to support the amendment moved by the shadow minister, which raises the concerns about the fact that this government has, for example, completely failed to rule out further laws in coastal shipping that would displace Australian workers and that would have the effect of undermining pay and conditions for Australian workers. It is a representative example of this government's lack of interest and lack of care for Australian jobs, Australian skills and Australian pay and conditions. Accordingly, I support the amendment. 13:17 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle The stated intention of the Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016 is to make our ports and airports safer to the extent that it changes the approach to regulating the maritime security identity card and the aviation security identity card—the MSIC and ASIC—respectively. It has to be said at the outset that it leaves many areas of safety and security regulation untouched, especially in relation to our seaports and other maritime infrastructure. There are also aspects of this bill that are not sufficiently clear, and there is a question mark over the potential for these changes to unfairly discriminate or otherwise prevent people who present no genuine security risk from working in our ports or airports. I can say from experience that there are many workers in my community who are directly affected by these changes, to the extent that an MSIC is a prerequisite of their employment. At a time when employment conditions are difficult—and in Western Australia they are as bad as they have been in a quarter of a century—any change that affects a person's opportunity to work should be approached with great care. I have assisted people both in the past and more recently who have had their MSIC renewal denied and were then forced to seek clarification or apply for administrative discretion. Needless to say, that presents a situation of enormous stress. Taken altogether, it is not clear whether this bill really serves the entire purpose intended or does so in the most effective way, or whether it strikes the right balance in making both administrative and security improvements while first ensuring that affected workers are not subject to some new and potentially capricious obstacle to work. While this bill tinkers around the edges, we should keep in mind those areas of safety and security regulation that are not being made the focus of review and reform. It is disappointing that a number of serious matters of maritime security, in particular, continue to go unaddressed by this government or, in some cases, are positively undermined by the actions of this government—and I will come to that in due course. Last year, there was a fairly rapid Senate inquiry into this bill as it existed in the 44th Parliament nearly a year ago. The report of the inquiry raised a number of issues in relation to the proposed law's purpose, scope and effect. As other members have pointed out in the debate already, there is a very basic but important inconsistency between the way the National Ice Taskforce highlighted a need to focus on serious 'and' organised crime and the way this bill refers to serious 'or' organised crime. Clearly they are not the same. The common practice for law enforcement agencies is to use the criterion 'serious and organised crime', and that is the formulation in the relevant Senate report and in the submission from the Attorney-General. It is hard to see why that formulation would not prevail and, on that basis Labor, through the shadow minister, have indicated we will move amendments to correct this. One of the reasons I am very happy to take part in this debate is that I represent an electorate that has both a seaport and an airport. It is well known that Fremantle is WA's principle cargo port, through which passes virtually all of WA's container trade, as well as bulk commodities such as petroleum, grain, alumina, iron ore, mineral sands and so on which pass through the outer harbour. In 2015-16, total port trade through Fremantle was 34.91 million mass tonnes, with a value of more than $26.1 billion. But, perhaps less well known, Jandakot Airport, a regional airport in my electorate, has at various times been the busiest airport in terms of flight movements not just in Australia but also, I think, in some years, in the Southern Hemisphere. It has always been the case that seaports and airports are points of entry and access when it comes to the illegal importation of goods, including the importation of illegal drugs, and proper regulation of these areas—their physical and systemic security measures—and oversight of all personnel with access to ports, airports and seaports are critical to maintaining safety and security. In that context, it has to be recognised that these changes to MSIC and ASIC arrangements leave some of the most significant security risk areas untouched. In the first place, there are already parts of the maritime supply chain that are not covered by the MSIC requirements—for example, those working in container packing yards, or senior and middle managers in stevedoring or trucking companies. What is more, and what is worse, this government has actually pursued and implemented policies that increase the risk in Australian ports and at offshore maritime facilities by weakening Australian coastal shipping and by encouraging the use of foreign crews and flag-of-convenience shipping. The cynical use and expansion of the temporary license provisions under the Navigation Act have inflicted significant damage on the viability of Australian owned and flagged ships and, therefore, on the employment opportunities for Australian seafarers. As we consider a bill that purports to strengthen the MSIC and ASIC screening arrangements, let us just remember that foreign holders of maritime crew visas are not subject to the same checks as apply to Australian workers that hold an MSIC. We have seen several examples in recent years of foreign flagged vessels that operate in flagrant disregard of basic workplace standards, and this creates safety and security and environmental risks. It really does not matter how robust the MSIC arrangements are if an increasing number of ships and workers are not covered by them and if, in future, we face the prospect of having no ships and workers covered by them because there are no Australian flagged and crewed vessels. A strong coastal shipping industry is important to ensure the ongoing presence and capacity of Australian flagged vessels to serve our freight needs, to sustain maritime jobs and skills in this country and to give Australia a sufficient merchant marine capacity. Shipping is our link to the world. We are an island nation. Our economic and strategic engagement depends on shipping; our ports are the apertures through which our import and export lifeblood flows. Make no mistake: if the government continues to inflict death by a thousand cuts on Australian coastal shipping, the economic, strategic and environmental consequences will be substantial. Beyond our own compelling national interests, we should not forget that Australian seafarers and port workers, through the Maritime Union of Australia and the International Transport Workers' Federation, play an active role in fighting to secure fair and safe working conditions for people to go to sea or work in ports the world over. That is in keeping with our national character. That is something that Australians have always done. We are concerned not just about our own circumstances and about safety and security in our own country but more widely. That has been an incredibly honourable tradition and a great contribution by working men and women and their organisational representatives in this country. Seafarers have always been, and will continue to be, a class of worker that is especially vulnerable. Last October, for the second time in two months, the Australian Marine Safety Authority detained a foreign vessel for not paying its crew. The condition of the ship was disgusting; there was virtually no food on board. This sort of occurrence is becoming more common as the use of foreign ships increases and as Australian flagged and crewed coastal shipping is subject to further pressure, diminishing support and regulatory neglect. If it goes unaddressed, this trend will weaken both our economic sufficiency and our national security, and it will reduce our capacity to respond to humanitarian emergencies in our region. As the shadow minister for infrastructure, the member for Grayndler, mentioned quite rightly, it is also likely that such changes will put us at greater risk of major environmental disaster. It is also relevant in considering the security of our ports to question the blind haste with which these vital pieces of infrastructure are being sold off. Rod Sims, the Chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, has been openly critical of such asset sales, pointing out that, when states seek to maximise asset prices for ports, they are laying the ground for inevitable freight price increases, which in turn flow through the entire economy. State governments obviously have an interest in maximising those prices. I know in Western Australia there is a particular interest because the Barnett government wants to cover its quite considerable blushes in relation to nearly $40 billion worth of state debt. But it needs to be remembered that, if you max out those asset prices on sale, a private operator has to recoup those funds and it does so through freight prices—and freight prices flow into everything. Mr Sims has been particularly critical of the proposal that a private operator in Fremantle would be given the contractual opportunity to control the development of the outer harbour in future. In an article from September, Kenneth Davidson listed a number of critical views from people with long experience of port operations. While deploring the sale of the port of Melbourne, former ports boss Michael Frydrych said: I have always operated on the premise that ports are vital to the development of countries and should play a supporting role to the rest of the economy. John Lines, the managing director of ANL, said in the same article: We remain opposed to the privatisation of state-owned monopoly ports. Port and other State asset privatisation are taxes by stealth which will be paid for decades to come. That is an important point: they are taxes by stealth. You take a monopoly asset, you sell it into private hands, you get no competitive benefits and the pricing approach that a private operator takes in the interest of maximising profit, which is their primary interest, flows through into the general economy. It is a tax by stealth, and you cannot argue against taxes and the influence of taxes and give away private monopoly infrastructure when you know that that will be one of the economic consequences. The reality is that the privatisation of Fremantle port, as part 2 or part 3 or part 5—it is hard to tell—of the crazy plan to create a privately operated toll road in the form of the so-called Perth Freight Link, would achieve the privatisation of our future in Fremantle and the south-metro region of Perth. Port assets and their landside links should be controlled, planned, delivered and adjusted over time in the broad public interest. When they are subject to the commercial interest of a private owner in the case of a privatised port or a private owner in the case of a privately operated toll road, we as citizens give away the opportunity to have those critical assets regulated and controlled in the broad interest. One of the things that people in Western Australia have not cottoned on to sufficiently is that, if we see the Perth Freight Link become a privately operated toll road, it will inevitably involve concession deeds as part of that contractual arrangement. Those concession deeds will be given so that the private operator of the toll road has confidence about its revenues into the future, and that will stop a future state government from being able to introduce public infrastructure of that kind. The reality is that Australia's strongest economic and strategic position is one in which our ports are administered and developed in the broad public interest, and that requires public ownership. It is a scenario in which coastal shipping should be supported and maintained as a vital transport capacity involving, more than anything else, Australian ships and Australian seafarers. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, and if the member for Fremantle wishes to continue his contribution he will be able to do so then. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 53 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Western Australian State Election 53 13:30 Mr HAMMOND 80109 Perth In my home state of Western Australia today we have seen a Faustian bargain of grand proportions, and that is a preference deal between the Liberal Party and the One Nation party to put the One Nation party ahead of its grand old partner the National Party. What we see is the real prospect, if Malcolm Turnbull and Colin Barnett get their way— The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN No, I remind the member for Perth of titles— Mr HAMMOND 80109 Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker—of a Liberal Party-One Nation coalition government, if Colin Barnett gets his way. It is a grubby and undignified grasp for power, destroying a longstanding relationship with the National Party. And what has it done in this place? Well, it has taken a nanosecond to bring division to the fore. We have seen the Deputy Prime Minister condemning the deal that has been done in Western Australia. We see a former Prime Minister making it very clear that it would not happen on his watch. We see a current Prime Minister crab walking away from his announcement that in the course of their campaign One Nation were an unwelcome presence. This is the epitome of populism, selling out policies and selling out principle. It is a deal which has a clear threat for trade and tourism and it is simply a deal which will do nothing but legitimise the far Right of our society, because xenophobia is still xenophobia. We contrast that with Mark McGowan's principled stance of not preferencing One Nation. What we see is a premier selling out what he stands for in a desperate attempt to cling to power, straight out of the Prime Minister's playbook. Capricornia Electorate: Floods 53 13:31 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia Parts of my electorate welcomed the new year in with record thunderstorms and flash flooding. The township of Sarina endured chaos overnight on 3 January, as hundreds of millimetres of rain were dumped on the town in quick succession. The weather bureau reported that Sucrogen Weir, near Sarina, had 300 millimetres in 24 hours. A Sarina home was evacuated due to flooding amid concerns a hill behind the property could collapse. Over a period of 10 days Sarina had 519 millimetres of rain, the highest rainfall recorded since 1951 for the region. The rain caused chaos for Queensland Rail after the north coast line between Mackay and Rockhampton was damaged; passengers travelling between Rockhampton and Cairns were bussed to their destinations. Our valuable sugar industry was also affected. Around half a million tonnes of cane has been left behind because of weather and milling problems, representing $20 million worth of sugar lost to the region. Road closures all over the region saw many people unable to leave their homes. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the volunteers of the Sarina State Emergency Service, police, fire, ambulance and other emergency services who assisted people in need. Thank you. Bass Electorate: Medicare 54 13:33 Mr HART 263070 Bass In yet another example of the government's failure to effectively manage the administration of public services, the rate of complaints around Medicare refund delays in Bass has significantly increased over the last few months. From Scottsdale to George Town and Launceston, Medicare delays are an issue that I am consistently made aware of as I am out and about in the electorate. No longer can my constituents visit the local Medicare office to lodge a claim. Now, the only options for them in applying for a refund are either online or via a paper form dropped into the box at Centrelink—in several cases never to be seen again! This system seems to be causing the most difficulties for pensioners and the elderly. Many of them do not have the technology or inclination to navigate the myGov site, nor to wait indefinitely in the Centrelink office for assistance. Once a claim has been lodged, people are experiencing delays of weeks and even months before their refund reaches their bank account. I have heard firsthand too many stories of people being left short by the delay, often putting them in the situation of having to ask family or friends for assistance, or simply going without. I recently met with a constituent from George Town whose visit to a specialist and subsequent delay in Medicare refund meant she was unable to do any grocery shopping for two weeks. This is a disgraceful situation brought about by an underresourced public service and the failure of this government to prioritise effective management of the public services that support our communities. Tangney Electorate: Education Funding 54 13:34 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney Melville Senior High School in my electorate is an independent public school, recognised for their gifted and talented programs and their aviation studies, graphic design, media and music in focus specialty courses. One-third of the students participate in the performing arts program. The state Liberal government has committed more than half a billion dollars in major upgrades to WA schools from the proceeds of the sale of Western Power. Melville Senior High School will receive $10 million towards upgrades, including a new performing arts centre of excellence. The current performing arts space is nowhere near large enough for friends, families, students and the local community to view productions. My state MLA colleague, Matt Taylor, has been fighting for these upgrades for some time. He has worked closely with principal, Phillip White, and acting principal, Kylie Bottcher. He has championed the cause with education minister, Peter Collier, and spoken on the issue in parliament. His passion for education and commitment to his community has delivered. WA Labor has pledged an inadequate $4.5 million, an amount that will not get the project built. Typical Labor: only doing half the job. The local community has a clear choice about who is best for their local community and can say yes to the new centre for arts excellence by ensuring the re-election of local Liberal member, Matt Taylor. Well done, Matt, on your great advocacy for your community. You know how to deliver for your electorate. Bruce Electorate: Citizenship 54 13:36 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce Australian citizenship is precious, and the community must have confidence in how cases are considered and how it is granted. Integrity in the administration of the citizenship function is critical. The process must be effective, efficient and free from politics. Unfortunately, there are worrying signs that the government is not managing the system with integrity. Hundreds of people in my electorate are stuck in limbo, their applications stalled and their lives on hold. The law is clear: if someone meets the requirements to have citizenship conferred upon them then they shall be processed. It does not matter where they are from, or how they came to live with us. My office has been inundated by distraught, frustrated, and often desperate people as nothing is happening—for years—with their applications. Many are from the Hazara Afghani community, although there are others, and there is growing evidence that the government is targeting certain classes of people. Yet they refuse to give any sensible explanations. Last December a Federal Court judgement confirmed the problems, declaring that there was unreasonable delay in making a decision to approve or to refuse applications, there are serious administration issues in the department, and there is mysterious, extensive and unexplained leapfrogging in the queue. The community anger and despair is real. I am speaking at a community meeting in Dandenong on 25 February. I urge anyone who is interested to come along and share their story. Maranoa Electorate: Chinchilla Melon Festival 55 13:38 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa This week marks the commencement, in my home town of Chinchilla, of the iconic melon festival.    The Chinchilla Melon Festival has a rich and proud history from its humble beginnings in 1994, when the community came together to lift spirits during drought. But the festival, even then, took on national prominence with live crosses from the then Hey Hey It's Saturday. Many might find it surprising to learn that although the first commercially grown melon was produced in the 1950s, today the district produces 25 per cent of the 217,000 tonnes of melons grown in Australia each year. The melon festival is a huge week of melon themed events, where visitors get to participate in everything from melon skiing and pip spitting to melon bungee and melon iron man races. From the 3,000 visitors back in 1994 to an expected record crowd this year of 15,000, visitors will pack into Chinchilla over the weekend. This will generate in excess of $3.3 million coming into the Chinchilla economy. Of that, the retail sector will benefit from an additional $1.2 million of revenue. The Chinchilla Melon Festival has become one of Australia's most iconic festivals but is also a prime example of the value of our dedicated and passionate community volunteers, like Doug McNally and his team, who provide a program full of fun and laughter—all for free—that will contribute significantly to the morale and economy of Chinchilla. Climate Change 55 13:39 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand In 2009, the then opposition leader told the nation, 'I will not lead a party that is not as committed to effective action on climate change as I am.' In 2010, that same man said to 'effectively combat climate change' the nation 'must move to a situation where all or almost all of our energy comes from zero or very near zero emissions sources'. In 2016, this same man, now Prime Minister, sat in impotent silence at the table of the House of Representatives while his Treasurer and Deputy Prime Minister inanely brandished a hunk of coal at the chamber like naughty schoolboys on muck-up day. In 2016, the same man, now Prime Minister, tells us—against the protests of scientists, businesses, economists and even Australian energy companies themselves—that Australia's future relies on new taxpayer funded coal fired power generators. For Australians who have watched this capitulation in horror, I have a simple message: Labor understands that Australia's future is renewable. This is what it looks like, Prime Minister! That is what you should be waving around at the dispatch box. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN Order! I will have no more of those props. The member for Gellibrand is warned. Mr WATTS 193430 We will call it even. The path to stopping climate change, the path to cheaper power for our nation, the Australian economy, the path to the future, lies in renewable energy. And the Australian Labor Party will provide the leadership that Australia needs to make it a reality. Groom Electorate: Sports Darling Downs 55 13:40 Dr McVEIGH 125865 Groom I rise to speak of a wonderful hard-working community organisation in my electorate: Sports Darling Downs. On Saturday night about 400 of us attended their 18th annual awards ceremony and, once again, it delivered for our community and athletes throughout our region. They have raised more than $800,000 through the community and sponsors—such as Wippells Autos, K&R Plumbing Supplies—to support local athletes in all fields of training, events and, especially, the personal development program Speak up for Sport. Highlights from Sports Darling Downs, in the past, include Hockeyroos Nikki Hudson and Karen Robertson, Boxer Michael Katsidis, IndyCar champion Will Power and Olympic shot-putter Justin Anlezark. Taking out the 2016 Senior Sport Star of the Year award was Claire Keefer, who made her Paralympics debut with a bronze medal in the women's shot-put at Rio. Swimmer Jacob Whale took out the Junior Sport Star of the Year while Wayne Beeston—a great friend of Toowoomba and the Darling Downs, and of mine—was also announced as a life member of Sports Darling Downs for his services to schools sports, young children and their families over many years. Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority 56 13:42 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra At last some light is to be shone on the shameless and blatant pork barrel that is the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority relocation from Canberra to Armidale. I am absolutely delighted that a Senate references committee will investigate the Turnbull government's corporate Commonwealth entities location policy order, particularly the decision to move the APVMA from this great city—the nation's capital—to the Deputy Prime Minister's electorate. I am looking forward to making a submission to the inquiry to highlight that the relocation is all cost and no benefit, according to the Prime Minister's own $272,000 cost-benefit analysis. It will cost the jobs of the 85 per cent of staff who refuse to leave Canberra—expertise that will take years to replace and add years to the approval time frames of new chemicals and animal medicines. It will cost the Canberra economy $157 million a year and rip out 365 jobs. It is a disgrace the Turnbull cabinet approved this absurd proposal in the first place. I am making a submission to this inquiry. I am calling on Canberrans: send me your thoughts and messages that you want to send to this government and this blatant, shameless example of pork-barrelling—please. Sir Robert Menzies will be turning in his grave. Harinath, Dr Gorur Krishna 'Harry', OAM 56 13:43 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra Today I rise to congratulate Dr Harry Harinath on receiving a Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award from His Excellency, Pranab Mukherjee the President of India on 9 January this year. The Pravasi Bharatiya Samman Award is the highest honour granted to non-resident Indians in recognition of their outstanding achievements both in India and overseas. Dr Harinath was one of 30 recipients selected unanimously by the awards committee in recognition of his service to the Australian-Indian community. Dr Harinath is one of the leading figures of the Indian community in Sydney and is a strong supporter of developing closer ties between India and Australia. He is a great exponent of Indian culture and explaining Indian culture to the broader Australian community. It is through the breadth of his involvements in the Indian community and his work with the multicultural communities in New South Wales that I have got to know Dr Harinath. Dr Harinath serves as chairman of Multicultural New South Wales, where he is a worthy successor to Stepan Kerkyasharian and Vic Alhadeff .He is also chairman of Parramasala, the great cultural festival in Parramatta, and a well-respected general practitioner at the Eastgardens Medical Centre. Dr Harinath and I also share a love of cricket. He was the first person of Indian origin to become a board member of Cricket Australia and is chairman of Cricket New South Wales. He was previously awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia in the Queen's Birthday 2008 Honours List for his services to cricket and the community. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr Harinath for his tireless work in a range of areas. I hope that he and his family take a full measure of pride in his outstanding achievement. Tasmania: Employment 56 13:47 Ms KEAY 262273 Braddon I rise today to talk about a full-time jobs crisis that is consuming Tasmania. ABS figures for the year ending November 2016 showed Tasmania had lost 6,300 full-time jobs. There are no signs things are getting any better, with another 1,300 jobs lost over December and January. So what is this government's response to this ongoing crisis of full-time job losses in Tasmania? Today we have learnt the government will not rule out closing its Launceston-based Tasmanian Major Projects Approval Agency, and the office could be moved to Darwin. And then, of course, there is the Joint Commonwealth and Tasmanian Economic Council. This body has not met since April of last year. Is this body, too, being wound up by this government? When the council did meet, it said that its priorities were infrastructure, through a feasibility study into a second Bass Strait electricity interconnector, and that boosting education attainment was critical to the state's economic future. But even on these two matters the government has not met its own goals. The timeline for completion of the interconnector study was extended to January 2017, so where is the report? And the government's answer to improving educational attainment has been to rip millions of dollars of Gonski funds from Tasmanians schools. This government has given up on Tasmania. Labor took to the last election a plan for Tasmania to boost jobs, invest in infrastructure and improve educational outcomes. This plan was overwhelmingly supported by the Tasmanian community, and it is time this government accepted the will— (Time expired) Flynn Electorate: Men's Shed, Flynn Electorate: Building Better Regions Fund 57 13:47 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn Mr Deputy Speaker Coulton, I do hope that the fires in your electorate and in those other electorates that surround yours have cooled off today. I also hope that the mighty mare Winx can win her 14th race in a row this afternoon. Across the country, men's sheds are making great contributions to their communities. In my electorate of Flynn, men's sheds are making a difference in dozens of townships. Last Saturday morning, I had the pleasure of visiting the Gracemere Men's Shed. I went to their general meeting and helped open their new covered work area. There are 34 members, good facilities and men looking after men. That is what it is all about. Chris Bailey, Ron Norman and Peter Jacob are the club's executives and they are doing a fantastic job. The newest area work project was made possible by a federal government grant of $5,000 under the Stronger Communities Program. The total project was $10,286. Programs like this make a real difference in regional and rural communities. I would like to remind our community groups to get their submissions in to the Building Better Regions Fund. It is a $297 million fund, with grants from $5,000 to $10 million, and community applications close on 31 March. Google 'Better Regions funding' for more information. Solomon Electorate: Infrastructure 57 13:51 Mr GOSLING ( 245392 Solomon ) ( ): Like some of my colleagues, I rise to speak of the inadequacy of the current government and, particularly, the current Prime Minister's work when it comes to growing our nation. Whether it be renewables or developing the North, there is a lot left to be desired. Not one single cent has been spent on the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility. It is a $5 billion concessional loans scheme, and not one cent has been spent on developing our vast North. When you have a look at the NAIF—which, of course, was placed in Queensland—the majority of the members of the board of the North Australia Infrastructure Facility are Queenslanders. I would not want to be a Western Australian with an election coming up thinking you might have another Liberal government not looking after your state. WA has a couple of members on that NAIF board, but the Northern Territory only has one. As a result, nothing is happening—certainly nothing in the Northern Territory. I call on the federal government to start developing the North, but not just Queensland. Start investing in the great Northern Territory and the great state of Western Australia. I had a chat with the Treasurer about coming up to the Northern Territory, but he has not been there for almost two years. In fact, the NT News today said, 'See you in the NT?' Hey, ScoMo, you have been Treasurer for 17 months now and you have not visited us. When are you going to come and visit us? (Time expired) Wright Electorate: Aged Care 57 13:51 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright I rise to express my empathy for the residents and staff of an aged care facility in my electorate which is going to be closed down. On Thursday, PresCare announced its plans to close the Roslyn Lodge on Tamborine Mountain. I understand that PresCare had sought to sell the home to another provider but was unable to do so and instead made a business decision to shut the business down. I empathise with the disappointment and the sadness expressed by many people on Tamborine Mountain in the wake of this announcement. Tamborine Mountain is a tight-knit community and news of this closure has brought a great deal of angst not only for the residents but also for the staff and the wider community. When PresCare announced the planned closure, the organisation expressed its commitment to help residents find alternative accommodation and to help their employees find alternative jobs. PresCare must take this responsibility very seriously and act swiftly to reduce the impact of the closure, particularly on the residents and their families. I want to make one thing clear: the Minister for Aged Care, Ken Wyatt, has informed me that Roslyn Lodge can only close after suitable alternative accommodation arrangements have been made for all of the residents. The Department of Health will work closely with PresCare to make sure that all residents have a genuine choice about their new home and that they will not be financially disadvantaged by the move. It must be noted that the closure of the home is a business decision made by the provider and it is not as a result of the Australian federal government. Both the staff and the clients are in my thoughts and my prayers. Renewable Energy 57 13:51 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne It is 2017, we are a First World country and, under the Turnbull government, the national electricity system cannot get cheap, clean power to people's homes when they need it to keep their fans and their air conditioners on. It may come as news to the Liberals and the Nationals, but there is actually a lot of sun that shines in Australia. Australia could do enormously well with solar power and with wind, except this government just wants to attack them. During a heat wave, solar plants actually do quite well, but what has this government done? It has cut the renewable energy target. But it gets even worse. In New South Wales they are experiencing record heat waves. Over the weekend we had websites reporting that the 15 hottest places in the world were in Australia. What does the government do? Members of the government come in here, hold up a lump of coal, pass it around amongst themselves and laugh. The rest of the world knows that, if you burn more coal, you make global warming worse and that makes heatwaves worse and makes them come more often. But this government is so beholden to the fossil fuel industry and the hard right on the backbench that it does not care if New South Wales and the rest of the country burn. But it gets even worse than that, because, when the Prime Minister is told the problem is not renewable energy, he says: 'I don't care. I will go out and lie to the Australian people.' This is the Prime Minister's 'children overboard' moment. This is when he knew what the truth was but decided to go and lie to the public to pursue an agenda—and he will meet the same fate. (Time expired) Jake Garrett Foundation 58 13:53 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay In 2012 a good friend of mine, Helen Garrett, was leading a normal life, happily raising her two children, Jake and April. In March of that year, through circumstances beyond anyone's control, the Garrett family was struck by the most heartbreaking tragedy, when 12-year-old Jake was taken from them as a result of an accident at the family home. In 2013, about a year after Jake's passing, Helen's love for her son and concern for those experiencing the loss of a child saw her start the Jake Garrett Foundation. The Jake Garrett Foundation was established with the aim of supporting families who are dealing with the burden of losing a child. The foundation is Australia's only charity whose main purpose is to raise funds for children's funerals. As well as providing specific grief support material for parents, siblings and grandparents, Helen and her team provide the difficult but very valued service of taking hand, foot and fingerprint sculptures which can be framed or turned into jewellery to the parents' requirements. Since commencing, the Jake Garrett Foundation has helped over 500 families and raised many hundreds of thousands of dollars to help pay for the funerals of children. I commend the tireless work of Helen Garrett and her team and encourage people to visit the Jake Garrett Foundation website and donate to this very worthy charity. Kingsford Smith Electorate: Australia Day Honours 58 13:54 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith I wish to congratulate and thank those Kingsford Smith locals who recently received Australia Day honours. They include: former CEO and Executive Director of Surfing New South Wales Mark 'Winny' Windon; the Australian Centre for International Commercial Arbitration President Alexander Baykitch; gold medallist in the 2016 Rio Paralympics in wheelchair rugby Andrew Edmondson; advocate for people living with HIV-AIDS John Michael Rock; Margery Whitehead, who has volunteered over many, many years with numerous local organisations; UNSW associate professor and obstetric physician at the Royal Hospital for Women, Dr Sandra Lowe; the late Eric Robinson, who was awarded posthumously for service to the field of audio and lighting; and, last but by certainly no means least, legendary singer, songwriter and rocker Jimmy Barnes, who was awarded for distinguished service to the performing arts and support for not-for-profit organisations, particularly for children with a disability. On behalf of our community, I congratulate you and thank you for your service to our community and to our nation. Your elevation to the order reflects your service, commitment and dedication to our community. Our community is very proud of you. Congratulations. Dairy Industry 58 13:56 Ms MARINO HWP Forrest I rise to thank Dale Hanks and Graham Manning, the two dairy farmers who gave evidence at the Senate inquiry into the dairy industry recently. These are two of the four farmers who were told by a milk company that their milk was no longer going to be required. In all my years as a dairy farmer in this nation, this is the first time I know of where this has happened to our dairy farmers. Graham Manning is one of a pioneering family of dairy farmers in Western Australia. Their family milked cows where the Mount Hospital now sits. Not only is he a pioneering fifth-generation dairy farmer; when we talk quality, his milk was in the top five per cent of milk quality in Australia for 14 years. And this is the person for whom there is no room in the WA dairy industry! As Graham said on the day, it was profoundly concerning for him that, when over 200 of his cows went 3½ hours further south, and further away from the processor, after he had done the milking at his dairy one morning, the processor accepted that same milk from another farmer that night; however, the milk from Graham Manning was not acceptable. I think Graham Manning for his great service to this industry. New South Wales: Bushfires 59 13:57 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong For a great many Australians, the past weekend will be remembered for oppressive heat and record-breaking temperatures. But families in the central west of New South Wales who have lost homes, crops and livestock will look back on February 2017 and remember the black pall of smoke on the horizon and the ferocity of the flames. Our thoughts are with all those Australians who have had their property damaged by fire, including two volunteer firefighters whose homes were lost while they were protecting other people's land. We are all acutely aware that things could have been so much worse. We are all deeply grateful that they were not. Of course, we know that the danger has not yet passed, and at least 20 fires are still uncontained. Today our thoughts are with all those engaged in fighting the fires, caring for the injured and comforting the frightened. We salute those Australians—helping their neighbours in hard times, living up to the very best of our nation—and we urge the people of New South Wales to follow warnings, to plan ahead and to stay safe. I thank the House. Queensland: Leslie Harrison Dam 59 13:58 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman Those of us representing regional and outer metropolitan Australia know just how attached we can get to our freshwater dams. Leslie Harrison Dam at Brisbane, just 25 minutes from the CBD, is a shadow of its former self because the current Labor state government has a drifting plan for the repair of the dam's spillway gates. We are asking for a return of this dam to its former magnificence. Respect this dam. Have a plan for dams if you do not have a plan for trains. We are asking Queensland Labor to get in there, fix it up and give us a shot at using it as a recreational place, for fishing. Stock that dam. Allow non-motorised craft on there. It is part of the water grid but it plays a very significant role in the hearts of Redlanders. I have heard people over the weekend saying, 'Damn Brown made our dam brown,' referring to the local Labor MP. It is time he stood up for our community. Get those spillway gates repaired. Start prioritising this work. Do not leave us in limbo. The plan has dragged on forever. This is a state Labor government not looking after its own constituents, too worried about self-preservation, not planning for the water stability and water security we need. We need safe, secure, reliable water, and a dam of that size can be a perfect recreational site as well. Queensland Labor, get your act into gear. The SPEAKER 00APG In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 59 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Apology to Australia's Indigenous Peoples 59 14:00 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth Nine years ago, we met here in this chamber, here on Ngunnawal land, which we acknowledge every day, and heard Prime Minister Kevin Rudd deliver the apology to our First Australians. It was a remarkable and historic moment. The galleries were filled overwhelmingly with our First Australians. There was almost no room in the Great Hall. The area in front of the parliament was a sea of humanity, expectation and support. The Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, gave an apology on behalf of us all for the laws and the policies of successive parliaments, successive governments and successive generations. In particular, he apologised for the policies that removed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country. It is an apology that today we reaffirm and it is an apology that has echoed through the years and will echo for centuries to come. It was an apology whose time had come. As we look ahead to a better future, we know that acknowledgement is the seed from which hope and healing are sown. In that spirit, we acknowledge the enormous strength and resilience of our First Australians who have overcome and are overcoming the disadvantage that was woven into their lives by policies like that. We acknowledge the mums and dads, the grandparents, the aunties and uncles, and the brothers and sisters who strove against overwhelming odds to find their lost children. And we acknowledge the suffering of those little children, crying for their mothers and their fathers and the warm embrace of kin. We acknowledge the disruption to culture, the loss of language and the destruction of community. Above all, we acknowledge the lifetime heartache that has been endured by each child and each parent who suffered and who continues to suffer. To all those families, we acknowledge that your suffering cannot be healed by words alone, and so we commit ourselves again to address the disadvantage that has stemmed from those past policies. Tomorrow I will present the Closing the gapreport, a gap we are as determined now as we were in 2008 to close. We look forward to receiving the recommendations from the Referendum Council so the parliament can complete the work of a constitutional amendment to recognise our First Australians. The Referendum Council is undertaking its process of consulting with Indigenous Australians. The Leader of the Opposition and I are looking forward to receiving the recommendations from the council, because then it will be the parliament's task, a parliament with distinguished Indigenous Australians among its members, to then shape the amendment and present it to the Australian people. Most importantly, we do all of this together. We face the future more hopeful than ever because our relationship is based on mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility. And it is one that must be filled with optimism. The apology was a very sad and solemn moment, but we see so many stories of remarkable enterprise, resilience, courage and achievement among our First Australians. I was discussing with Chris Sarra only the other day, an Aboriginal man whom I quote a lot and whose writings I have found profoundly instructive. When we talk about the challenges that we are working on together, we must not solely focus on the deficit side of the ledger. There are great stories of achievement. We are looking at them here in this House: the first Indigenous Australian to be a minister in a Commonwealth government, Ken Wyatt, and Linda Burney, in her own right the first Indigenous woman to be a member of his House and a minister, of course, in the New South Wales government previously. So there are great positive stories to tell and we have to be focused on them as well. Our First Australians lead lives as diverse and different as any of us, from the most remote communities to the centre of our busiest cities and to our parliaments themselves. They are citizens of our modern multicultural nation, contributing to our society, their families and our community, playing a magnificent, resilient, enterprising part in our great nation. So today we not only reaffirm the apology that was given by Prime Minister Rudd but, while we recognise the importance of words—after all, this is a House of words—we recognise nonetheless that it will be deeds that will set us surely and truly on the path of reconciliation and recognition. 14:07 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong As a newly elected member in this place, I had the privilege of being in the chamber for Prime Minister Rudd's apology to the stolen generations. Some days, parliament together hits those rare notes where collectively the sum of our actions is greater than the individual parts. On that day nine years ago, that was such a day. Prime Minister Rudd, opposition leader Brendan Nelson, the government, the parliament and the people of Australia said sorry. We faced up to a dark shadow of our national past: exclusion, discrimination and dispossession. The moment I remember most vividly was not the offer of the apology, as fundamental as that was, but the way it was accepted. On that day, there was a giving of forgiveness and a seeking of forgiveness. There was a sense of hope and joy. How on earth are we so fortunate to share this continent with the bigness of spirit of our First Australians, the way they grasped the hand of national healing? It did not become a moment for recrimination; but it in fact became a moment of catharsis for all, banishing the demons and devils of old hatred as forgiveness was sought. I think a lot of us that day found ourselves asking, 'Why did it take so long? Why did we wait to do the right thing?' That was because once it happened, with one or two unfortunate exceptions, there was a collective weight taken off the shoulders of the nation. Let us not find ourselves asking that again. There are profound challenges ahead of us on the road to reconciliation. We should be taking hope from the resilience of Aboriginal people; drawing hope from the success of Aboriginal leadership; finding hope in the way that communities, locals, young people and their elders are tackling the problems they face; and creating hope in a future where our First Australians have the first say in decisions which affect their lives. With this hope, let us walk forward together in the spirit of the apology nine years ago today. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 60 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Western Australian State Election 60 14:09 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister: is the Prime Minister aware that the West Australian Liberal Premier has confirmed that the Liberal Party is preferencing One Nation at the forthcoming Western Australian state election? Will the Prime Minister advise the Premier of Western Australia to put One Nation last in every seat? The SPEAKER 00APG Just before I call the Prime Minister, I have listened carefully to the Leader of the Opposition's question. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on both sides will cease interjecting. As the Practice makes clear, questions that go beyond the responsibilities of ministers are out of order. Page 554 of the Practice— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members of my left and the member for Griffith—already, we are not even at a minute or so in! I am going to explain my position to the House. Page 554 of the Practice makes it very clear that ministers can only be questioned on matters for which they are responsible. No minister is responsible for the subject matter of the question, that being the Premier of Western Australia or the state party referred to in Western Australia. I am going to give the Manager of Opposition Business the call on a point of order. Mr Burke DYW I simply ask you to reflect on a precedent that was set on 31 October 2000. If you hear the words in the question that then opposition leader Kim Beazley asked then Prime Minister John Howard, it is almost identical to what has just been put. The question was: My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that Western Australian Liberal Premier Richard Court has left open the possibility of the Liberal Party preferencing One Nation at the forthcoming Western Australian state election? Will the Prime Minister advise Premier Court to adopt the same position that the Prime Minister reluctantly adopted at the 1998 federal election—namely, to put One Nation last in every seat? The question is almost identical— Government members interjecting— Mr Burke DYW That is true, the Premier's name is not Richard Court anymore! Other than that, if it was good enough for John Howard to answer, this Prime Minister should answer it as well. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left and right, I am going to address this matter very quickly. Whilst the Manager of Opposition Business has obviously done some detailed research on the history of Hansard, the Practice is very clear and I am going to make a couple of points. Whilst that question was clearly allowed and in that case the Prime Minister obviously wish to answer it, as I can tell is probably the case today, I have ruled on this matter— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left, I have ruled on this matter in some detail and reflected on it since the beginning of this parliament. Within a couple of weeks of the beginning of this parliament, the member for Solomon asked a question to the Prime Minister that I deemed out of order on the basis that it was about the Chief Minister in the Northern Territory and a donation from Gina Rinehart, from memory. I made it very clear that it did not go to the Prime Minister's responsibilities and—notwithstanding the fact he wished to answer it on that occasion—I made it clear, as far as I was concerned as Speaker, we could not allow questions out of order to be asked. I am maintaining that ruling. Energy Security 61 14:13 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister update the House on how the government's energy policies will keep power bills affordable and improve security for hardworking Australian families and businesses, including in my electorate of Banks? 14:13 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for his question. Like all honourable members, the honourable member has businesses in his electorate that depend upon affordable and reliable security of energy. Secure power is absolutely critical and affordable power is absolutely critical for businesses, as it is for households. Mr Champion HW9 What happened in New South Wales? The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wakefield. Mr TURNBULL 885 Honourable members will understand, when they speak to their constituents, how shocked their constituents are by the doubling of energy prices over the last decade. Overwhelmingly, it is the consequence of Labor Party policies that put ideology ahead of pragmatic, businesslike approaches to energy. The reality is that the Labor Party today stands for unreliable power and unaffordable power. That is the package they are presenting, and we see the most graphic proof of that in South Australia. Wherever I go in Australia, I meet with Australians who are battling higher and higher energy prices, whether it is the workers at the Viridian glass plant in Dandenong; whether it was the tuna fishermen in Port Lincoln; or whether it was the workers at NowCare in Gilmore, with the honourable member, on Friday, a family-owned chemical and pharmaceutical business that is being battered by higher and higher energy prices right across the board. Portland Aluminium, another excellent example, is a business is major input is energy, and it has been going through the roof because of the Labor Party's ideological driven approach to energy prices. We see what has happened in South Australia. The proof is there. It is absolutely clear—state Labor governments pursuing unachievable unaffordable renewable targets with no plan to secure supply at all. We have set out the road map to do that, with an objective technology-agnostic approach that will do three things: give us affordable energy, give us reliable energy and meet our emissions reductions targets. Labor cannot do that, and that is why the opposition leaders in South Australia, Victoria and Queensland have been right in pledging that they will abandon their Labor state governments' unrealistic renewables targets—because those targets will cripple the businesses of their states and will place continuing and indefensible pressure on household budgets. That is the price of Labor's assault on households and businesses. (Time expired) Pauline Hanson's One Nation 62 14:16 Mr BURKE DYW Watson My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that, in the last few months, One Nation has stated that being a single parent is a lifestyle choice which leads to an increase in ugly and lazy people, the Port Arthur massacre was faked, and the 9-11 terrorist attack was a hoax. In light of these statements, does the Prime Minister agree with his industry minister, who said: … the One Nation of today is a very different beast to what it was 20 years ago. They are a lot more sophisticated … And how much influence does One Nation have on government policy? 14:17 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth No doubt this causes the honourable member great discomfort when he reflects that the member for Herbert would not be sitting in this parliament were it not for One Nation preferences. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left! Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Order, on both sides! Economy 62 14:18 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on how the government is working to reduce cost-of-living pressures for hardworking Australians; and is the Treasurer aware of any comments supporting an internationally competitive economy and tax system in order to protect the living standards of all Australians? 14:18 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for his question, and I particularly thank him for his key role in organising the A50 event in Sydney last Thursday and Friday, which brought $17 trillion of funds under management by those who came to Australia last week—so, well done. It is an excellent initiative. And the member would be aware of the remarks made by the Reserve Bank governor on Thursday night. Before I draw attention to those comments, I draw attention to the comments by the shadow Treasurer on 7 October 2009 in an interview he gave to Ross Greenwood. He said: One of the weapons in the armoury of the Reserve Bank is the signal that they send—the signal that they send through those sorts of public speeches etcetera and that is often very significant. The Governor makes no apologies for using that and I think that's appropriate. Now, the governor of the Reserve Bank had a message for the member opposite last Thursday night, when he said: … we need to make sure that our tax system is internationally competitive. One example of this complication is in the area of corporate tax, where there is a form of international tax competition going on in an effort to attract foreign investment. Like other countries, we face the challenge of responding to this, while achieving a balance between recurrent spending and fiscal revenue. This government is responding to that challenge. Those opposite are frustrating the government from responding to that challenge. Those opposite have run out of excuses as to why they refuse to support a policy in this place that they themselves advocated when they were in government. But they have another excuse. Their other excuse was that apparently we cannot afford it. But when the Leader of the Opposition said 'the benefits to investment and growth from lower company tax rates', when he made that speech, the deficit was $41.5 billion and rising. And none other than the shadow Treasurer said this: … the United Kingdom, facing a much tougher fiscal situation than Australia's, cut its corporate tax rate to 23 per cent in April 2013, to be reduced further … Now, today the shadow Treasurer says the Reserve Bank governor has got it all wrong because there is such a thing as dividend imputation. Well, it was not introduced yesterday, Shadow Treasurer! It has been around for a long time. When you were arguing for company tax cuts—and on this side of the House we know that that changes necessary for businesses to be able to remain competitive and to support the jobs of those who work for them. Those opposite are quite happy to loll around and corporate boardrooms when their government and talk up to the business community and say, 'We're all for changing corporate tax rates,' but when it does not suit them, like we know with this Leader of the Opposition and those who sits on the opposition front bench, they change their tune when the politics dictate. The only reason those who are opposed to the changes that are going to make Australian businesses competitive— (Time expired) Pauline Hanson's One Nation 63 14:21 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. One Nation has called for Australia to end its membership of the United Nations, and just last week Senator Pauline Hanson dismissed concerns over Vladimir Putin's role in the deaths of almost 300 people, including 38 Australians, on flight MH17. What does this say about the government's approach to foreign policy, when a member of cabinet describes a party with this approach as 'sophisticated'? Have any diplomatic posts raised concerns about Senator Hanson's influence? 14:22 Ms JULIE BISHOP 83P Curtin I thank the member for her question. I really do think it is a bit rich for Labor to be lecturing us on One Nation preferences when the member for Dobell was elected on those preferences. I also think it is a bit rich— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left! Mr Pyne interjecting— Mr Dutton interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the House. The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. The Minister for Foreign Affairs will resume her seat. The Leader of the House and the minister for immigration and numerous people on my left are preventing the minister from answering the question that has been asked. I will not tolerate this level of interjection any further throughout the answer. The minister has the call. Ms JULIE BISHOP 83P I think it is pretty rich for the member for Sydney to seek to lecture us on preferences that are determined by the state divisions when the Labor Party unquestioningly accepts Greens preferences, does deals with the Greens and, in fact, entered into a coalition with the Greens, who has a view of one world government, who wants to tear up the US-Australia alliance and who would have to represent the most dangerous political train of thought in Australian politics. Labor unquestioningly does deals with the Greens. They are the risk to foreign policy in this country—a Labor-Greens coalition. Medicare 63 14:23 Mr WILKIE C2T Denison My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, your personal commitment to health care is compromised by the freeze on the Medicare rebate for a visit to the GP. Indeed, yours is a regressive policy that burdens the poor, because the freeze is driving down bulk-billing rates. This is just plain dumb, because primary care at seven per cent of the health budget is not the cause of healthcare inflation; it is actually what helps keep people out of expensive hospitals. Tasmania is being slugged especially hard, because bulk-billing was down another two per cent there in the last quarter, even though we are the most disadvantaged and sickest state. Prime Minister, please, will you immediately lift the freeze on the Medicare rebate for a visit to a GP? 14:24 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for his question. The government is committed to ensuring that all Australians, all Tasmanians, and all members of the honourable member's electorate in fact have access to high quality health care when they need it, whether it is seeing the GP, getting medications or tests or needing hospital care. My government is delivering record levels of health funding, and this continues to grow every year. Ms Butler interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Griffith is warned! Mr TURNBULL 885 As far as the Medicare freeze on the indexation is concerned, we are open to reviewing that indexation pause, which was begun by members opposite when they were in government. The Minister for Health is having productive discussions with the AMA and the colleges as to how that can be achieved. But, clearly, we are managing a very tight budgetary position. We need to ensure that we get as much value from our health dollar—and by 'value' I mean in terms of better outcomes for patients—as we can. In terms of Tasmania, I would say to the honourable member that across Tasmania there have been an extra 1.03 million more GP services billed in the last year compared to 2012-13. In the honourable member's electorate, there have been an extra 76,000 GP bulk-billed services in the last 12 months compared to 2012-13. So, more Tasmanians are seeing a GP, without having to pay for it. Those are the facts. Mr Wilkie C2T Mr Speaker, on a point of order, I am concerned that the Prime Minister— The SPEAKER 00APG He needs to state the point of order. Mr Wilkie C2T is misleading the chamber here. Bulk-billing in Tasmania is down, and that is a fact. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Denison will resume his seat. That is not a valid point of order. Mr TURNBULL 885 The honourable member would be well aware of the importance of providing better and more effective support at the primary healthcare level, the GP level, to people with chronic diseases. Our Health Care Homes trials are a very important part of that, because, as the honourable member knows, doctors will be rewarded for treating a patient in a much more holistic way rather than episodically. It is a very important trial. There are 10 regions where it is being rolled out, and Tasmania is one of them. We are giving Tasmanians the opportunity to participate in that. Of course, all Australians have access to many medicines at much cheaper prices due to our national reforms to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. We have added lifesaving drugs, including for breast cancer and melanoma, which means that Tasmanians and indeed all Australians who need those medications, which could cost $100,000 per treatment, can now access them for only $38.80 for general patients and $6.30 for concessional patients. I assure the honourable member that at every level we are spending more on health care. We are doing everything we can to ensure that all Australians and all the constituents of the honourable member are getting the best health care possible and ensuring that our healthcare dollar goes as far as it can to ensure that they live healthy and active lives. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 64 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 14:28 The SPEAKER 00APG I would like to inform the House that we have present in the gallery this afternoon the Rt Hon. Nick Herbert, member of the House of Commons for Arundel and South Downs. On behalf of the House, I extend a very warm welcome to you. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 64 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Energy 64 14:28 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Energy. Will the minister update the House on how a coordinated, national approach to energy policy is supporting secure and affordable energy for hardworking Australian families and businesses? How does this compare with alternative approaches? 14:28 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Tangney for his question and acknowledge his deep commitment to getting better energy policy across the country and ensuring the lights stay on. The Prime Minister has laid out a clear plan for our energy policy—first and foremost, energy security, and energy affordability as we transition to a lower emissions future and taking the ideology out of the policy. We understand that renewables are an important part of the energy mix. In fact, just 18 months ago there was bipartisan support for a renewable energy target, which the member for Port Adelaide said would restore investor confidence. But you cannot have increased renewables without increased storage. That is why this government is prioritising storage projects, why the Prime Minister has outlined our emphasis on pumped hydro and why we have directed ARENA and the CEFC to invest in these projects. More than $100 million has been flowing to storage projects like a project in South Australia which is linking 1,000 homes and businesses with batteries and solar PV to create a virtual power plant, and like the work that we are doing with the ANU to map out future sites for pumped hydro across the country. I am asked if I am aware of any alternative approaches. Well, we know that the Labor states of South Australia and Queensland have 50 per cent renewable targets, and we know that Victoria has a 40 per cent target, and we know that the Leader of the Opposition wants to take this madness national with his 50 per cent target. But we also know that when they were rushing last week, after the blackout in South Australia, to blame the operator, they all started to trip over themselves. The member for Sydney, who struggles to get a question up here, put out a tweet during question time asking me to turn on the gas in South Australia. I thought to myself, 'Maybe she did not listen to the member for Wakefield earlier that day, when you thought the federal government could provide the answer,' because this is what the member for Wakefield said on Sky News: … as I understand it, the Federal Government has no powers to direct the Australian Energy Market to do— The SPEAKER 00APG The Minister for the Environment and Energy will resume his seat for a second. Mr Bowen interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for McMahon is warned! The member for Melbourne on a point of order. Mr Bandt M3C On relevance, the minister might like to know about solar power. It does quite well during a heat wave— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Melbourne will resume his seat. Mr Bandt interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG His microphone is not on. I say to the member for Melbourne and the member for Denison, as I said to the Treasurer last week, they know the rules on props. Please place the prop on the table. I would like to address the House. Mr Bandt interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Melbourne will resume his seat. I have got to inform the member for Melbourne: as far as anyone watching is concerned, he is on mute. As soon as I say, 'Resume your seat,' the microphone goes off. I would like to now address the House. The minister will resume his seat. Mr Pasin interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Barker will cease interjecting. I would like to address the House without interruption; in fact, I will, without interruption. Anyone interrupting will be dealt with. Last Thursday, I have to say, an undesirable prop was used here in the House, and this has occurred again today. If you look at the history of our parliamentary debate, this has occurred from time to time, but I am just giving fair warning now— Mr Butler interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Port Adelaide! I am giving fair warning now this is not going to become a regular occurrence in the House. So, like a game of musical chairs, that is it. Any further repetition of it I will need to deal with. As I said, it has happened from time to time, but it is not going to become a regular feature of question time. Mr Joyce interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I say to the Deputy Prime Minister, who is midconversation, I find it quite unbecoming for the House and it is not going to become a regular feature of question time. The minister has the call. Mr FRYDENBERG FKL I wonder if the member for Melbourne knows that it takes 220 tonnes of coking coal to make a wind turbine and a dozen metals and minerals to make a solar panel. The member for Port Adelaide, the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Sydney and the member for Watson do not have any idea who the Australian Energy Market Operator is, they do not have any idea what the powers of the federal government are, they do not have any idea what the state government's responsibilities are, and they do not have any idea of what the impacts of blackouts on households and businesses are. In fact, the member for Port Adelaide flippantly described those blackouts in South Australia as a 'hiccup'. Western Australia State Election 65 14:34 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister, because today he said of the WA One Nation preference deal: This is a disappointing move. I hope the architects of it clearly understand the ramifications of the decision … Given the federal Minister for Finance was closely involved in the negotiations, has the finance minister ever conducted legislation negotiations in the Senate with One Nation on behalf of the Deputy Prime Minister or any other National Party ministers? Is the Deputy Prime Minister happy to have the Minister for Finance negotiating with One Nation on his behalf? The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the House will resume his seat. I have ruled one question out of order on the subject matter. I have allowed another two in. That question is in the category of the first question asked. It is out of order. I will hear from the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Burke DYW I respect the ruling that you have made. Can you make clear just what it is that is making it out of order? The SPEAKER 00APG Maybe the Manager of Opposition Business might go to the point that he thinks is in order. I am glad he concedes most of it is out of order. Mr Burke DYW It is the fact that it is asking about legislation negotiations in the Senate and the minister's role in who he delegates to conduct those legislation negotiations in the Senate. The SPEAKER 00APG I will allow the Deputy Prime Minister to answer that narrow part of the question and any other point he deems fit. 14:35 Mr JOYCE E5D New England I thank the member for Hunter for his apt question about agriculture. I am always waiting for a question on agriculture or water from the member for Hunter. I think what would be better would be to get a question on energy security, since he is the member for Hunter and, last time I went through there, there was actually a power station, or a couple, that he might want to keep open, just like the member for Shortland might want to keep their power stations open. But, of course, they do not believe in keeping their power stations open. They believe in anything but the questions that are actually pertinent either to their portfolio or to the area where they live. To the area of the effects of preference deals and how they affect legislation, that is a very pertinent question for the member for Herbert, who got in on One Nation preferences, and the member for Longman, who got in on One Nation preferences, and the member for Dobell, who got in on One Nation preferences. So we have rather a confusion of how to deal with things when the Labor Party— The SPEAKER 00APG The Deputy Prime Minister will resume his seat. The member for McEwen on a point of order. Mr Rob Mitchell M3E It goes to direct relevance. In 2010— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for McEwen will resume his seat. I made it very clear when I allowed this question that I would allow the Deputy Prime Minister to answer the question and any other matter he deemed fit. The gate is open. The Deputy Prime Minister has the call. Mr JOYCE E5D I paid heed to the point of order, and it was kind of irrelevant: it started badly, faded away a bit in the middle and the less said about the end of it the better. What we actually see with the Labor Party is that they will completely avoid the issue that is pertinent to how you actually get working men and women back into work. You have a choice: you can either have cheap labour or cheap power. They do not believe in cheap power, they do not believe in actually looking after the working men and women. Mr Conroy interjecting— Mr JOYCE E5D The member for Shortland knows that, and the member for Shortland will know that he is now on camera and he has to explain to his constituency why he has become a patsy for the Greens. Why has he become a patsy for the Greens? Because he probably got Greens preferences, the member for Shortland— Mr Conroy interjecting— Mr JOYCE E5D his whole political agenda within the Labor Party has now been determined by Greens preferences. As was the member for Hunter, who no doubt got Greens preferences. He is very proud of those Greens preferences. Because I know, to his bootstraps, he believes in the Greens agenda. Of course, I know one person—that is, the member for Grayndler—who almost is a Greens member! He just sits there—he has to get The Daily Telegraph to go into bat for him, for The Daily Telegraph to go, 'Save Albo', 'Save Albo from the Greens'. Because the Labor Party has been taken over by the Greens. The Labor Party is a paid-up member of the Australian Greens. And yet we never hear about what their policy agenda is. Remember, it is the Greens that want to get rid of coal mining completely. Send our whole nation down the financial tube, but they do not care about that. The Labor Party does not care about that; it has been overtaken. The problem with the Labor Party these days is the Labor Party does not have any people who actually have done any labour in it. There is no-one who has done any labour. There are no actual workers in it any more. They have given up on workers and taken up on union officials and university students. That is what the Labor Party is: union officials and university students. You do not have the people who are actually the shearers, who are actually the work men and women— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Just before I give the call to the Manager of Opposition Business, the member for Wakefield is warned, as are the members for Shortland and Moreton. The member for Griffith has already been warned. That is her final warning. The Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Burke DYW In his answer, the Deputy Prime Minister referred to documents from the electorates of Herbert, Longman and Dobell, the how-to-vote cards that were handed out. I would seek leave to table all three how-to-vote cards, all of which have Labor putting One Nation last. Leave not granted. Opposition members interjecting— Government members interjecting— Ms Chesters interjecting— Ms Butler interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Murray will resume his seat. The member for Bendigo is warned. The member for Griffith could not help herself; she will leave under 94(a). The member for Griffith then left the chamber. Agriculture Industry 67 14:40 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources. Will the minister update the House on the importance of energy security and affordability to hard-working regional Australians, particularly in the agricultural industries? Can the minister outline any obstacles to securing the jobs and productivity of Australia's $60 billion agricultural sector? 14:40 Mr JOYCE E5D New England I thank the honourable member for his question. Australia has the most efficient irrigators in the world, and there is no better example of that than the Goulburn and Murray valleys in the member's own electorate. We have seen leading food processors like SPC and Kagome; innovative operators like Kyvalley Dairy exporting liquid milk to Asia; a range of high-value horticulture: apples, pears, stone fruits, grapes, wines. It is the home of Rubicon, the world's leader in efficient irrigation equipment. The Commonwealth has invested, as part of this process, over $1 billion in more efficient irrigation infrastructure in the Murray Goulburn region. The Prime Minister is to be commended at being the instigator, of starting that process of getting better and more efficient irrigation so that we can get a better return back through the farm gate. And we are investing right now in Australia. On Saturday we announced the Duck Irrigation Scheme in Tasmania. We are actually building dams; we are actually building water infrastructure. The $30 million project at Circular Head will provide 5,200 megalitres of high-security water to support dairy production as well as production of crops like potatoes, onions and carrots. But there is one thing you need for efficient irrigation, and that is affordable power. Whether it is in the Burdekin or whether it is in Victoria, in the Murray Goulburn, or whether it is in Tasmania: if you cannot afford the power to lift the water, then you cannot have an irrigation system. It is interesting to see in the Riverland in South Australia, Premier Jay Weatherill goes down there to kick up a stink about water policy, and all the farmers could tell him was the stink they have got in power policy. They cannot even afford to lift the water. In fact, they said quite clearly to him, 'It's no good talking about water if we can't pump it!' And where does the instigation of this dilemma come from? It comes from the crazy ideas that the Labor Party have absorbed from the Australian Greens in that triumvirate of trying to make sure, with the Australian Greens and others, that they abide by the wills of Johnston Street and Trafalgar Street and Annadale—the 'angel of Annandale' over there—to try to look after them and then let the whole rest of Australia go down the tubes. What this amounts to is that places such as Woolly Nook Farm are now using diesel power for their packing shed. They are actually having to go off the grid to supply their power. We are seeing Lindsay Point Almonds having to go off the grid to supply their power. We are finding Kingston Estate Wines having to go off the grid to supply their power. Mr Pyne 9V5 Submarines. Mr JOYCE E5D The submarines are actually worried about how they are going to—the new submarine development will have to worry about how to get the power. What we have is a policy of the Australian Labor Party—and they will not come to the dispatch box to debate it. They just will not. They have refused to come to the dispatch box to debate power policy, because they are going to stand behind middle Australia's policy, of South Australia's policy, of taking Australia back to the Middle Ages, to live contented in caves living off beetles and nuts. When are the Labor Party going to actually stand behind their own power policy? (Time expired) National Disability Insurance Scheme 67 14:43 Ms MACKLIN PG6 Jagajaga My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the government's announcement today that it will use the $3 billion it wants to cut from families, pensioners and new mums to fund the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Given the Prime Minister's cuts have little chance of passing the parliament, will he be cutting $3 billion from the NDIS? Why is the Prime Minister threatening to cut the NDIS instead of scrapping his $50 billion handout to big business? What sort of callous, uncaring and out-of-touch government is this Prime Minister— (Time expired) 14:44 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth The government I lead can count, which is more than you can say for the government that the honourable member was a member of. All members of this House, this parliament, support the NDIS but it has to be paid for, and the Labor government left it massively underfunded— Ms Macklin interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Jagajaga has asked her question. Mr TURNBULL 885 and what we are doing is ensuring that measure after measure is putting funds to support the NDIS. That is what we are doing. I will ask the minister to expand on that because what we are doing is acting responsibly. The Labor Party, reckless as ever, is seeing the solution in debt and deficit rather than in prudent economic management. 14:45 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce Since coming to government in 2013, we have consistently and accurately noted that the Labor Party left a funding gap for the NDIS in the year 2020, which starts at $4 billion and grows very rapidly after that. Now, there are three ways that you can pay for that funding gap: you can find savings in the budget, you can borrow more money or you can increase taxes. That funding gap will be met but our very strong preference is to find savings. So for members opposite, who still try and maintain this bizarre myth that it was fully funded, let me read you the best and last explanation that was given by the member for Jagajaga as to that funding gap. When contacted by The Australian with respect to an article where we noted again that there is a funding gap in 2020: 'A spokesman for Ms Macklin told The Australian he had, "stopped caring, bothering" about explaining Labor's funding of the scheme. How utterly extraordinary. Mind you, a lie as big as the one that you had funded the gap—here it comes, we do not like it. The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will withdraw that word. Ms Macklin interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Jagajaga will cease interjecting. I know she is under provocation, but the minister will withdraw that unparliamentary term. Mr PORTER 208884 I do withdraw. It is not true that the Labor government, when in government, fully funded the NDIS. It is not true that they delivered four surpluses in one night. It is simply not true. And when pushed for explanation, how utterly extraordinary that the best that they could come up is that they had stopped caring or bothering about explaining Labor's funding of the scheme. And why would you keep peddling that utter myth? You would have to try and stop bothering or caring when the nonsense is as large and the myth is as large as the one that they have propagated. What we announced today is that we will find savings measures to fully fund the NDIS. We are the government who will give line of sight. Had you been serious about fully funding the NDIS, you would have done exactly the same thing that we are doing—that is, to create an account into which the savings will go where they will be protected and allocated only for the purposes of funding the NDIS. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 68 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 14:47 The SPEAKER 00APG I would like to inform the House we have present in the gallery this afternoon the former member for Durack, Mr Barry Haase. On the half of the House, welcome back. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 68 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Energy Security 68 Energy Security 68 14:48 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor My question is to the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment. Will the minister outline to the House how affordable and reliable energy supports Australian exports? How would alternative approaches jeopardise the prosperity of hardworking Australian exporters and energy reliability? 14:48 Mr CIOBO 00AN0 Moncrieff I thank the member for O'Connor for the question. Like all those on this side of the House, I know he is passionate about boosting Australian job opportunities by growing our export sector. And he is right: the fact is that Australian exports have flourished under this coalition government and they flourish because it is the coalition government that has put in place three powerhouse free trade agreements with key North Asian markets: South Korea, Japan and China. In fact, the value of Australia's exports reached some $32.6 billion in December, the highest level ever in our nation's history and, in fact, resulted in a record export performance of a trade surplus of some $3.5 billion, which is also the largest ever recorded. Over 2015-16, our net exports contributed to over half of Australia's economic growth, some 1.4 per cent out of a growth rate of some 2.7 per cent. So what these results show is a clear vindication of this government's efforts with respect to pursuing trade agreements that are good for Australia, good for Australian workers and, of course, good for Australian wages. In large part, our record exports have been driven by increased services exports and large increases in Australian energy exports of LNG and coal. And this is the same LNG and coal sector that provides the low-cost energy that is critical to Australia retaining its export competitiveness. While Australia is the world's biggest coal exporter with exports expected to be around $58 billion in 2016-17, according to the Minerals Council, we want to make sure as a government that government policy is committed to ensuring continued growth in the sector and continued jobs. You would expect with that growth in the sector that the Liberal Party might be a little bit more committed to it. You would expect that the Leader of the Opposition, for example, would be little bit more focused on backing clean coal technologies like those on this side of the chamber are. But the problem is that the Leader of the Opposition does not care about coalminers, he does not care about those regional communities. In fact, he is more concerned about kale than he is about coal. That is what his focus is. His focus is about what he can do for those in the inner cities that would rather eat kale than what it is he can do about coalminers in regional Australia. The fact is that Australians can see straight through this Leader of the Opposition. They know a phoney when they see one, and let me tell you, Mr Speaker, they can always spot a 'Counterfeit Bill'—they can spot a 'Counterfeit Bill' from a long way away. And when they look through a magnifying glass, what they can see about the opposition is that they have failed policies, policies that are not good for Australian workers and they will turn their back on our trade and export agenda. Electricity Security 69 14:51 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister specifically confirm that on the day after the blackout in South Australia last year, the conference call between the Prime Minister's office, the energy minister's office and environment and energy officials was told: 'Australian energy market operators' advice was that the generation mix, that is, renewable or fossil fuel, was not to blame for yesterday's event. It was the loss of 1,000 megawatts power in such a short space of time as transmission lines fell over.' 14:52 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth Nothing better illuminates the delusion of the Labor Party than that question. They are in a state of denial—a complete state of denial. Let us go to the Australian Energy Market Operator's report, and what does it say? Talking about the growing proportion of variable renewables in the South Australia grid, that is to say wind and solar: 'The growing proportion of this type of generating plant within the generation portfolio is leading to more periods with low inertia and low available fault levels, hence a lower resilience to extreme events.' That is what AEMO says. The reality is that of course it was not the windmill that caused the transmission line to fall down. Nobody said it was. What happened was typical of the lazy, negligent, complacent Labor government. They introduced more and more variable renewables into the mix, increasing the vulnerability of the transmission network, increasing the lack of resilience of the network—as AEMO has said—and, when the storm came, the network went down. If the power station at Port Augusta had been operating, it would not have— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order. Mr Burke DYW Mr Speaker, the question goes to one issue only, which is asking the Prime Minister whether he received a specific piece of advice. There is nothing else in the question other than asking whether or not he received that. We quoted the advice in the question. The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister is relevant to the subject of the question; he is not drifting off the policy subject of the question. The Prime Minister is in order. Mr TURNBULL 885 The AEMO's advice has been consistent, always, with what is in their report, and that report is exactly as I read it. The fact is, you have much more wind in South Australia than you have in other states. As a result, you need to have more backup power, more storage—but the South Australian Labor government did not bother getting around to that. So they became more and more reliant on the interconnector to Victoria—where they are busily drawing down brown-coal-fired power, I might say. What an extraordinary irony! The reality is that the Labor Party have lost the plot on energy. They can continue pounding away—we can see them, led by the Leader of the Opposition—to the light on the hill. There they are, the legions of the Labor loyalists. They are going there, on their way to the light on the hill. Through the darkness of the night, the light is there. It is still. There is not a sound. But then you hear, softly at first but then louder and louder, the chug, chug, chug of the backup generator—because that is what you need to power the light on the hill! Or anywhere in South Australia nowadays. The people of South Australia have been sacrificed on the altar of Labor's incompetence and ideology. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Isaacs is warned. Mr Shorten 00ATG Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table the FOI which reveals the direct opposite of what the Prime Minister just said to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG Is leave granted? Leave is not granted. Small Business 70 14:56 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey My question is to the Minister for Small Business. With the minister update the House on action the government is taking to protect small businesses from the impact of unreliable and expensive electricity? What hurdles stand in the way of achieving energy security for hardworking Australian businesses? 14:56 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I thank the member for Grey for his very important question. We have heard in this question time today, from the Prime Minister as well as from the Minister for the Environment and Energy, how this federal government will take the ideology out of the energy debate and give South Australian small business the certainty it deserves and the affordable energy it needs. The member for Grey and I have spoken many times about how important small business is. He is a passionate South Australian. He represents 90 per cent—90 per cent—of the geographic area of his state. There are 11,884 small businesses in the member for Grey's electorate. Those small businesses expect—they deserve—that when they flick the switch, the power will come on. Energy security is vital for small business. The members for Grey, for Barker, for Boothby and for Sturt know just how essential it is for small businesses to have the power at their fingertips—not just when the wind blows, not just when the sun shines, but every single minute of every single day. City or country, coastal or inland, there are lights and fridges which need to be switched on, cash registers, EFTPOS machines, computers and other technology, on which small businesses rely. Small businesses deserve an affordable baseload power on which they can rely, just like the communities which rely upon them. When the farms and family businesses of Grey and the rest of South Australia were plunged into darkness again last Wednesday—for the eighth time, I might add, in recent months—South Australian small business was left counting the cost of picking up the tab: fridges and freezers left to defrost, thousands of dollars of stock now destined for the dump. For a couple of McDonald's outlets employing 150 people, many of them young people, their energy costs have gone up—almost doubled—by $50,000 each. This is in the member for Grey's electorate. And this is even after the owner spent capital on trying to reduce power usage. Another one employs 90 people, an annual payroll of $1.2 million: their electricity bill increased 59 per cent, year-on-year, January to January. Sadly—unfortunately—the Labor energy policy is: 'Would you like a blackout with that?' The Labor Party's federal shadow minister, the member for Port Adelaide, the national president of the ALP no less, called it a hiccup. Tell that to the small businesses in South Australia! Little regard for perished produce, few mentions of failing technology; just one sorry blame game by the South Australian Labor government and by its twin here in Canberra. The policies of those opposite, just like their leader, are unrelia-Bill. Energy Security 70 14:59 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister. Today we have learnt, through freedom of information, that the Commonwealth government was directly advised about the blackout in South Australia last year, and I quote: AEMO’s advice is that the generation mix (ie renew-able or fossil fuel) was not to blame … Why, then, on the exact same day of receiving this advice, did the Prime Minister and his energy minister blame renewable energy for the blackout? 15:00 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth The inability of the Leader of the Opposition to do anything other than misrepresent is extraordinary. He has no capacity for correlating his remarks here with the facts on any occasion. He says whatever he thinks will suit him. The truth is, as we know and as AEMO said in their report, the change to having such a large amount of variable renewable power—wind turbines in the main—meant that the grid in South Australia had, and I quote, 'a lower resilience to extreme events'. Certainly nobody is suggesting that there was a solar panel that caused the storm or that the extreme wind event was caused by an errant wind turbine going at excessive speed. We all know that. But the reality is that the South Australian Labor government introduced a massive amount of renewables into their grid and did not plan for the consequences. That is the fact; that is what AEMO says. It is perfectly obvious that what was done was mindless, negligent and incompetent. They made South Australia more and more reliant on Victoria and the interconnectors with Victoria. They allowed to have closed down coal-fired power at Port Augusta and they had gas-fired power stations that were not operating. The reality is that they put all of their bet on renewable energy and failed to recognise that it has certain consequences. There is nothing wrong with wind farms and there is nothing wrong with solar panels. They are great; they play an important role. But they do not work all the time, and you have to plan for it. That is why you need storage, why you need backup and why you need better transition networks. You need to put in place those measures. The absurdity of the Labor Party's position, their delusion, is that, in the midst of all of the hardship they inflicted on families and businesses in South Australia, the member for Port Adelaide stands up and describes it as a hiccup—just a little hiccup that your business has shut down and you have to lay off your workers; just a little hiccup that you cannot turn the air conditioner on on a 40-degree day; just a little hiccup that all of your fishing catch is going off because you cannot run your refrigerators. Talk about out of touch! The Labor Party are lost on this issue. This is a test of competence and they have failed. Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 71 15:03 Ms HENDERSON ZN4 Corangamite My question is to the Minister for Health and Sport. Will the minister update the House on recent listings on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme? How do these recent listings support hardworking Australian families and reduce cost-of-living pressures? 15:03 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I want to thank the member for Corangamite, who has long been an advocate for families of children with cystic fibrosis, along with many members of this House, including, in particular, the member for Forrest. I also want to acknowledge the member for Farrer, who worked long and hard over many, many months to help families with cystic fibrosis. In that context, it was an honour and a privilege to join the member for Corangamite in visiting families from Cystic Fibrosis Australia outside Parliament House last Wednesday. Whilst we were there, we were able to make the announcement that the drug Kalydeco will be listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. As a consequence, families who would otherwise have had to pay up to $300,000 a year will be able to access life-saving drugs for children between two and five years of age. It was previously available for children over that age but has now been extended to children between two and five years of age inclusive. For those families and parents, such as those of young Dash—we met those parents—that $300,000 is money that could never have been found. This is exactly the sort of thing that a government should be doing through its healthcare system: providing for those who are least capable with the most important needs. These children's lives will be profoundly different as a result. In addition to that, this is a Ovarian Cancer month, and I have also been fortunate to list the drug Olaparib on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. That drug would ordinarily have cost $100,000. It will now be made available to over 230 women who face the terrible scourge of ovarian cancer. It is likely to improve the quality of their life significantly. It is likely to extend the quality of their life by a number of years. It is not a cure at this stage, and so medical research is fundamental. Other decisions that we have been able to make in the last few weeks include drugs for lung cancer and drugs for other areas—in some cases, again saving families $100,000 a year. That is what comes about through a careful and sustainable combination of four pillars: firstly, a commitment to universal access for Medicare and pharmaceuticals; secondly, a commitment to universal access through our hospitals; thirdly, a focus on mental health and preventative health; and, fourthly, a focus on medical research. There is more to be done on medical research to extend the range of outcomes and treatments which can subsequently be listed, but these drugs have been able to be listed because of the combination of medical research coupled with sensible, prudent budget management, which gives us the ability to save lives and improve lives exactly as our health system should be doing. Energy Affordability 71 15:07 Mr BUTLER HWK Port Adelaide My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's previous answer and I also refer to The Australian newspaper this morning which reveals that the highest price rises for electricity over the past decade occurred in the three states with the highest reliance on coal power and the lowest reliance on renewables: New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria. How does the Prime Minister explain these massive price rises when he cannot blame renewable energy? 15:07 Mr TURNBULL 885 Wentworth I thank the honourable member for his latest hiccup on energy. The honourable member is trying to apologise feebly and shift blame away from what is a fundamental failure of the Labor government in South Australia. Let's be very clear about this. It is obvious from the AEMO's work; it has been obvious for a long time. If you go back to the work of the South Australia renewables council you will see this point about the vulnerability of the network as more renewables are introduced. It has been flagged for a long time, but nothing has been done by the Labor government. They put all of their hopes on continuing to suck more electricity out of Victoria, which ironically is generated by burning brown coal, the most emissions-intensive form of baseload generation in Australia. The reality is that this has been a failure of Labor Party government. It has been an exercise in incompetence, and all of the excuses in the world cannot get Labor off the hook. The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat for a second. The member for Port Adelaide. Mr Butler HWK Thank you, Speaker. I waited a while, but I wonder whether the Prime Minister could be directly relevant and might touch on the price rises in those three states. The SPEAKER 00APG I thank the member for Port Adelaide. The Prime Minister is in order. The member's question certainly did have a specific element, but it also referred to previous answers and the Prime Minister is on the policy topic. Mr TURNBULL 885 Thank you, Mr Speaker. South Australia has, as the honourable member knows, the most expensive electricity in Australia and, worse still, it is the least reliable. It is not only putting businesses at risk and jobs at risk because it is so expensive; the fact that it is not reliable means that businesses have to invest in generator capacity—as they said when I was in the member for Grey's electorate in Port Lincoln—as though we were living in a Third World country where you have to invest millions of dollars in diesel backup generators to ensure that you have your fridges going and your business going. It has been a colossal failure of government by the South Australian Labor Party. How did they get into that problem? It is very simple: they introduced a very large percentage of wind power into the state, they failed to recognise that it has different characteristics to baseload power, they did not put in place the storage or the backup mechanisms to support it, and, frankly, they acted mindlessly and carelessly and incompetently, and South Australians are paying the cost. That is exactly the same approach that the Labor Party has taken federally with their reduction targets, with their renewable targets. They have not thought this through at all. They have demonstrated yet again their incompetence, their negligence, their complacency and the fact that they will always put politics and ideology ahead of the management and the careful discipline of government that Australians expect from those who seek to lead them. Donations to Political Parties 72 15:11 Dr McVEIGH 125865 Groom My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry, representing the Minister for Employment. Will the minister inform the House why it is important to bring a consistent and well thought out approach to the reform of donations in election campaigns? How does a considered approach to donations reform maintain the integrity of our system? 15:11 Mr PYNE 9V5 Sturt I thank the member for Groom for his question. It is important, of course, to reform foreign donations to political parties in this country, and that is why the Prime Minister at the National Press Club on 1 February said: ... Australians expect us to ensure that only Australians and Australian businesses can seek to influence Australian elections, whether via a political party, an activist group like GetUp or an association or a union. The Leader of the Opposition came into the chamber today to play catch-up with the government, to play catch-up with the Prime Minister, who has been talking about electoral reform for the last 10 years since he entered the parliament, and the Leader of the Opposition introduced a private member's bill today on foreign donations. This does not surprise me because the Labor Party knows a lot about foreign donations. I am not talking about the Ba'ath Party in 1977; I am talking about much more recent political history. In 2013 to 2015, the Labor Party received $4 million worth of foreign donations from China alone and the coalition only received $2 million. In fact, Labor received double the level of foreign donations than the coalition received in 2013 to 2015. There is more. They know quite a bit about foreign donations because Senator Sam Dastyari's career went under the bus because he thought it was perfectly reasonable for Chinese businesses to pay his personal debts. Of course, Senator Dastyari resigned, but apparently all is forgiven because he was brought back to the front bench last week. So all is forgiven. Six months in Coventry; now he is back on the front bench of the Labor Party again. So we are not going to be lectured by the Labor Party on foreign donations or electoral reform of any kind and not by this Leader of the Opposition who entirely forgot a $40,000 donation from Unibilt for his 2007 election campaign until he had to appear at the Haydon royal commission nine years later. Then suddenly he remembered it again and updated his register a few days before he had to appear at the royal commission. So we will not be lectured by the Labor Party on electoral reform, especially not when you analyse the Leader of the Opposition's bill and discover that his bill would still allow the Chinese businesses who gave Labor $1.355 million in 2013 to continue to do so and not when you realise that the Labor Party's bill would still allow Senator Dastyari's personal debts to be paid by Chinese businesses. So what we have introduced here is a smokescreen by the Labor Party to cover their embarrassment about the Leader of the Opposition's lack of credibility, one of his frontbencher's misunderstanding about the ethics of politics, and the foreign donations they have been taking for decades from overseas. Do not look at what he says; look at what he does. Mr Turnbull 885 I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. DOCUMENTS 73 DOCUMENTS Presentation 73 15:14 Mr PYNE 9V5 Sturt Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. BILLS 73 BILLS Migration Amendment (Character Cancellation Consequential Provisions) Bill 2016, Privacy Amendment (Notifiable Data Breaches) Bill 2016 73

Migration Amendment (Character Cancellation Consequential Provisions) Bill 2016

Privacy Amendment (Notifiable Data Breaches) Bill 2016

Returned from Senate 73 Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016 73

Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016

Second Reading 73 15:15 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland In summing up, I would like to thank speakers from both sides of the chamber for their contributions to the debate. The Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016 introduces an additional purpose to the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 of combating serious or organised crime at Australia's airports and seaports. The aviation security identification card and maritime security identification card schemes are a critical part of securing the aviation, maritime and offshore oil and gas sectors. This bill will prevent the exploitation of aviation and maritime transport or offshore facilities by individuals with links to serious or organised crime. It will ensure that such persons cannot gain access to aviation, maritime and offshore facilities. These amendments will provide for the regulatory framework to support the introduction of new and harmonised eligibility criteria for the ASIC and MSIC schemes that better target serious or organised crime related offences. The revised eligibility criteria will be set out in the Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Regulations 2003. In addition, to the amendments already mentioned, the bill will clarify and align the legislative basis for undertaking security checking of ASIC and MSIC applicants and holders. It will allow for regulations to be made prescribing penalties for offences against the new serious or organised crime requirements that are consistent with the existing penalty provisions across the ASIC and MSIC schemes. And it will insert an additional severability provision to provide guidance to a court as to parliament's intention. This bill gives effect to the government's election commitment to strengthen background checking regimes to ensure that individuals with links to serious or organised crime cannot gain access to our airports or seaports. This will in turn keep illegal guns off our streets and keep our communities safe. Previously, people with a serious criminal history were able to obtain a security clearance to work at our airports and seaports. This will no longer be possible with implementation of these legislative amendments. In addition, the bill will also complete a key action identified in the government's December 2015 response to the final report of the National Ice Taskforce, to prevent serious and organised crime by strengthening the ASIC and MSIC schemes. Organised crime, in particular the importation of illegal drugs, is a serious threat to our nation. These changes are a substantial step forward in the fight to disrupt the distribution of these drugs, including ice. This bill was previously introduced in the House of Representatives on 11 February 2016. It passed the House on 16 March 2016, but lapsed at prorogation on 17 April 2016. Following referral to the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee in the last parliament, the bill was recommended to progress to the Senate without amendment. The Australian government agrees with this recommendation and thanks the committee for its consideration of this complex issue. The Australian government does not agree with the assertion in the additional comments to the report and does not agree with the recommendations presented by the dissenting report. The revised eligibility criteria, which this bill enables, is the culmination of extensive stakeholder consultation across the aviation and maritime sectors. This consultation concluded that extending the current ASIC and MSIC schemes is more efficient and effective than developing a new and separate scheme to counter serious or organised crime at our airports and ports. The existing ASIC and MSIC schemes are well understood by industry, and introducing a new scheme would likely impose additional costs and lead to confusion and inadvertent noncompliance. The proposed changes will lift the threshold for less serious and lower-level criminal offences. As a result, more applicants are expected to be found initially eligible for an ASIC or MSIC, reducing the impact on their employment and increasing the staff available to employers. This bill not only improves the government's ability to combat transnational and domestic organised crime; it also strengthens the scheme's existing national security assessment and the ability to protect Australia's airports and ports against acts of terrorism. I thank members for supporting the bill to ensure the earliest possible implementation and therefore impact of these vital measures. The SPEAKER 00APG The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Grayndler has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question is that the amendment be agreed to.

The House divided. [15:24]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 66 AYES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Byrne, AM Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Feeney, D Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hammond, TJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Katter, RC Keay, JT Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Lamb, S Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 74 NOES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR (teller) Ciobo, SM Coleman, DB Coulton, M Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Hastie, AW Henderson, SM Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Laundy, C Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McGowan, C McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.
Original question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.

 Consideration in Detail 75 15:31 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler by leave—I move amendments (1) to (6) and (8) to (11) as circulated in my name together: (1) Clause 1, page 1 (lines 5 and 6), omit "Serious or Organised", substitute "Serious and Organised". (2) Schedule 1, item 2, page 3 (lines 9 and 10), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (3) Schedule 1, item 3, page 3 (line 15), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (4) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 18), omit "Serious or organised", substitute "Serious and organised". (5) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 21), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (6) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 24), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (8) Schedule 1, item 7, page 5 (line 3), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (9) Schedule 1, item 12, page 5 (line 22), omit "Serious or organised", substitute "Serious and organised". (10) Schedule 1, item 12, page 5 (lines 25 and 26), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (11) Schedule 1, item 12, page 6 (line 4), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". The amendments that I have moved in this first section are amendments relating to the distinction between 'serious or organised' and 'serious and organised'. This is not just a question of language; it is a question of language translating into action when it comes to legislation. The significance of this is that the amendments that I have moved are consistent with the recommendations of the National Ice Taskforce and the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement report from 2011. That is the basis of the Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016. These amendments would replace the statement—including the title, it must be said—of the bill throughout this legislation. It is a uniform change and will impact the aviation and maritime bills in the same manner. It is important that we get the language right when we are adding new purposes to important legislation. We need to ensure that we are targeting identified problems in a precise manner. If we do not do that, we are inadvertently weakening the intent of the legislation by broadening the definition so widely that it undermines the intent of the bill to respond to organised crime involved in the trafficking of ice, and that was the basis of this legislation. We on this side of the House are being constructive. We have not said that we will oppose the legislation. However, we have said, and given clear notice, not just to this minister but to the previous minister, that we have concern here that, essentially, what has happened is that whoever has drafted this legislation has been sloppy about it. I say that because it is the nicest term that can be used. It is better that this is an inadvertent error rather than something that is a calculated decision to abuse the circumstances of the trafficking of drugs to try to widen, in an improper way, the scope of the people who will be caught up by this definition. As I said in parliament when this bill was first put forward during the last term, we are concerned that the mission of transport security remains tightly focused around managing the post 9-11 security environment. Currently, that is about safeguarding against unlawful interference at our regulated airports and seaports, and really focuses on terrorist-related activity—and that is the purpose of this legislation. These amendments are intended to widen that purpose to include targeting serious criminality which may not be unlawful interference of a terrorist type, which is what is in the previous definition in the bill. Now, no doubt, serious criminality should be targeted. It is of a different focus to terrorism—hence, this legislation. We acknowledge that and we are being constructive in the arguments that we are putting forward. So whilst Labor will not oppose the widened purpose—widening it from terrorism to serious criminality, particularly in the context of the trafficking of ice and other serious drugs—it is important that we take up the experts' opinion. The views of the experts who conducted the Ice Taskforce and the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement report should be the basis of the legislation, rather than us taking it upon ourselves to widen it inappropriately. (Extension of time granted) The problem with what the government has done here is that the language has changed from 'serious and organised crime' to 'serious or organised crime'. We believe that we should follow the experts. Frankly, I will be surprised if the government rejects these amendments, because this is an opportunity for the government to have consensus around this legislation. That is certainly always my preferred option. If the government does not agree to the amendments here, perhaps the government might take it upon itself to move the same amendments in the Senate as government amendments. We do need to get this right and wherever possible we have tried to create a circumstance whereby transport security is above the day-to-day argy-bargy of politics that often infects this fine democratic institution here in the House. I refer to the Ice Taskforce report. I say to the minister, who was not responsible for this bill, that this is an opportunity for him as the new transport minister to show how much better he is than the transport minister that he replaced and suggest that he read the report. This transport minister should not try to attain more than transport ministers any further back than that—because, put simply, the Nats will never have the big picture—but he can be the best National Party transport minister. That is the opportunity that he has here. The Ice Taskforce report uniformly talks about targeting 'serious and organised crime'. The Joint Committee on Law Enforcement report of the inquiry into the adequacy of aviation and maritime security measures always refers to 'serious and organised crime'. Both reports refer to it throughout. This is something that the current Minister for Justice should recall, if the transport minister wishes to consult with him, because he was a member of the joint committee at the time. Indeed, this is what the joint committee unanimously recommended to this parliament: The committee recommends that the scope of the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 be widened to include serious and organised crime in addition to terrorist activity and unlawful interference. All we are suggesting is that you go to that unanimous recommendation. Indeed, the Attorney-General's Department's submission on this bill during the previous parliament uniformly talked about targeting 'serious and organised crime'. The law enforcement agencies, such as the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, almost always refer to 'serious and organised crime'. The Australian Crime Commission Amendment (National Policing Information) Bill 2015, the coalition government's legislation, which Labor supported and which was carried through both houses of parliament last year, refers to—guess what, Minister? 'Serious and organised crime'. Indeed, the Senate report on this very bill talks about targeting 'serious and organised crime', despite the use of 'or' throughout. This is never explained. Only the bill itself uniformly talks about targeting 'serious or organised crime'. Even the department's 2015-16 annual report, tabled in the House on 7 November last year, refers to this legislation, on page 30, as targeting 'serious and organised crime'. I commend these amendments to the House. They are important amendments. This is not a matter of semantics; this is a matter of ensuring that we truly target, in an appropriate way, serious and organised crime. 15:42 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland I appreciate the contribution by the member for Grayndler. The government has closely considered the amendments put forward by the member but will not be supporting these amendments by the opposition. We believe that 'serious or organised' is far broader than 'serious and organised' and will capture people with a serious criminal conviction or organised crime conviction or both. So, whilst we understand the points being made by the member for Grayndler, we do not agree with his amendments. The government has committed to strengthening background-checking regimes to ensure that individuals with links to serious or organised crime cannot obtain access to our airports and our seaports, and the inclusion of combating serious or organised crime at seaports and airports into the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 will help keep illegal guns and illegal drugs off our streets. The government is committed—as I acknowledge that the member for Grayndler has indicated that the opposition is committed—to keeping Australia safe. We believe that stopping people with a serious criminal conviction or an organised crime conviction or both from gaining access to secure areas at airports and seaports is a crucial part of this. I accept the comments made by those opposite during the second reading debate on the bill that they are very committed to reducing particularly the amount of illicit drugs on our streets, but I do not believe that you can say, on the one hand, that you want to reduce illegal drugs in our community and, on the other hand, water down attempts to intervene in the drug trade. I believe this bill is a step in the right direction and the government is not supporting the amendments put by the member for Grayndler. Can I just say more generally in relation to the National Ice Taskforce: as the member indicated, the 2015 final report of the National Ice Taskforce echoed the concerns of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement and Intelligence at its inquiry into the adequacy of aviation and maritime security measures to combat serious and organised crime. Now, it noted that the growing use of ice in regional Australia must be recognised and appropriately addressed. The legislation before the House is helping to address that issue. Mr Deputy Speaker, I know that from your personal experience in your own electorate that you know the impact of illicit substances, particularly ice, is one of great concern in our regional communities and also of great concern in particular in our Indigenous communities. I think that ice has managed to penetrate parts of our community that we thought would never be impacted by the use of illicit drugs, so I do take the contributions from those opposite very seriously—just as the government takes its responsibilities very seriously in relation to its response to the National Ice Taskforce. We believe this is a step in the right direction in reducing the opportunity for ice and other illicit substances to reach Australia, but also a step in the right direction in preventing individuals and criminal gangs or syndicates which traffic those illicit drugs or, indeed, traffic illegal guns, from having access to our major transport links. So I just repeat that the government will not be supporting the amendments from the opposition. 15:46 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I am somewhat disappointed that the minister has indicated the government will not support these amendments, given the spirit in which they have been moved. There is no question that the growth of ice use, particularly in regional communities and, as the minister has said, in Indigenous communities, is having a devastating impact. This is a drug that certainly was not around just a few years ago, and governments have to respond to changes in circumstances. That is why, whether our amendments are carried or not, I indicate that we will support the legislation that is before the House. But I do note that when the minister addressed the joint parliamentary committee report which preceded the National Ice Taskforce reports in 2011 and 2015 respectively, he spoke about them recommending addressing serious 'and' organised crime. They were the words that he used, because they are the words that are in those reports. They are the words that are in the department's annual report. They are the words that the Australian Crime Commission Amendment (National Policing Information) Bill 2015, that was passed by this parliament, includes. They are the words that the Attorney-General's Department's submission on this bill in the previous parliament talked about. Consistently, they are the words that are appropriate to be used, and not just to widen without any proper consideration the implications of changing from serious 'and' organised crime to serious 'or' organised crime. We really need to concentrate our efforts if we are going to have a correct impact on it. I would accept the fact that in this chamber the government has a majority to deny the opposition's amendments that I have moved here. But I would say that the minister should ask for advice from the department or from the AFP—or anyone would do—to support the change in this definition. It is my view that part of the reason for there being able to be a bipartisan position on security issues moving forward is that the politicians are not playing politics with these issues but listening to the experts. If the experts came to me and suggested that we were out of step with what they themselves had previously recommended, then that would be worthy of proper and appropriate consideration. But that has not occurred. Every agency, from the department, through the security agencies and through to the National Ice Taskforce and the joint committee have recommended wording that is consistent with what we are putting forward in these amendments. I commend the amendments to the House. 15:50 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland With that, we should not delay the House unduly. The government strongly believes that the bill, as it is presented to the House, is meeting the intention of the reports that the member for Grayndler referred to previously. The legal advice that we have received is that using the term 'and' could be interpreted as requiring both elements to be proved—that is, both elements of being serious 'and' organised as distinct from being serious 'or' organised. Again, I acknowledge the spirit in which the member for Grayndler has approached this issue, but simply disagree on the best way forward with the legislation. Serious and organised crime, I acknowledge, is certainly a term in common usage—probably in many ways it is a colloquial term, used quite widely. But the fear within the government is that use of the word, 'and', as I said, would require a legal interpretation of meeting both elements of being serious and organised as distinct from serious or organised. Certainly, in preparation of the bill for the House, the Australian Federal Police were consulted and accepted the use of the term 'or'. The government will not be supporting the member's amendment. 15:51 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I will not delay the House for too much longer before we vote on this. I will simply point out two things. Now, firstly, I appreciate the fact that the minister has outlined, for the first time, some rationale for the government being fairly intransigent on this issue. But the problem I have with that and with the explanation he has just given is that the Australian Crime Commission Amendment (National Policing Information) Bill 2015, which passed the parliament last year, refers, with Labor's support, to 'serious and organised' crime. It defies logic that, somehow, this has arisen in circumstances that legislation was carried. That is legislation that is relevant to national security concerns and, in particular, specifically addresses the Australian Crime Commission and its operations. It seems to me that if this legislation is carried as it currently reads—being put forward by the government—it will put it out of step with the other legislation. Frankly, people will read that, and there is an opportunity where legislation is inconsistent, particularly legislation that has an impact on prosecution of criminal activity—for people to point towards those inconsistencies between the two pieces of legislation. I expect what we will see before this parliament, which should have happened before now, is that if they are going to change the definition then amend the Australian Crime Commission legislation that has been carried by this House—it will be in need of amendment in order to bring it into consistency with this definition. Secondly, what has to happen as well, with this, is for draft regulations to apply to this legislation, and the regulations to specify relevant offences that would be deemed to rule out people being eligible for ASIC or MSIC cards. I would have thought that the revised definition we are proposing here—going back to a definition that is consistent with legislation that has previously been adopted in this parliament—would be more appropriate. If the government has any concerns about any specifics, then the appropriate way is to address it in those regulations. I know from experience that determining what is included in those regulations to be a relevant offence is something that could be the subject of considerable debate and making sure it is got right. But, at all times, it has to be focused on terrorism or very serious organised crime activity. It cannot be such that people who have committed minor infringements get caught up in this. What that will do is undermine the purpose of the legislation. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the amendments be agreed to.

The House divided. [16:00]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 66 AYES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Brodtmann, G Burke, AS Burney, LJ Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Champion, ND Chesters, LM Clare, JD Claydon, SC Collins, JM Conroy, PM Danby, M Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Feeney, D Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR (teller) Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gosling, LJ Hammond, TJ Hart, RA Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husar, E Husic, EN Jones, SP Keay, JT Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Lamb, S Leigh, AK Macklin, JL Marles, RD McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE Owens, JA Perrett, GD (teller) Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Shorten, WR Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM Swan, WM Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 75 NOES Abbott, AJ Alexander, JG Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Banks, J Bishop, JI Broad, AJ Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR (teller) Ciobo, SM Coleman, DB Coulton, M Crewther, CJ Drum, DK Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, J Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Hartsuyker, L Henderson, SM Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Keenan, M Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Laundy, C Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Marino, NB McCormack, MF McGowan, C McVeigh, JJ Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD O'Dwyer, KM Pasin, A Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Prentice, J Price, ML Pyne, CM Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharkie, RCC Sudmalis, AE Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE Turnbull, MB Van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Wyatt, KG Zimmerman, T 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

 16:06 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler by leave—I move amendments (7) and (12), as circulated, together: (Amendment to motion for second reading to be moved by Mr Albanese) That all the words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes that the Government failed to articulate a policy for the aviation or maritime sectors at the 2016 Federal election; (2) notes the Turnbull Government's failed WorkChoices On Water legislation would have seriously undermined the Australian maritime sector; (3) notes in particular that the Government has: (a) failed to rule out further laws in coastal shipping that would aid the displacement of Australian crews on the Australian coast with foreign crews doing the same work for reduced wages and conditions; (b) failed to outline its response to the High Court's decision to overturn the Government's attempt to circumvent Parliament's intention to give priority to Australian jobs in our offshore oil and gas sector; (c) actively worked to facilitate the replacement of Australian maritime crews by foreign crews for permanent work in Australia, by arranging rapid visas, skills recognition and access to ports in cases such as the MV Portland in January 2016; and (d) previously considered relaxing air cabotage arrangements that could have the effect of displacing Australian flight and cabin crews with foreign crews on lower wages and conditions while working in Australia; and (4) notes that the Government and its expert agencies have repeatedly acknowledged the obvious point that criminal and security vetting of foreign aviation and maritime workers is much harder than for Australian workers; and (5) calls on the Federal Government to develop as a matter of urgency aviation and maritime policies, ensuring that such policies prioritise jobs and skills for Australians while also facilitating more reliable background checks". (Mr Albanese) (1) Clause 1, page 1 (lines 5 and 6), omit "Serious or Organised", substitute "Serious and Organised". (2) Schedule 1, item 2, page 3 (lines 9 and 10), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (3) Schedule 1, item 3, page 3 (line 15), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (4) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 18), omit "Serious or organised", substitute "Serious and organised". (5) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 21), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (6) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 24), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (7) Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 17), after item 4, insert: 4A After section 126    Insert: 126A Review of decisions relating to security checking under the regulations (1) This section applies if regulations are made, under any of the following sections, dealing with the security checking (including background checking) of persons who have access to an area or zone:    (a) section 35;    (b) section 36; (c) section 36A;    (d) section 37; (e) section 38;    (f) section 38A; (g) section 38AB. (2) The regulations must include provisions allowing a person in relation to whom a security check is carried out to seek:    (a) reconsideration by the Secretary or the Secretary AGD of a decision in relation to a security identification card; and    (b) review by the Secretary or the Secretary AGD of a decision in relation to a security identification card; and (c) review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of a decision by the Secretary or the Secretary AGD on review of a decision in relation to a security identification card. (3) To avoid doubt, nothing in this section permits:    (a) the Secretary or the Secretary AGD to review an adverse security assessment or a qualified security assessment; or    (b) the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to review an adverse security assessment or a qualified security assessment other than in accordance with the provisions of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. (4) In this section:    adverse security assessment and qualified security assessment have the same meanings as in the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979.    Secretary AGD means the Secretary who is responsible for administering the scheme prescribed for the purposes of section 8 of the AusCheck Act 2007 (the AusCheck scheme). (8) Schedule 1, item 7, page 5 (line 3), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (9) Schedule 1, item 12, page 5 (line 22), omit "Serious or organised", substitute "Serious and organised". (10) Schedule 1, item 12, page 5 (lines 25 and 26), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (11) Schedule 1, item 12, page 6 (line 4), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised". (12) Schedule 1, page 6 (after line 19), after item 12, insert: 12A After section 201    Insert: 201A Review of decisions relating to security checking under the regulations (1) This section applies if regulations are made, under any of the following sections, dealing with the security checking (including background checking) of persons who have access to a zone:    (a) section 105;    (b) section 109; (c) section 113;    (d) section 113D; (e) section 113F. (2) The regulations must include provisions allowing a person in relation to whom a security check is carried out to seek:    (a) reconsideration by the Secretary or the Secretary AGD of a decision in relation to a security identification card; and    (b) review by the Secretary or the Secretary AGD of a decision in relation to a security identification card; and (c) review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of a decision by the Secretary or the Secretary AGD on review of a decision in relation to a security identification card. (3) To avoid doubt, nothing in this section permits:    (a) the Secretary or the Secretary AGD to review an adverse security assessment or a qualified security assessment; or    (b) the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to review an adverse security assessment or a qualified security assessment other than in accordance with the provisions of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. (4) In this section:    adverse security assessment and qualified security assessment have the same meanings as in the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979.    Secretary AGD means the Secretary who is responsible for administering the scheme prescribed for the purposes of section 8 of the AusCheck Act 2007 ( the AusCheck scheme). The opposition has moved these amendments in two blocks to try and minimise the disruption to the activity of the House. We believe that, just like our last set of amendments, this set of amendments is very reasonable indeed. It goes to the review of decisions made in security checking. This second group of amendments will put in place the legislative basis for existing review mechanisms. There are, of course, existing review mechanisms available, but, as part of the change package that is before the parliament, the government is proposing to harmonise what are currently different appeal systems for the ASIC and the MSIC. Holders of the ASIC, the aviation security identification card, will have a clearer system of review rights which is equivalent to the existing system which applies for holders of the MSIC, the maritime security identification card. The amendments will retain the new uniformity between the maritime and aviation systems. About a quarter of a million Australians have an ASIC or an MSIC. For many, the access to those cards is literally a precondition of their employment and their livelihood, to enable them to look after their families. The amendments that I have moved, one of which applies for aviation and one for maritime, will simply require that regulations made after this bill passes into law contain a review mechanism that either already exists or is proposed by the government as part of the harmonisation. Inserting in the respective maritime and aviation security acts a requirement for regulations to include a review mechanism provides an extra level of assurance that the system will include reviews where an adverse finding is made. When you are doing legislation like this, extending the scope of scrutiny pertaining to the issue of maritime and aviation security identification cards, it is reasonable that, at the same time, there be assurance given. Many of the quarter of a million Australians who have an ASIC or an MSIC will be concerned that somehow they will inadvertently get caught up, in what I believe is in contravention of the government's aim here—and the opposition shares that aim—in having appropriate security arrangements around our airports and seaports. I believe that the amendments we are advancing here are worthy of support. I think the government should consider them. This is an example of the government having the opportunity to seize parliamentary process to make the legislation that it proposes better. Common sense suggests that, where people, in a spirit of goodwill, come up with suggestions that will improve legislation, governments should not be stubborn and just say, 'That's coming from the opposition; therefore that's a bad idea.' This is a good idea. This is about providing certainty. This is about building on the government's good idea of harmonising the processes for the appeal system for ASIC and MSIC that it says it has. That is a good idea. So let us make it better by carrying these amendments, which the opposition commends to the House. 16:11 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland The government will not be supporting these amendments from the opposition, while I certainly appreciate the sentiment of the member for Grayndler and offer him this reassurance that the changes presented in the bill will not remove any of the existing appeal rights for applicants. As the member for Grayndler would know, the new eligibility criteria to be specified in the regulations will introduce new offence categories, such as offences arising from antigang or criminal organisation legislation, illegal importation of goods, interfering with goods under Australian Border Force control and foreign incursion and recruitment. As the member has indicated, and others have spoken about today, this bill strengthens the government's ability to tackle the supply of the drug ice and the importation of those precursor chemicals which are used in its manufacture and the individuals in the criminal gangs or syndicates who seek to traffic those substances. As the new criteria will focus the schemes on serious criminal activity, applicants with minor or low-level offences will only become ineligible when a significant term of imprisonment has been imposed. This will mean, importantly, that these people may be issued with their cards more quickly, lessening the impact on their employment and increasing the number of staff who will be available to employers in the industry. While I acknowledge the member for Grayndler's contribution, I offer him that reassurance that the changes will not remove any of the existing appeal rights for applicants. I understand that the opposition has moved these amendments as it is concerned that the appeals mechanisms for ASIC and MSIC applicants in the aviation and maritime regulations could be diminished or removed in the future. I want to assure him and assure anyone listening today that the government has no plans whatsoever to diminish the appeal rights for ASIC and MSIC applicants. There is already a comprehensive appeals process in the current aviation and maritime regulations, and this process is essential to the administrative transparency of the schemes. I repeat that some people who may have a minor or low-level offence will be less likely to get an adverse finding on their application for the ASIC or MSIC in the future, whereas those with serious or organised crime offences will be the target of this legislation. As I said, there is a comprehensive appeals process already available. The bill before us actually expands the appeals process for ASIC applicants, by providing them with the ability to apply to the Secretary of the Attorney-General's Department for reconsideration of a discretionary decision, an ability that already exists for MSIC applicants. There is also, as the member is aware, an appeal right to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for ASIC and MSIC applicants, and any future changes to the appeals process will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, as all changes to regulations are. I would note, just in conclusion, that the Office of Parliamentary Counsel has advised that including the appeals process in the acts would not create any practical protection against future changes to the aviation and maritime regulations. 16:15 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Can I thank the minister for putting on the record during this debate his assurances about his objectives and his statement that he has no plans to change the comprehensive appeals process that is in place. I accept his comments at face value. The minister, I have found, is someone of integrity, and he would not say that unless he meant it. But the truth is that ministers come and go. The minister who introduced this legislation is gone. The minister who wrote this legislation is gone. I note the rate at which the Prime Minister has to table new sheets containing his frontbench at the beginning of question time. The fact is our task in this place is to have good legislation that goes beyond the, what is, a very short-term survival instinct of a minister in the current coalition government. Whilst I appreciate his personal assurances and I wish him no ill will—indeed, I hope that he stays a minister until the next election, not beyond that, but until the next election; I wish him well—I do not think we can have legislation on that basis, which is why having the appeals processes included in the legislation is common sense. It is true that legislation can be changed, but it is also true that legislation has a different status from regulations. That is the truth. When regulations are brought forward, they can often be put under circumstances whereby there are nine parts of the regulations being put forward that are agreed to but the 10th is a problem. Then, the parliament has to make a view as to whether to disallow the entire regulation, or proposed amendment to the regulation, not just one section. That is why legislation is better than regulation, because it allows for proper scrutiny in the law of the land. What is more, when you are dealing with people's appeals rights for the consumers of that legislation—those directly impacted, and we are talking about those 250,000 people—those 250,000 people, I think, who currently have ASICs or MSICs, have a different view about what the law is, the legislation, than a forage around looking for some rather obscure regulation which may or may not be relevant to them. This legislation is trying to get transport security on our ports and airports right for the medium term. It is true that there will have to be change to legislation at some time because we have to keep up with the threat that comes from those who would seek to do us harm or those who are engaged in organised criminal activity. They adjust their methods, therefore, we need to adjust our legislation and our response, together with the appropriate agencies, and they, of course, need to adjust their action on the ground. Our amendments here are sensible and, I think, are worthy of consideration. We will see what happens with them in the Senate. I would have thought that if they were carried in the Senate then the government would agree with the changed legislation, particularly given the comments that the minister has made. So why not? Here is an opportunity for you, Minister—cut out the senators, get it done now, get the legislation right, and then we can save ourselves a bit of time talking to those in the other place, and say, in a bipartisan way, that this is legislation that has the support of this parliament that it deserves. But only if we get it right, and this minor amendment would make it even better legislation. 16:20 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland As much I am charmed by the member for Grayndler's concern for my political welfare, I intend to remain as a minister for a very long time into the future with the blessing of the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. Can I just indicate again that the government have considered very seriously the amendments put by the opposition. We have taken it in the spirit with which it was offered, but the government, as I want to emphasise, have no plans to diminish the appeal rights of the ASIC and MSIC applicants. I do refer the member, again, to the fact that the Office of Parliamentary Counsel has advised that including the appeals process in the acts would not create any practical protection against any future changes to the aviation and maritime regulations. We will not be supporting the amendment. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the amendments be agreed to. The House divided. [16:29] (The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith) [take in division 150 at 16:29] Question negatived. Original question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 84 16:31 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. 16:31 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Labor will be voting for the third reading of this bill, as we just voted for the second reading of the legislation. I want to make that clear to the House. We will be pursuing our amendments in the Senate, but we would be happy if the minister has suggestions about ways in which the amendments could perhaps be adjusted to satisfy the government, because I do believe that they have been reasonable amendments, and they were put forward in that spirit. I would much prefer for transport security legislation to not be the subject of divisions in the House, because I think it is a national interest issue. So, in speaking in favour of the third reading, I commend the bill to the House but suggest that there are flaws in the legislation that could be easily fixed, and that is the spirit in which the amendments that we just proposed before the House were moved. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Transport Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 84

Transport Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2016

Second Reading 84 16:33 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I rise to support the Transport Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2016—even though I note that it is 2017 before we have got around to actually debating this legislation. As I indicated on behalf of the Labor Party during the last debate, it is my view that aviation security must always come before partisan politics. This has always been my commitment. I have pursued it both in government and in opposition. This legislation provides for some simple but necessary changes that will ensure that Australia is up to date with a modern system of transport security. Importantly, it seeks to ensure the right balance between privacy and security, upholding Australia's commitment to an equal and non-discriminatory screening program. All Australians expect that the Commonwealth will ensure that ongoing vigilance, particularly in the aviation sector, is awarded the utmost importance. Transport safety in today's world is dynamic. Governments must respond to threats as they emerge with appropriate legislative changes. This legislation will play an essential role in ensuring that this continues to occur. It will update the process that airports use for the screening of people, vehicles and goods which are already in a security zone at an airport, bringing it in line with international standards. While legislation currently permits screening of people, vehicles and goods when entering a security zone, there is no additional provision for the random screening of these when they are already inside the security zone. Put simply, this will allow for the scrutiny of a person, a vehicle or a package which has already gone through security screening and is at the gate inside an airport or in the shopping centres that exist around international airports, in particular, but many of our domestic airports as well. It is, I think, a practical suggestion in responding to what might be future threats. The main aim of this legislation is to provide this authority, but I do note that it also reinforces that we do not have in any of our screening procedures racial profiling or profiling of any other sort. We have in place, I think, very good security provisions at airports, and this provides just another layer which, on the advice of experts, the government believes is necessary and therefore the opposition will be supportive of. The use of this authority will be a matter between the airport and the Office of Transport Security, the government body that approves transport security plans for each airport. The government has indicated that these arrangements will initially apply at nine airports, including all of the mainland capitals as well as the Gold Coast and Cairns airports, which are significant tourism destinations and, indeed, significant international arrival and departure points. Importantly, this legislation sits alongside enhanced security awareness training for employees and contractors who work in security zones. It also authorises greater delegation of powers under aviation and maritime transport security legislation to facilitate quicker responses. While the government has highlighted removal of regulatory constraint as a benefit, Labor believes that transport security is too important to simply be an exercise in extending light-handed regulation. Regulatory settings should always be reviewed, but Labor's main reason for supporting this legislation was, first and foremost, because it updated security measures so they are consistent with world standards. The legislation also includes an additional sensible option to enhance the central objective of removing threats to aviation security. Australia has always taken aviation security seriously. We are a signatory to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, also known as the Chicago Convention. Recently, the International Civil Aviation Organization, established under the Chicago Convention, has increased standards for screening of persons, goods and vehicles in security controlled zones at airports. Australian legislation should be updated to reflect this higher standard, which is what this bill will achieve. We have, from time to time, responded to events that have occurred internationally. When I was the minister over the Christmas period of one year, we had what became known as the 'undie bomber', which required a very busy January as throughout the world we responded very quickly to put in place changed regulations. We also, as a result of that incident and other perceived threats, introduced here in Australia full body scanners. We undertook a process whereby we examined world's best practice. We introduced, I believe, the best system—the most thorough in the world. At the time, the shadow minister, Warren Truss, gave full support to that. There were some people who argued that we could not actually bring in full body scanners, that people had a right to refuse. The legislation that was carried before this parliament was tough legislation. Indeed, it has a no-scan, no-fly policy—the toughest of the options that were put up—and that was supported by both sides of parliament. I thank the now government, the then opposition, for the fact that they did not play politics with that. There were attempts by some, on the basis of perceived civil liberties interference, who said that these mechanisms should not be given support. We went to a great deal of trouble, including locating body scanners here at Parliament House so that members of parliament, members of the media and anyone else who was interested could go through and see in real circumstances the way that they would operate. If there had been an issue with those full body scanners, I would have had a health problem because I went through them hundreds and hundreds of times, demonstrating for others that they were essentially emitting fewer waves than people's mobile phones. Getting across the reality of a response as opposed to the potential for a scare campaign is often at the heart of security issues. The government has done a very good job, in my view, of providing assurances so that people will not be singled out on the basis of any particular characteristic that they may have. There is a diligence contained in this legislation which is consistent with our non-discriminatory policy when it comes to all of these issues. We know from recent events, including the bombing of a Metrojet flight in Egypt in October 2015 and the attempted bombing of a Daallo Airlines flight in Somalia in February last year, that even a potential threat requires action. Of course, these changes must ensure that people's rights to equal treatment and privacy continue to be protected. The explanatory memorandum to this legislation outlines its commitment to both of these in the formal 'Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights'. On equality and non-discrimination it says: All people have the right to be treated equally. In keeping with Australia’s egalitarian screening regime applied to aviation passengers, selection of airport and airline workers, visitors and contractors for screening inside the security restricted areas ... of airports will be conducted on a purely random basis. Individuals will not be selected according to their race, religion, gender, or any other personal characteristic. Because that is included in the explanatory memorandum, it effectively becomes part of any consideration by any court as to what the intention of the legislation is and provides that legislative security. On privacy it says: In cases where a frisk search is necessary the individual may request that procedure to occur in a private room or within a screened area. A frisk search will always be undertaken by someone of the same gender as the person being searched. Once again, that is an appropriate provision in terms of privacy. I congratulate the department, through the minister, and the Office of Transport Security and others who have been engaged with the drafting of this legislation. They have ensured that those provisions are made explicitly clear. Inevitably, there are concerns raised about these issues, and it is best to address them up-front. We expect that airports and the government will ensure that appropriate arrangements exist and for those provisions to be applied in practice at all times. Importantly, the statement in the explanatory memorandum enshrines people's rights whilst also underpinning a robust and effective screening program. It builds on Labor's strong track record for aviation and airport security. When in government, we oversaw the strengthening of the security regime applying to air cargo and we committed more than $54 million to install X-ray screening technology at freight depots. We also invested an additional $200 million in the nation's aviation security. Much of this funding facilitated the introduction of new and improved security technologies at airports, including not just the latest body scanners that I referred to but next generation, multiview X-ray machines and bottle scanners capable of detecting liquid-based explosives. It also provided for increased policing at airports, enhanced security procedures and strengthened international cooperation. We improved security at regional airports, introducing legislation that requires screening of domestic checked baggage at all regional airports operating RPT services. That piece of legislation did not have unanimous support, but everyone supports it now as it was the right legislation. Some said that it would have an impact on flights to regional areas, and it did not. It did the right thing. Certainly, what you could not have was what previously occurred. There was best-practice security at the major capital city airports, but if you were flying in from a small, regional centre on a regular passenger transport movement service, nobody checked anything as you went through. Common sense prevailed there. The government of the day prevailed, and now it is particularly important that that security is there. More than 150 million passengers fly through Australian skies each year, and Labor will always support sensible measures that protect Australian citizens and continue the nation's reputation for aviation safety. We have an enviable safety record that is second to none. It is a credit to our existing system of regulation and all participants in the system, including airports and airlines. The bottom line is that this requires people on the ground to carry out these sorts of changes. By and large, they do so with goodwill and cooperation and with understanding that our record of aviation safety and security is something that we as a nation should be very proud of. This legislation is consistent with maintaining that record. Labor will be supporting this legislation. 16:48 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland I thank the member for Grayndler for his constructive contribution. I also thank him for flagging the opposition's intention to support the Transport Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2016. As the member for Grayndler indicated, safety of our air travellers must be a paramount consideration for the government. We have a long and proud history and, as the member correctly indicated, we have an enviable safety record. Eternal vigilance is the key to addressing new and emerging threats, and it is highly desirable that, as much as possible, we can have a bipartisan approach to issues of national security. I am sure the travelling public and the broader community appreciate the willingness of members on both sides to work together as much as they possibly can to achieve positive outcomes in this space. The bill will ensure Australia's transport security framework remains responsive to the evolving security environment and efficient as the transport sector grows into the future. The bill amends the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003to introduce strengthened airside security measures at Australia's major international airports and to increase the efficiency of government regulatory assessment processes. A terrorist attack on Australian aviation would result in loss of life, severe economic consequences, public loss of confidence in both the government and the aviation sector, and would damage Australia's repetition as a safe and secure destination for international air travel. This bill will strengthen Australia's already robust aviation security system by allowing the implementation of screening in airside areas. This security screening will be applied to airport workers who have access to passenger aircraft in the course of their employment, as well as their vehicles and any items they may carry. This new airside security screening will form part of a package of measures to mitigate the insider threat to Australian aviation and is planned to be rolled out at Australia's highest-risk airports over the next year. Implementation of these measures will be progressive, allowing the industry time to undertake any necessary capital works and to hire and train staff. Aviation workers who are subject to security screening under the new arrangements will be afforded the same protections as passengers, to ensure they are not subject to racial or religious discrimination and that they their privacy is protected. These measures will ensure that Australians continue to enjoy safe and secure air travel and that Australia remains at the forefront of international best practice. The bill also implements measures to allow the secretary of the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development to delegate his powers in the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 to lower-level Australian Public Service employees. Given the predicted growth in the transport sector and the evolving security environment, these amendments will give the government administrative flexibility. This will ensure that regulatory submissions can be effectively assessed in statutory time frames and that industry demands can continue to be met. The secretary remains responsible for determining which powers under the acts are appropriate to be delegated. Significant and complex regulatory reform will remain at senior levels, while only simple regulatory decisions will be delegated to lower-level employees. Again, I thank the member for Grayndler and thank the opposition for its support. I commend this bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 87 16:52 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Agriculture and Water Resources Legislation Amendment Bill 2016, Excise Levies Legislation Amendment (Honey) Bill 2016 87

Agriculture and Water Resources Legislation Amendment Bill 2016

Excise Levies Legislation Amendment (Honey) Bill 2016

Cognate debate.

Consideration resumed of the motion:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Third Reading 102 18:35 Mr HARTSUYKER 00AMM Cowper by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Excise Levies Legislation Amendment (Honey) Bill 2016 102

Excise Levies Legislation Amendment (Honey) Bill 2016

Second Reading 102 Third Reading 103 18:37 Mr HARTSUYKER 00AMM Cowper by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Treasury Laws Amendment (2016 Measures No. 1) Bill 2016 103

Treasury Laws Amendment (2016 Measures No. 1) Bill 2016

Second Reading 103 18:37 Ms O'DWYER LKU Higgins Deputy Speaker Kelly, let me first thank members who have contributed to this debate. This bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (2016 Measures No. 1) Bill 2016, contains amendments that relate to the regulation of Australia's terrorism insurance scheme, employee share schemes, Deductible Gift Recipient specific listings, the taxation of ex gratia disaster recovery payments, and retail client moneys. It is a bill that empowers Australians to participate in the economy with greater certainty. Schedule 1 of this bill makes an important clarification to the Terrorism Insurance Act 2003 to ensure it operates as originally intended—that is, to provide insurance against declared terrorist incidents, including when carried out by chemical, biological or other similar means. Schedule 2 of this bill amends the disclosure requirements for eligible employee share schemes. You may recall, Deputy Speaker, that the government made changes to the taxation treatment of certain employee share schemes last year. We made those changes because we wanted to spur innovation and entrepreneurship in the economy, as well as help Australian businesses be more competitive in recruiting and retaining talent in the international labour market. Following on from that, and as part of the National Innovation and Science Agenda, the government announced it would remove the requirement for disclosure documents given to employees under an ESS to be made public when they are lodged with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, and would consult on making ESS more user-friendly. The exposure draft of this bill and a consultation paper containing various proposals to make ESS more user-friendly were released concurrently on 26 October 2016. Comments on the exposure draft were due on 2 November 2016, and the bill was introduced to the parliament on 1 December. Feedback on the bill was incorporated into the bill prior to its introduction in this House. Several industry bodies representing start-ups and their employees, such as AVCAL, Employee Ownership Australia and New Zealand, and the Business Council of Co-operatives and Mutuals, were strongly supportive of the disclosure measures contained in the bill. Consultation on proposals to make ESS more user-friendly closed on 7 December 2016. The government is seeking feedback on ways to improve ESS for all companies, including but not limited to start-ups. The government is still considering the submissions received on this important issue. This bill ensures that ESS disclosure documents lodged by eligible companies will no longer need to be made public if all companies in the group are unlisted, have been incorporated for less than 10 years, and have an aggregated turnover of less than $50 million. This helps start-ups to track skilled employees at a time when companies might be cash-poor, because it ensures that their commercially sensitive information is not unnecessarily made public. However, this bill does not absolve any company from the requirement to provide disclosure of ESS documents to employees. Companies will still be required to comply with their disclosure obligations under the Corporations Act, including the obligation to provide updated information to employees where there is any material change to the terms of the ESS offer. Under the measures in this bill, all comparable start-ups have the benefit of the same disclosure regime. Employees' remuneration arrangements will no longer be made publicly available merely because a company has offered an ESS. This was strongly supported by the major industry bodies representing both start-ups and their employees. Also, the measures in the bill are not designed to relieve start-up companies of the requirement to make appropriate public disclosure of an offer of securities to the public for the purpose of raising capital for the company. Different disclosure obligations for an equity-raising campaign versus an ESS are justified. A fundraising exercise is open to the public broadly, and potential retail investors must be provided with the information needed to make an informed investment decision. An ESS, on the other hand, is designed to facilitate start-up companies to attract and incentivise employees, at a time when the company seeking to establish itself and is cash-poor. An ESS forms part of an employee's remuneration arrangements. The measures in this bill not only remove an impediment to entrepreneurialism but also create benefits for start-up companies and their potential employees and contractors. In response to the question from the member for Chifley, it is also important to note at this stage that—the arrangements as previously articulated in this House in relation to crowd-sourced equity funding—not all start-ups will look to raise funds from the public in relation to crowd-sourced equity funding arrangements, so these additional disclosure requirements under the crowd-sourced equity funding framework are only relevant in those circumstances. Schedule 3 of this bill adds six entities to Deductible Gift Recipient specific listings in division 30 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. These are: the Australasian College of Dermatologists; the College of Intensive Care Medicine of Australia and New Zealand; the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists; Australian Science Innovations Incorporated; The Ethics Centre Incorporated; and Cambridge Australia Scholarships Limited. Obtaining deductible gift recipient status will help these listed entities attract public financial support for their activities, as taxpayers can claim an income tax deduction for certain gifts to deductible gift recipients. Schedule 4 provides ongoing income tax relief to ex gratia disaster assistance payments made to eligible New Zealand Special Category Visa (subclass 444) holders. Providing ongoing tax relief to these payments may provide more money in hand for people affected by natural disasters, and provide recipients with certainty as they will be assured that their payments will be free from tax or that a tax rebate will be available. The proposed amendments will also align the tax treatment of these payments to the tax treatment of the equivalent payments made to Australians. Finally, schedule 5 of this bill introduces amendments to the client money regime. In October 2015, the government announced its response to the Financial System Inquiry, which included a number of measures to improve consumer protections. This bill delivers on the government's commitment to protect consumers by better protecting client moneys in relation to over-the-counter derivatives and ensuring that an investor's money is adequately protected when held by intermediaries. This bill also brings Australia into line with other developed countries with strong client protection regimes. Clients, especially retail clients, have a right to expect that their client money is used for purposes they reasonably anticipate. Because of our commitment, client money will no longer be vulnerable to the kinds of complex risks retail clients would not ordinarily expect. So, while still acknowledging that the ultimate consequences of investment decisions rest with clients, this bill provides clients with the protections to which they are entitled. The bill also gives ASIC the power to monitor the use of derivative client moneys. It does this by way of the client money reconciliation and reporting rules. Schedule 1 to this bill will apply from 1 July 2017; schedule 2 will commence from the date of royal assent; schedule 3, on commencement; schedule 4 will apply on 1 January, 1 April, 1 July or 1 October, to occur after the day this act receives royal assent; and schedule 5 will apply 12 months and one day from the date of royal assent. I commend this bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 104 18:46 Ms O'DWYER LKU Higgins by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Superannuation Amendment (PSSAP Membership) Bill 2016 104

Superannuation Amendment (PSSAP Membership) Bill 2016

Second Reading 104 18:47 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner The Superannuation Amendment (PSSAP Membership) Bill 2016 enables certain members of the Public Sector Superannuation Accumulation Plan, PSSap, who move to non-Commonwealth employment to choose to continue to make contributions to the scheme. That better aligns the PSSap with superannuation schemes in the rest of the economy and it means that public servants are not forced to move to another superannuation scheme. It follows changes from 1 July 2015 which saw members pay the administrative costs of the PSSap rather than the Commonwealth. That change, too, brought the scheme more in line with private sector arrangements. It has been estimated that there are nearly 90,000 contributing members and around 40,000 people who have money with PSSap but are no longer paying into it. As has been pointed out by David Donaldson in The Mandarin: At the moment, APS employees who go to work for a state government or move into the private sector are unable to nominate a Public Sector Superannuation Accumulation Plan account as the place to pay new super. Instead, they need to choose between keeping the money paid by the APS in that account and having new super put into a separate fund—with the extra ongoing costs that brings—and moving their money out of the PSSAP, which also entails extra costs. This bill will ensure that PSSap is modernised and, given that its members are paying its costs, rather than taxpayers, it is a perfectly appropriate measure. However, when we speak about superannuation, it is important to recognise some of the other measures that this government is attempting to pursue. This government has attempted, through its negotiations with the Public Service, to reduce the employer superannuation rate, attempting to remove any mention of the employer superannuation contribution rate of 15.4 per cent from new agreements. That would mean that the finance minister and the public service minister could instruct APS agencies to pay 9.5 per cent instead of 15.4 per cent. That reflects the debate that this House has seen over superannuation going back decades. The labour movement has always wanted to see superannuation extended and broadened, ensuring that superannuation is accessible to ordinary working Australians. Labor built our superannuation system and will always work to ensure it is fair, sustainable and sets Australians up for a comfortable life in retirement. We do not see superannuation as being for the few; we see it as being for the many. More than two decades ago, Labor created universal superannuation and, last term, Labor introduced legislation to increase the superannuation guarantee. But at every time we see the coalition attempting to frustrate the goals of universal superannuation. In 1994, the member for Warringah said: Compulsory superannuation is one of the biggest con jobs ever foisted by government on the Australian people. And then we saw under both the Howard government and the Abbott-Turnbull government a freezing of the superannuation guarantee. When they are in opposition, they talk the good talk about superannuation but, when they come into government, they freeze the superannuation guarantee. They themselves are happy to take 15 per cent as parliamentarians if they were elected after 2004, but they do not want low- and middle-income Australians to see the same level of superannuation go into their accounts. And, when they came into office, the Liberals and Nationals got rid of the low-income superannuation contribution, only to then bring it back under a slightly tweaked name. So, whenever we debate superannuation reform in this place, we always do so against a backdrop of a history that has shown that Labor is the party—the only party—that fights for super and fights for better retirement incomes in middle Australia. Bill Shorten and Labor have ensured that we fight not only for expanding superannuation to low- and middle-income Australia but also to ensure that our superannuation tax concessions are fair and sustainable. The current system delivers half of all tax concessions to the top fifth of income earners. That is not fair and it is not fiscally sustainable. Labor believes that the current proposals that the government has put forward belatedly to close some superannuation tax loopholes do not go far enough, either in terms of budget savings or in terms of fairness. Labor's Senator Katy Gallagher and the shadow Treasurer, Chris Bowen, have proposed a package that improves on the government's proposals by $1.4 billion over the forward estimates and $18.9 billion over the medium term. That includes lowering the annual non-concessional contributions cap to $75,000. Parliamentary Budget Office analysis has shown that only 0.7 per cent of taxpayers made non-concessional contributions worth more than $100,000 in 2012-13. Eighty-six per cent of taxpayers made no non-concessional contributions. So we believe it is appropriate to bring down the annual non-concessional contributions cap. Labor believes we need to bring down the high-income super contribution threshold to $200,000. The government is proposing that it be $250,000. Again, Parliamentary Budget Office analysis estimates that less than four per cent of taxpayers would be affected by the change. It is a change which would deliver significant revenue to the budget bottom line—more than $7 billion over the course of the decade. Labor opposes the government's new superannuation tax loopholes. While the government is saying it is closing loopholes with one hand, with the other it is opening new ones. The proposal of allowing for catch-up concessional contributions and tax deductibility for personal superannuation contributions will overwhelmingly benefit high-income earners while having a more than $12 billion impact on the budget over the course of the next decade. With net debt having nearly doubled since the coalition came to office and with our triple-A credit rating under threat, Labor does not believe that these are appropriate new superannuation tax breaks to put in place. But we do support the measure today. The introduction of the PSSap was a sensible modernisation, ensuring that the accumulation arrangements for former public servants are the same as for those in the private sector. It makes no sense to see former public servants forced to maintain multiple superannuation accounts, nor to force them to move PSSap account balances to another superannuation account. It reduces transaction costs and increases the retirement incomes of those great public servants who use the PSSap. This is important because the superannuation funds operated by the government are among the largest in our superannuation system. Currently we have two major agencies with responsibility for government super: ComSuper and Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation. ComSuper performs the administrative role for most super schemes for ADF members and government employees. These schemes are among the largest and most complex occupational superannuation schemes in Australia. They have a combined membership of over 700,000 contributors, pensioners and preserved-benefits members. ComSuper employs 482 staff, all of them here in the nation's capital—well, here for now, as long as Barnaby Joyce does not have his way and moves them off somewhere to regional Australia, as he appears to be attempting to do with every public servant's job here in Canberra. The Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation is a corporate Commonwealth entity and the trustee of most government and Defence super schemes and retirement income streams. It has responsibility for investments and products for members. It has over $30 billion under management, pays pensions to more than 200,000 retirees and was itself formed by the merger of three previous Commonwealth super trustee bodies. Because these two agencies both deal with the activities of the same 700,000 people, there is considerable overlap in their activities. Both sides of the House are interested in reducing duplication and finding sensible efficiencies within the Commonwealth Public Service. Labor supports these sensible changes and recognises those who have worked hard to ensure that these schemes operate successfully and with the same transparency and rigor that applies to private sector schemes. But, whenever we are talking about superannuation, it must be reiterated that the coalition has never and will never be a friend to superannuation. The coalition has fought only for tax breaks to the top end of town and never for universal superannuation that would benefit a great many Australians. 18:57 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith The Superannuation Amendment (PSSAP Membership) Bill 2016 allows members of the Public Sector Superannuation Accumulation Plan who pursue employment outside of the public sector to remain contributory members of the scheme. This is a sensible reform and one that is supported by myself and my Labor colleagues. At present, former public sector employees are unable to remain contributory members of the scheme and must either consolidate their superannuation by moving their PSSap membership monies into a separate superannuation account or maintaining multiple super accounts. Superannuation is complicated enough. It is the lack of understanding of the superannuation system and people's own investments that lead to bad investment choices. There have been cases of individuals who have made bad investment choices and have suffered as a result with respect to the level of their retirement income and its sustainability into the future. Of course, there were many Australians who, through no fault of their own, saw much of their superannuation savings whittled away as a result of bad banking practices in the United States which resulted in the global financial crisis and spread throughout the world. Basically no-one's investments, be they in superannuation or in other managed investment vehicles, were immune from the devastating effects of the financial crisis. So it is important that superannuation is as simple as possible and is as comprehendible and understandable as possible. Contributing to that is ensuring that people are able to, where they choose to and where they want to, maintain membership of a superannuation fund that they know and trust. With the advent of choice of superannuation funds, it is important that all superannuation fund members get the right to exercise that choice and to remain members of the fund that they wish to contribute to during their working lives to maintain a decent standard of living in retirement. Maintaining membership of a scheme someone knows should be a contributory factor to the stability of the superannuation scheme and to providing certainty for people in terms of their investments. That is what this reform does, and that is why it is worthy of support from the parliament. Labor are of course very proud of the Australian superannuation system and its role in establishing what is now close to $4 trillion in investment funds. Labor are committed to ensuring that Australians reach retirement with financial independence and security. We are proud of the policies over successive Labor governments that have established that wealth of investment funds and also provided for stable retirement incomes for Australians at pension age. Superannuation has also meant big changes for the Australian people and for their living standards, particularly in retirement. Superannuation was not always a popular concept in Australia. In seeking to establish the system, Labor overcame significant opposition from interest groups concerned by the burden of its implementation and ongoing cost to businesses. It is no secret that conservative MPs and leaders throughout the country railed against the establishment of compulsory superannuation. It was first proposed under the Hawke government as a means of providing for secure and stable retirement incomes, as part of an arrangement with the Australian union movement through the Prices and Incomes Accord. In the early nineties, when it became obvious that Australia would soon experience a significant shift in demographics through an ageing population, the Keating government pursued this reform and pursued further reform in compulsory employer contributions to superannuation funds. As of June 2015, Australians have over $2 trillion in superannuation assets. The bill before us today creates a new subcategory of ordinary employer-sponsored members of PSSap, referred to in the bill as 'former Commonwealth ordinary employer-sponsored members', and their new employers will become 'designated employers'. The changes in this bill better align the Commonwealth scheme with the private funds, which allow members to continue making contributions when they change employment. An added benefit of the changes in this bill is to help keep the costs associated with the administration and management of superannuation funds down. Often when a member shifts funds or changes membership of a particular fund, there can be an exit fee associated with that. There can be new fees in establishing a new fund, and there can be changes and differences in the type of insurance people take out as membership of those particular funds. These changes will also boost the retirement incomes of those affected. They reduce that impost upon people and some of the costs associated with shifting funds, particularly when someone is very happy with the fund they are operating in and does not wish to shift their savings but has to because of a change of employment. These reforms enhance the flexibility of our superannuation system, and ensure that people can continue to invest and save in the fund that meets their needs and that they are familiar with and comfortable with into the future. The bill places some restrictions on maintaining contributory PSSap membership. For example, a person must have been a Commonwealth employee or office holder for a continuous period of at least 12 months. They must also be engaged in non-Commonwealth employment in respect of which their employer has a superannuation guarantee obligation. These are sensible restrictions, ensuring that maintaining PSSap membership into the future is a part of this scheme. In conclusion, I support this bill. Labor supports this bill. It contains sensible amendments to our superannuation system that maintain the integrity of ensuring people get the choice of fund when it comes to planning for their retirement incomes. It also ensures that the system provides the necessary flexibility to allow people to make that choice under this superannuation system. I commend the bill to the House. 19:04 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston I thank all members who have contributed to the debate on the Superannuation Amendment (PSSAP Membership) Bill 2016. The bill enables members of the Public Sector Superannuation Accumulation Plan, known as PSSap, a fully-funded scheme that has operated as the default fund for new Commonwealth employees since 2005, to maintain contributory membership of the scheme if they move to non-Commonwealth employment. This change will bring the PSSap into line with accumulation schemes in the broader superannuation industry, which commonly allow members to remain as contributory members when they change employment. In recent years, there have been a range of government initiatives aimed at reducing the administration costs borne by scheme members. The changes in this bill complement these initiatives, as PSSap members who move to non-Commonwealth employment will no longer have to incur the costs of maintaining multiple superannuation accounts or rolling the moneys held in their PSSap account over to a new superannuation account. The ability to maintain PSSap contributory membership on ceasing Commonwealth employment will be subject to some restrictions. In particular, a person must have been a Commonwealth employee or office holder for a continuous period of at least 12 months and be engaged in employment in respect of which their new employer has superannuation guarantee obligations. Specific superannuation arrangements have been established for persons in various non-employee roles with the Commonwealth. For example, this includes members of the Australian Defence Force. Those who move from Commonwealth employment to such rules are not affected by the changes. They will continue to be subject to the Commonwealth superannuation arrangements, established specifically for these persons. The changes in the bill will ensure that Commonwealth superannuation arrangements remain contemporary and complement broader initiatives aimed at reducing the administration costs borne by scheme members. I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 108 19:07 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Customs and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 108

Customs and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016

Second Reading 108 19:08 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair I rise to speak on the Customs and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016. I say at the start: Labor will support this bill today which amends the Customs Act 1901, the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act 1905 and the Maritime Powers Act 2013. The bill amends the Customs Act to: allow for the exemption from paying import declaration processing charges; extend the circumstances in which an application can be made to move, alter or interfere with goods for export that are the subject of customs control; clarify and simplify the provisions concerning the making of tariff concession orders, or TCOs, for made-to-order capital equipment; and remove some unnecessary and outdated provisions. The Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act will be amended to provide that the Commerce (Imports) Regulations 1940 may prescribe penalties for offences against those regulations. The bill amends the Maritime Powers Act to confirm that the powers under that particular act are able to be exercised in the course of passage through or above the waters of another country in a manner consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The bill enables Australia to honour its international agreements that specifically exempt certain imports from payment of fees at the border. Currently, section 71B of the Customs Act sets out when a person is liable to pay import declaration processing charges. Currently, there is no capacity within the legislation for a person to be exempt from paying these charges. As a result of the current section 71B, Australia is unable to honour its international obligations and the agreement that specifically exempts some imports from payment of fees at the border. The bill amends section 71B of the Customs Act to add another subsection, subsection (4), to allow the minister, by legislative instrument, to determine that some specified persons, some persons in respect of specified goods or specified persons in respect of specified goods are not liable to pay an import processing charge. The new subsection (6) allows for the refund of any charges paid where the person was exempt from paying. A new subsection (7) sets out that, if a person is liable to pay, it will be considered a debt due to the Commonwealth and that the fees may be recovered by action in a court of competent jurisdiction. There is also an amendment to clarify how debts can be recovered for unpaid warehouse declaration processing charges. Since April 2014, the screening process for liquids, aerosols and gels requires an initial screen. If the item triggers an alarm, it will be more thoroughly rescreened by removing the duty-free packaging. It is an offence under section 33 of the Customs Act to remove duty-free packaging from an item for any reason, including undertaking a second-stage screening. This bill amends the Customs Act to extend the circumstances in which a person can apply to move, alter or interfere with goods for export that are subject to customs control. So it is a necessary amendment. It means that screening staff at an international airport will be able to remove an item that triggers an alarm from sealed duty-free packaging and open a sealed duty-free bag and screen items without breaking the Customs Act. So it is a necessary thing for the protection of our borders. The tariff concession orders are granted on imported goods when substitute goods are not being produced in Australia. Those products can be imported at a free rate of customs duty. The Commonwealth of Australia Tariff Concessions Gazette publishes about 50 new TCOs each month. Once published, Australian manufacturers have 50 days to object to the granting of a TCO by providing evidence of the same product being manufactured or produced in Australia. The gazette also publishes the TCO applications that have been reworded, refused, revoked or reissued, or those made. Currently, for Australian manufacturers to apply to have a tariff concession order revoked or to object to the making of a TCO, they must meet two tests. Australian businesses must demonstrate that at least 25 per cent of factory costs of substitutable goods occur in Australia, and that a substantial process of manufacture is also undertaken in Australia. These two tests must be met. The explanatory memorandum actually says that goods: … are taken to have been produced in Australia if, in addition to the goods being wholly or partly manufactured in Australia, not less than one quarter of the factory works or costs of the goods is comprised of the value of Australian labour, materials or overhead expenses incurred in Australia. Providing this evidence requires Australian businesses to provide details of confidential accounting evidence as part of the objection process. The department has confirmed that Australian manufacturers who have objected to a TCO being issued have been easily able to demonstrate they exceed the 25 per cent factory or works cost test. Following consultation with stakeholders and industry, this bill will reduce the burden of proof on Australian companies by removing the 25 per cent requirement. So it is a red-tape-reduction measure, supported by stakeholders and supported by business. And Labor will support it, obviously. Schedule 5 clarifies the requirements for an Australian producer of made-to-order capital equipment when seeking to revoke a tariff concession order or object to the making of a TCO. The amendment extends the evidentiary window for a local manufacturer to prove their capability of production of substitutable goods. The time frame will be extended from two years to five years on the basis that a two-year period is insufficient for an Australian manufacturer to demonstrate capability for large-scale capital works like unique mining machinery, given the amount of time and labour involved in such manufacture. The Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act contains a number of offence provisions that impose penalties. Schedule 7 of the bill amends the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act to allow an officer to inspect and examine 'goods that are, or that the officer reasonably believes are, goods prescribed by the regulations' that are imported. Schedule 8 confirms that, in a manner consistent with the intent of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, powers under the Maritime Powers Act can be exercised in the course of passage through or above the waters of another country. Currently, the Maritime Powers Act prevents the exercise of powers at a place in another country except in defined circumstances. For the purposes of the act, a 'country' is defined to include territorial seas and other waters. Finally, Schedule 9 repeals the Customs (Tariff Concession System Validations) Act 1999 and the Import Processing Charges (Amendment and Repeal) Act 2002, as these acts are now redundant. In the circumstances, this is the sort of bill that Labor would draft if we were in office. I commend the government for their cooperation with the Labor opposition in briefing us about the purpose of this legislation and its contents, and we will support the bill accordingly. 19:16 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston I rise to sum up this bill and to thank the member for Blair for his contribution to it on behalf of the Labor Party and to thank the other members who have spoken on it. The Customs and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2016 contains amendments to the Customs Act 1901, the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act 1905 and the Maritime Powers Act 2013. The amendments to the Customs Act do a number of things. They provide for regulations to be made that would allow the defence minister to revoke a licence or permission to export goods if he or she is satisfied the exportation of the goods would prejudice the security, defence or international relations of Australia. This amendment strengthens Australia's defence and strategic goods export control regime by providing the defence minister with greater flexibility to revoke export permits before goods are exported from Australia. It also streamlines the Australian Trusted Trader accreditation process, removing the need for trusted traders to enter into an initial agreement conferring interim trusted trader status, so that only one agreement which confers full trusted trader status is entered into with each trusted trader. It also enables Australia to comply with international agreements and treaties involving the application of fees and charges at the border by allowing certain parties or goods to be exempt from liability to pay the import declaration processing charge. It enables the collection of unpaid import declaration processing charges and unpaid warehouse declaration processing charges as debts to the Commonwealth. The amendment also allows for screening authorities at international airports to open sealed duty-free bags containing liquids, aerosols and gels to enable them to screen the contents while they are subject to customs control. It also removes red tape on Australian manufacturers who object to the making of, or seek to revoke, a tariff concession order by removing one of the two tests they have to meet to prove their case. It clarifies when an Australian manufacturer can apply to have a tariff concession order for made-to-order capital equipment revoked or object to the making of such an order. Finally, it repeals an obsolete provision of the Customs Act that allowed goods to be temporarily imported for the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games and related events. In addition, the amendments to the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Act will reflect modern drafting practices and do three additional things: firstly, clarify that an officer may inspect or examine goods that the officer reasonably believes are goods prescribed by the regulations; secondly, change the authority for forming an opinion on disclosing certain information as part of a trade description from the Governor-General to the minister; and, thirdly, insert a head of power to allow the Commerce (Trade Descriptions) Regulation 2016 to prescribe penalties not exceeding 50 penalty units to offences against those regulations. The amendments proposed in schedule 8 of the bill are intended to confirm the government's clear intent that the powers under the Maritime Powers Act are able to be exercised in the course of passage through or above the waters of another country in a manner consistent with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Finally, Schedule 9 of the bill repeals the Customs (Tariff Concession System Validations) Act 1999 and the Import Processing Charges (Amendment and Repeal) Act 2002, as those acts are now redundant. Once again, thank you very much to all members who have contributed to the bill. I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 110 19:21 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Customs Tariff Amendment Bill 2016 110

Customs Tariff Amendment Bill 2016

Second Reading 110 19:22 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair I say at the start that Labor will support this legislation. The Customs Tariff Amendment Bill 2016 amends the Customs Tariff Act 1995 in four ways: it repeals schedule 1 of the tariff act, which sets out classes of countries and places to which special rates apply; it repeals section 16A of the tariff act, which provided now expired safeguard provisions within the Thailand-Australia Free Trade Agreement; it inserts additional notes into chapters 7, 8 and 19 of schedule 3 to the Customs Tariff Act, to clarify the classification of certain fruits, vegetables and pasta; and it amends the text of item 44 of schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act, to provide for an end date for the item in line with announcements in last year's budget. The bill is compatible with human rights and projects $220 million in additional revenue over the forward estimates. Regarding the repeal of schedule 1 of the Customs Tariff Act, currently section 1 of the act lists countries and places where special non-reciprocal rates of customs duty apply. Some goods originating from countries listed in schedule 1 are entitled to a preferential rate of customs duty. For example, frozen sweet corn imported from Albania would be subject to a preferential rate of customs duty of four per cent rather than the general customs duty rate of five per cent. The bill repeals section 1 to facilitate the content being moved to the Customs Tariff Regulations 2004. When moved to the regulations, it becomes easier, of course, to update countries and places as required in a more timely way. I note the Bills Digest prepared for this bill questioned the explanatory memorandum's rationale for omitting this schedule and moving it to the regulations. It suggests there is no evidence to suggest there will be more significant and frequent changes required to the list of countries and places. Since being enacted on 1 July 1996, schedule 1 has only been amended seven times, with the last amendment occurring five years ago, in March 2012. The bill also repeals section 16A of the Customs Tariff Act. The Thailand-Australia Free Trade Agreement includes safeguard provisions for certain tuna products, like canned tuna, and some pineapple products. These safeguard provisions were activated at the discretion of the minister for agriculture and expired in December 2008 by mutual agreement from both governments. It is a redundant section; it is appropriate to repeal it. Schedule 3 of the act classifies goods according to the International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, which sets out the rate of the duty applied to the goods. New notes will be added to chapters 7, 8 and 19 of schedule 3 of the Customs Tariff Act to assist with the classification of goods and only have the force of law for goods imported into Australia. This section of the bill answers the important question: when is pasta really a seafood won ton and what type of vegetable is a gherkin? Changes are required in response to two Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions about gherkins and seafood won tons. The first case sought to clarify whether gherkins should be classified in chapter 7 as an edible vegetable and be imported duty free or in chapter 20 as preparations of vegetables, fruit, nuts or other parts of plants, which would be subject to a five per cent tariff. The second AAT case dealt with the import of frozen dumplings and won tons with a seafood filling—I am filling in here, by the way!—to determine if these goods should be treated as seafood or pasta. In this example, it was unclear if a seafood won ton should be duty free under heading 1605 as 'crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates, prepared or preserved'; or if the seafood won tons should be subject to a five per cent duty and categorised under heading 1902 as 'pasta, whether or not cooked or stuffed—with meat or other substances—or otherwise prepared, such as spaghetti, macaroni, noodles, lasagne, gnocchi, ravioli and cannelloni; and couscous, whether or not prepared'. Often these issues arise when there are multiple products made with the same ingredients. For example, pasta and won tons are both made with flour and water. It might seem trivial, but the incorrect classification of gherkins and won tons has a real financial impact for Australia, overseas suppliers and consumers. The bill also clarifies the grey areas for the tariff treatment of vegetables, fruit, nuts, pasta and noodles. In the circumstances, we are also supporting the closure of the Enhanced Project By-law Scheme, which was announced in the 2016-17 budget. With that, I support the legislation. 19:27 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston I rise to sum up the debate on the Customs Tariff Amendment Bill 2016. In doing so, I thank the member for Blair for his contribution. The Customs Tariff Amendment Bill 2016 contains four amendments to the Customs Act 1901. The first amendment repeals schedule 1 of the act and moves it to the Customs Tariff Regulations 2004. Mr Husic interjecting— Mr TUDGE M2Y enabling timelier revisions of the list of countries and places eligible for preferential rates of customs duty—for example, in response to any changes in their level of development. I am being interjected on here, Mr Speaker! The SPEAKER 00APG As long as you are mindful of the clock! Mr TUDGE M2Y The second amendment removes expired provisions relating to the Thailand-Australia Free Trade Agreement. The third amendment adds three additional notes to schedule 3 of the act. Mr Husic 91219 Name them! Mr TUDGE M2Y These additional notes will ensure that domestic clarification of certain fruits, vegetables and pasta-like goods is consistent with Australia's international obligations following recent decisions by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Mr Husic interjecting— Mr TUDGE M2Y Mr Speaker, I am consistently being interjected on here, which makes it very difficult to complete this important summing-up speech! The final amendment gives effect to the closure of the Enhanced Project By-law Scheme, announced as part of the 2016-17 budget and effective from 3 May 2016. This amendment recognises the decline in the ability of the scheme to achieve the policy objective. I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 111 19:29 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. ADJOURNMENT 111 ADJOURNMENT National Affordable Housing Agreement 111 19:29 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney The Liberal-National government are prepared to put billions of dollars into property speculation. But we heard on the weekend in a story given to The Australian that they are going to cut the National Affordable Housing Agreement—the agreement that helps homeless people find a home, that helps provide affordable rental accommodation and public housing. This is a further indication of a government that is completely out of touch when it comes to the housing needs of ordinary Australians. We have a Prime Minister who told Jon Faine that what Australians should do is get rich parents, that parents should be helping their kids into the housing market. This is a confirmation of something: that this government has given up on the notion that an ordinary person with an ordinary job should be able to afford an ordinary home. In fact, they are saying that you need intergenerational wealth to get into the housing market in this country. We have a Deputy Prime Minister who says that with housing affordability the only problem is that everybody wants a harbour view. I can tell you, Mr Speaker, that is not the case. People want a modest roof over their heads, and they cannot afford that today. We have the former Treasurer, Mr Hockey, who said that Australians should just get a good job that pays good money. Well, if only I had thought of that! What a policy insight that one was! And the current Minister for Urban Infrastructure said, when he was asked about Sydney housing affordability: I suspect the people of Sydney have a lot more things that they're thinking about on a daily basis than that. Well, that is certainly not true for the millions of young Australians and their parents who fear that they will be locked out of the housing market for ever. It is certainly not true of the people who are struggling along in the rental market in the insecurity of knowing that their landlord might decide at the very last minute that the fact that they have been a very good tenant does not matter, that they want to turn the property over. And it certainly is not the case for the thousands of Australians who are homeless every night—in fact, an increasing number of Australians who are homeless every night. This government has cut homelessness funding—$44 million a year for new build alone has been cut. They have scrapped the National Rental Affordability Scheme, which delivered almost 40,000 new affordable rental dwellings before those opposite killed it. They have defunded housing and homelessness organisations because they are frightened of what those organisations say and do, standing up for ordinary Australians who believe, as we all do on this side, that people deserve a roof over their heads. There is no minister for housing, which is an insight into the importance that this government puts on housing policy and, as I said, they are now proposing that they will get rid of the National Affordable Housing Agreement. On the National Affordable Housing Agreement: they have dumped this story to The Australian coming out of the Report on government services saying, 'Well, there's been no real increase in social housing out of this.' That is actually not true. If you look at chapter 18 of this report, it in fact shows that there has been a 16½ thousand—16,533—increase in the number of dwellings in public and community housing: 'social housing', as we call it. It talks about how the big increase has been in social housing which, in fact, is something that Labor supports. We believe that community housing is a very appropriate vehicle for providing affordable rental accommodation to needy Australians. I also found this terrifically ironic: a promise to reduce homelessness by seven per cent had also not been met, with the homelessness rate instead rising to 17 per cent. That is tragic! That is a national shame, and it is a national shame caused by those opposite because they have cut all of the new building funding—$44 million a year—that was set aside by Labor in the National Homelessness Partnership to build new houses for homeless Australians. They cut that in their first budget and then they went, 'Oh, I wonder why homelessness is going up?' Who would have thought? They have cut funding for homelessness services. Who would have thought that that would increase homelessness in this country! Those opposite should hang their heads in shame. Labor had a target to reduce homelessness; they gave up on that target! They simply do not even pretend that we want to reduce homelessness in this country. They have no housing minister and no housing policies and then they turn around and say, 'Oh, we've got a real problem with homelessness. We're going to get rid of all that other government funding that will help reduce this problem.' This is a government that has presided over unaffordable housing to buy, unaffordable housing to rent and fewer homes for homeless Australians. (Time expired) Petrie Electorate: Redcliffe Peninsula Line 112 19:35 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie I am a patient man. But I am not a patch on the people of Petrie: 132 years is a long time to spend waiting for a train, but that is exactly what generations of residents in my electorate have done. First mooted in 1884, it took the coalition government—this coalition government—to come to the party with the funding needed to make the Redcliffe Peninsula rail line happen. Labor of course had their chance—and to be fair, they did pay it some lip service. They signed a bit of paper and made their own version of a commitment until it came to the 2013 election, when the previous member for Petrie said that under Luke Howarth and under a federal coalition government this would never happen. At which point they politicised the issue. They said we would not fund it—delayed indefinitely. And at the 2016 election, just four or five weeks before the election, the previous member, who is now the state attorney-general, once again said it would be delayed indefinitely. 'Delayed indefinitely,' they said. When we were elected we put taxpayers' money where it rightly belonged: into the Redcliffe Peninsula rail line. It opened in October 2016. It now connects those in the Moreton Bay region, one of the fastest-growing regions in Australia, mind you, with Brisbane's CBD. It marries affordable housing with jobs; it links lifestyle and opportunity; it cuts travel time; it eases road congestion; and it reduces emissions. And these were just some of the reasons that we worked to find the funding needed to make the project happen. So on 4 October, when the Prime Minister joined me in boarding the first train to travel from Redcliffe out to Petrie, it was a proud day. It was a proud day not just for all levels of government but for the Australian coalition government—for me, personally, but for the entire community and for generations of people who had waited for this to happen. As we handed control of the line to the Palaszczuk Labor government and Queensland Rail, we trusted they shared our commitment to the people of Moreton Bay. Sadly, they soon proved their loyalty lay elsewhere. Just days after the Prime Minister and I took that first trip, Queensland's then transport minister, Stirling Hinchliffe, received some disturbing news. According to the report of the Strawn commission of inquiry, released just a fortnight ago—and which I have here—just days after that first trip, Mr Hinchliffe was told of impending disruptions and delays. Mr Hinchliffe—who has since resigned as transport minister—has conceded he received information about driver shortages more than six months before that first trip, in March 2016. Those warnings materialised as a mass service disruption so that two weeks after that first trip one in eight trains was being cancelled. By Christmas Day, this had blown out to one in three. This affected commuters at Bald Hills, Carseldine, Zillmere and right along that Caboolture line. The added demand from the Redcliffe-Peninsula rail services collided with the slickness of the relationship between Labor and the unions. The trains virtually ground to a halt and Queenslanders were left stranded at the station. That the Labor government was powerless to prevent this still-unfolding debacle beggars belief, and it gives an astonishing insight into the fundamental flaw of the foundations upon which the Labor Party is built. Why were they powerless to act? It is because they value their relationship with the unions more than they value the people they represent. And they let the tail wag the dog. The report of the Queensland Rail train crewing practices commission of inquiry was released just two weeks ago. We have since been exposed to one shameful admission after another, each implicating the Palaszczuk government more than the last. These include revelations that union crewing rules and restrictions reduced productivity to the point where train drivers spend less than one-third of their shifts actually driving a train. That is absolutely amazing. They include that driver recruitment practices crippled the line. And, according to the report, we are looking at up to two years before full service is restored. While the union holds the rail line to ransom, I guess Queenslanders can only exercise patience: stuck at the station, just waiting for a train. National Sorry Day 113 Swan Electorate: City of South Perth, Swan Electorate: Infrastructure 114 19:45 Mr IRONS HYM Swan I would like to take this opportunity to update the House on one of the local governments in my electorate, the City of South Perth. For those who are not familiar with the great state of Western Australia, the City of South Perth is bordered on three sides by the Swan and Canning rivers, offering scenic parks and gardens and a beautiful view of the city of Perth from across the Swan. The City of South Perth includes a number of bowling and tennis clubs, two libraries, a bridge club and a range of many other community facilities and junior sporting clubs like the South Perth Junior Football Club and the Manning Rippers junior football club. This, combined with its prime location and its charming buildings, makes it a very popular suburb among local residents and tourists alike. On the weekend, the City of South Perth celebrated the opening of the Manning Community Hub, a $14 million project which has changed the face of Manning and is a fantastic facility for the broader South Perth community. In 2008, only a year after I was elected to represent the people of Swan, the City of South Perth consulted with its community members to assess options for the site in Manning bounded by Bradshaw Crescent, Conochie Crescent and Welwyn Avenue. The council found strong support for a community facility or a central hub which would include the relocated Manning library. During the community consultation, the City of South Perth endeavoured to target a broad-ranging demographic to ensure the project would fit the needs of kids, teenagers, families and its senior residents. What has resulted is a new state-of-the-art library and Manning community hall, which will house a number of community groups to support the vibrant and growing community of Manning and surrounding suburbs. The Manning Community Hub's design provides opportunities for public art displays, not-for-profit organisations and family-orientated services. On Saturday, the City of South Perth held an open day for the Manning Community Hub. There were family activities and entertainment, and it was a great opportunity for local residents to explore this exciting project. I attended the open day with my wife, Cheryle, who is also a councillor for the City of South Perth, and we were both very impressed by the centre. It also was an opportunity to catch up with some of my constituents. I ran into an old mate, Kim Fancote, who is a local Manning resident and former WAFL player for the mighty Perth Demons. I would like to congratulate the City of South Perth for their investment in their local community and look forward to many local events at the new hub in years to come. In addition to the hub, the City of South Perth secured $2.5 million of federal funding in October of last year through the National Stronger Regions Fund. The City of South Perth's Connect South project proposal demonstrated the criteria of contributing to economic growth, addressing disadvantage within the region, increasing investment and building partnerships, and achieving viable and sustainable project outcomes. The total cost of $7.5 million going towards Connect South will deliver an enhanced and invigorated Mends Street precinct, and will play a key role in the long-term economic and social growth of the South Perth peninsula. I would again like to congratulate the City of South Perth on their successful application and I am eager to see the South Perth region transform. As the local federal member of parliament, it is great to have such a strong working relationship with local councils within the electorate. I met with the City of South Perth's chief executive officer, Geoff Glass, and Mayor Sue Doherty last month to discuss their future plans and direction for the city, as I do with all the local councils in my electorate. It was good to see how eager they both are to further enhance and grow the wonderful community that is South Perth for their residents and to establish South Perth as a major tourist destination within WA. They also have a plan to have another commemorative-type building to celebrate the 10th Light Horse Regiment, which will be revealed in the future. I would also like to mention the Manning Road on-ramp, which I have been campaigning for since I came into parliament in 2008. In 2010, the coalition committed $10 million to the Manning Road on-ramp. Unfortunately, we did not win the election and Labor did not commit to the Manning Road on-ramp. In 2016 we have recommitted $20 million to the Manning Road on-ramp. Again, we got no commitment from Labor. But now that we are in a state election process, I am looking for both the Labor and Liberal state parties to commit to funding the balance of this Manning Road on-ramp. The local MLA, John McGrath, has been a strong supporter, and we have strong community support, with over 1,000 people responding to a survey saying they need the Manning Road on-ramp. I am hopefully looking for announcements from both sides of politics to support this strong community need. Again, I congratulate the City of South Perth for all the work that they do for their community. Climate Change 115 19:50 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith For many people across the country, the weekend just gone was almost too hot to handle. I wish to pay tribute to the many volunteer services, in particular rural fire services, paid fire brigades, police, ambulance and hospital staff, who are dealing with record heatwaves. Before this week, New South Wales had never experienced a February day above 42 degrees. That record was smashed on Friday, before Sydney's average temperatures reached 44 degrees on Saturday. According to the Climate Reanalyzer website, New South Wales and other parts of eastern Australia were the hottest places in the world on Saturday, and it was not much better for other states. On Sunday, four Queensland towns had their hottest day since records began, as Toowoomba reached 40 degrees and Birdsville hit 45.5 degrees. South Australia was no better, hitting 40 degrees, with 48.2 degrees in Renmark. Globally, 2016 was the hottest year on record. The last decade has been warmer than any other. Yet the Turnbull government has restated its commitment to more investment in coal-fired power stations—after recently announcing that it would consider taking money from the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. I ask: how many climate records need to be broken before this government realises that climate change is happening? How many warnings do scientists and economists need to give this government before they take the issue of action on climate change seriously? This policy shift from the government is alarming and, if implemented, could potentially prove disastrous for our children's future. Thankfully, the major energy investors and suppliers are not buying it, with groups such as the Australian Energy Council, the electricity generators' own lobby group, labelling new coal-fired power plants 'uninvestable'. The New South Wales government has also refused to share the Turnbull government's disdain for renewable energy, with the New South Wales Minister for Energy and Utilities, Don Harwin, thanking all New South Wales electricity generators—gas, coal, hydro, wind and solar—for each playing their part during the recent heatwave. Even the 350,000 people with solar panels on their roofs warranted a thanks. This government's policy of attacking the renewable energy target, of lying about disruptions to power in South Australia in the wake of storms— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Kingsford Smith will just withdraw that unparliamentary term. He knows full well— Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 I withdraw. This government's misrepresentations about disruptions to power supply in South Australia in the wake of storms, its refusal to endorse wind and solar, its directing of funds away from wind and solar, and its dream of new coal-fired power plants say everything about this government's wrong priorities and lack of consideration for future generations and serve as a reminder of this Prime Minister's complete abandonment of his values and principles. The Australian people are now asking, 'What does this Prime Minister stand for?' He used to be the most forceful and eloquent advocate for action on climate change, for carbon pricing and for renewable energy. He is now the wilting flower of the parliament when it comes to action on climate change. He was once known as a conviction politician. It is now crystal clear that this Prime Minister stands for nothing except whatever will placate the radical right wing of his party and ensure that he keeps his job for a little longer. Climate change is impacting our lives and our economy just as climate scientists have been warning. The fire season is extending. Extreme weather events are getting more and more frequent. The Great Barrier Reef is dying. In recent years we have seen the frequency of some of these events increasing. For these reasons, there is a desperate need for a clear plan, leadership and action, now more than ever. Labor have that plan. Labor will take action on climate change because we have listened to the experts. We take their warnings seriously. We will institute an emissions trading scheme. We will institute new vehicle emissions standards. We will institute a separate baseline-and-credit ETS for the electricity system. We will undertake an electricity market modernisation review. We will ensure that carbon is captured on the land and put a trigger in the federal legislation. That is a plan for real action on climate change. Energy 116 19:55 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes We just heard from the member for Kingsford Smith how the Labor Party is putting the prosperity of this nation at such risk. He talks about the Labor Party's plan. Can you tell me, Member for Kingsford Smith: how much will your plan will cost? How much will it cost the consumers and businesses of Australia? Secondly, how much will it change the temperatures by? To the nearest 0.00 degrees would be fine. We have an energy affordability and reliability crisis in this nation. It is probably quite fitting that, at 5.36 this afternoon, we had a message from the Department of Parliament Services warning that there would be power outages to the Parliament House of Australia. As last Friday showed and the blackouts in South Australia have showed, we do not have enough baseload power in this country. Last Friday we had the aluminium smelter at Tomago forced to reduce its power. A busy paper mill at Tumut had power cuts. We had the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet asking all government buildings in this nation to set their thermostats at 26 degrees. We had my old schoolmate Don Harwin, the New South Wales Minister for Energy and Utilities, having to send out advice to New South Wales residents to move into shopping centres and not turn on their power at home. What will happen next summer? If we have a repeat of these weather conditions next summer, where will this nation be in supplying electricity? Next summer, Hazelwood, which supplies 20 per cent of Victoria's power, will not be there. Next summer, the population of this nation will have increased by something like 330,000 people. We struggled last Friday to provide enough electricity for the population of this nation. How are we going to do that if we lose Hazelwood power station and we have another 330,000 people in this nation who will have air conditioning, fridges and cooking and all the other appliances? You can build as many wind turbines as you like, but the bottom line is: when the wind does not blow, the power does not flow. That is what we have seen this summer. We have seen the wind turbines in this nation producing between one and two per cent of their total capacity. We are sleepwalking into a disaster for our nation. Electricity prices in this country are already double those of the USA. How can any industry that has to use power or turn the lights on be competitive, in a very competitive international market, if they are having to pay double the price that consumers and industry can get electricity for in the USA? We saw the member for Melbourne come into this chamber with a solar panel, thinking this was the solution. Yes, solar is a wonderful technology, but the reality is: the International Energy Agency shows that solar produces not one per cent of the world's power needs but 0.1 per cent—1/10th of one per cent. Even if we invest trillions of dollars buying solar panels from China, the International Energy Agency estimates that, by 2040, solar will produce 0.7 per cent. We will not even have cracked it for the one per cent. The problem that we have is Labor's insane policy of a 50 per cent renewable energy target. We have seen the damage that that has done to South Australia. We have seen the South Australian Premier say, 'We are running a big international experiment,' turning the businesses and the consumers of South Australia into guinea pigs. That is what the Labor Party wants to do to this nation. Affordable and reliable energy in the 21st century should be a given, but the Labor Party puts it at risk. It puts our prosperity risk, it puts tens of thousands of jobs at risk and it puts the health of Australians at risk, if they are unable to turn on the power on a hot summer's day. House of Representatives adjourned at 20:00 NOTICES 116 NOTICES

Monday, 13 February 2017

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Coulton ) took the chair at 10:30.

 

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 118 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Western Australian State Election 118 10:31 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I rise today to speak about a very sad development in the politics of my home state of Western Australia. Colin Barnett and the WA Liberals have abandoned the WA National Party, the party they formed government with in 2008, the party that saved Premier Barnett's political career and made him Premier. Colin Barnett has abandoned the WA Nationals in favour of Pauline Hanson's One Nation party. With friends like Colin Barnett, who needs enemies? I am not sure what Premier Barnett might have hoped his legacy to the people of WA might be—Elizabeth Quay, with its children's water park full of bacteria, or the new Perth children's hospital, with asbestos in the roof and lead in the water? Or will it be his 'pragmatic achievement' of ditching the WA Nationals and instead elevating and normalising Pauline Hanson's One Nation party in Western Australian politics? It is clear to me the Liberals are more concerned with doing deals with this One Nation party than with developing a plan for the future of Western Australia. One Nation will not secure jobs for Western Australia. One Nation will not provide a better education for your children in Western Australia. One Nation will not improve health care in Western Australia or fix the failing healthcare system. Their candidate for the Pilbara has said single mothers are 'lazy' and 'ugly'. One of their Queensland candidates called the Stolen Generation a 'concocted myth'. The One Nation party as a whole appears to reject science as a whole but particularly ignores any science or evidence concerning climate change. Some might remember that Australia recently held a seat on the United Nations Security Council—a Labor initiative, I might add. This coincided with the terrible and shocking shooting down of MH17 with the loss of 300 lives, 38 of which were Australian, over the Ukraine by Russian backed fighters. Now the Liberal Party is making deals with the party that wants Australia to exit the United Nations and whose leader, Senator Hanson, has drawn a moral equivalence between Australian leaders and the violent, authoritarian rule of President Vladimir Putin. This open democracy of Australia is in no way like Putin's Russia. This is Pauline Hanson's One Nation. This is the party Premier Barnett is dealing with. This is the party the Liberals want to form government with in Western Australia. This is the party the Prime Minister has brought back into the parliament with his double dissolution folly last July. The Western Australian Liberals have chucked their mates, the Nats, under the bus to try to limp over in this upcoming WA state election. They are prepared to sell out and deal with whatever they can to hold onto their power and get their pay cheques. In my electorate I know that only a Mark McGowan Labor government will build a new train station in Karnup, providing more opportunities for the people of Baldivis and Secret Harbour. The METRONET plan will ease congestion, free up parking and enable better public transport options to Warnbro station. What I know for sure is that now, beyond doubt, a vote for Colin Barnett and the WA Liberals is a vote for One Nation. Telecommunications 118 10:34 Mr BROAD 30379 Mallee Right across the electorate of Mallee we have had a wonderful harvest. There is grain everywhere. We are now harvesting the table grapes. We are harvesting the nectarines. I encourage people to go out to the supermarkets and buy this great grown Australian fruit. One thing that was evident across the harvest was people's inability to make a mobile phone call. This is a safety issue; this is a tourism issue; this is about people wanting to access data whilst they are trying to sit there and get their harvest off. I have listened to the arguments from Telstra, the arguments from Vodafone, the arguments from Optus—from different sides of the sphere—and I have to say that I do support regulated national roaming. I think that if we are going to look to the future, wherever you are going to travel you should be able to pick up whatever tower there is. Surely to goodness Telstra, Vodafone and Optus can get their heads together and work out how they can share the network rather than double building it right across Australia. The argument that Telstra puts forward that they have to make a profit in the city, and therefore they are going to build towers in the bush does not ring true. If I look across the electorate of Mallee, which is a third of the state of Victoria, I see they have not built a tower there in four years that has not been subsidised by the Mobile Phone Black Spot Program. Their argument does not ring true, and I think it is time that we ripped the bandaid off. They received $297 million as part of the universal service obligation. This has largely been superseded with the rollout of NBN—where people are not requiring a fixed line to their house any more—and I think that we should take the hundred million dollars that the federal government contributes to the universal service obligation and put that into the Mobile Phone Black Spot Program. Telstra is receiving $44 million for payphones annually—16,800 payphones that are usually vandalised, and are not used anymore because they are antiquated technology. We have to plan for the future. We have to rip the bandaid off. We have to make sure we are very strict on this—the ACCC is doing an inquiry. Let us make it so that if you are driving down the road and your phone can pick up a Telstra tower it does; if it can pick up an Optus tower it does; if it can pick up a Vodafone tower it does. This is 2017. Surely to goodness we need to be a bit more forward thinking, rather than continue to give Telstra $297 million under the universal service obligation to deliver pretty poor services and pretty expensive data to our regions. Moreton Electorate: Lunar New Year 119 10:37 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton Gong xi fa cai. As you well know, the Chinese diaspora in Moreton, and across Australia in fact, has been celebrating Lunar New Year for a few weeks—dancing lions, fireworks, great food and family and friends coming together. Unfortunately, because I have been a little busy with an inquiry looking into section 18C amendments to the Racial Discrimination Act, I have not been able to go to as many of the Chinese New Year events—or Lunar New Year events—in my electorate as I would have liked. However, on Friday night I attended the Chinese New Year celebrations of the Lions Club of Brisbane Chinese. It was a wonderful event well attended by community leaders and politicians—and wannabe politicians. Also, on Saturday I joined the Taiwanese Friendship Association and the Hakka Association to attend the Lunar New Year event that they had at the Sunnybank Performing Arts centre. In fact, DC, the president of the Hakka Association, gave me a wonderful shirt that I wore. I am sure that anyone who follows me on Twitter would know that it is a beautiful shirt, and I look forward to wearing it on every occasion—although I will not repeat what my wife said when I wore it home! Running from Australia Day right through to the weekend just gone, Lunar New Year is a great sign. Sadly, it signals the end of summer days on the beach between Monday and Friday and the fact that I can only can get to the beach on the weekend! The year of the rooster is significant—I know it comes between the year of the monkey and the year of the dog. As the father of rooster, I know what they are like. In fact, 2017 is a fire rooster year, which occurs once in every 60 years. The fire roosters are trustworthy with a strong sense of timekeeping and responsibility at work. At the event yesterday, the Hakka Association event, I announced that I am going to be working with the member for Maranoa, Mr Littleproud, on a project to track down the names and recognise the Chinese community in my home town of St George, because sadly a fire back in the early seventies wiped out a lot of the grave markers that designated Chinese people in the cemetery in St George. We are going to work on a memorial, track down the names and recognise them, because it is a big part of the Chinese community to make sure that you recognise your ancestors. I look forward to working with the Balonne Shire Council and also with the member for Maranoa and, more importantly, with my Chinese community, led by Lewis Lee, to recognise that. We will be convening a meeting shortly to commence that process. Durack Electorate: Infrastructure, Durack Electorate: Aged Care, Western Australian State Election 119 10:40 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I am very pleased today to speak about the tropical town of Carnarvon, in my electorate of Durack. As I have said in this chamber on many occasions, Carnarvon is home to beautiful weather and delicious fruit, not forgetting the vegetables, as well as being on the doorstep of some of Australia's best natural beauty, such as the Ningaloo Reef, Shark Bay and the Kennedy Range. One of this government's hallmarks—unlike Labor—is its support for and development of regional, rural and remote Australia. Right throughout the Gascoyne, this federal government has led a number of significant developments, including improved mobile phone reception through the Mobile Black Spot Program, which has led to a commitment of several new mobile phone towers in the region in locations such as the Cape Range National Park, the Francois Peron National Park and the Point Quobba blowholes. Tourists in Carnarvon will recognise those locations. Upgrades to the North West Coastal Highway and Australia's defence base at Learmonth are other important developments that this government has made in this very, very important and beautiful part of Australia. More good news is that in the second half of this year NBN construction will start in Carnarvon, creating faster internet for residents and businesses in the town and nearby regions. As the federal member for Carnarvon and also the Gascoyne, I am determined to ensure that Durack continues to have more aged-care places across the breadth of Durack. We need to work harder to ensure that regional Australians have the opportunity to age at home rather than being shipped off to the cities, Deputy Speaker—but I am not telling you anything that you do not already know. Last month I had the great honour of announcing 14 new aged-care places in Carnarvon, which will make a profound impact on the lives of the senior residents and their families. This has been a long time coming. Make no bones about it: these 14 places are wholly funded by the federal government as result of my advocacy and the good work of Minister Wyatt. It is worth noting that it is not just the federal Liberals who are delivering in the town. The Liberal-led state government is committing nearly $65 million for the amalgamation of the current school facilities, which will see kindergarten through to year 12 offered on one campus. Of course, this important decision might be at risk if Labor were to win the WA state election next month. The region will, however, greatly benefit with the state representation of Julee Westcott, who is the Liberal candidate for the North West Central seat. Julee is part of the furniture in the North West, having lived and worked in the Gascoyne for many years. I look forward to Julee winning this seat and to working with her, as she will be another strong female regional Liberal voice in the state parliament. Clement, Ms Tricia 120 10:43 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Hindmarsh On a sad note, I rise today to speak about someone who was such a great contributor to the electorate of Hindmarsh and the western suburbs and to senior citizens clubs in my electorate. I am speaking about the passing of Tricia Clement, who, sadly, passed away on 23 November. Tricia had been involved in the Active Elders senior citizens organisation in my electorate for many years, and that is where I first met her. She was also a member of the executive of the Council of the Aged in South Australia and assisted, volunteered and helped in aged care, social clubs and a whole range of things, helping them with getting grants for their groups et cetera. Tricia used the experience that she gained as a volunteer at COTA to help many groups get many grants, especially for the Active Elders senior citizens in my electorate. Together with her partner in crime, Jan, the treasurer of Active Elders, she would call me regularly for letters of support to assist them. Tricia not only helped Active Elders get grants but also helped many other senior citizens groups. Together they put together the paperwork for Marion council that got them a grant for a new kitchen. Tricia was also heavily involved in the applications and presentations that resulted in the Active Elders senior citizens winning the Every Generation award twice—not once but twice. That is a very big award in South Australia. She was involved in setting up the Justices of the Peace and community dinner that is now in its eighth year, and she was fundamental in helping set up the over-50s forums held by the Marion council every quarter. Tricia was a passionate person. She was passionate about involving older South Australians in the community. She helped set up the intergenerational programs at Ascot Park and Marion primary schools. This involved the senior citizens groups having interaction with some of the primary schools and getting to see what kids are doing and kids getting to see what senior citizens are doing. This was a wonderful idea and a wonderful concept which involved groups of women from Active Elders, for example, spending one afternoon every week in a classroom sharing art and craft activities with the kids. This was a wonderful way of linking the classroom to the neighbourhood and connecting the students and their learning with the local community. This led to a number of joint activities that greatly benefited both the children and the members of Active Elders. The main thing that Tricia Clement offered was her enthusiasm, her friendship and her humour. She will be sadly missed. At pretty well every Active Elders function that I went to, she would be there to greet me and to lobby me about getting a particular grant for something or about someone that she knew was in need and thought that I could assist. She will be deeply missed by all, but I am certain that her influence and her indelible mark on Active Elders and the wider community will be remembered for a very long time to come. Thank you, Tricia, and rest in peace. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 I thank the member for that heartfelt contribution. Grey Electorate: Rail 120 10:46 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey I rise today to give the House an update on the government's commitment to invest in the Adelaide-Tarcoola rail project, which falls within my electorate of Grey. As members are probably aware, it was only in April last year that Whyalla's Arrium steel works went into administration following a very negative statement in February that the future of the company was uncertain. The Prime Minister subsequently visited Whyalla in March to announce that the Turnbull government would bring forward by five years an Australian Rail Track Corporation upgrade of the track between Adelaide and Tarcoola. Subsequently, ARTC signed a contract with Arrium for the supply of the 1,200-kilometre-long, 60-kilogram-per-metre rail—replacing the old 47-kilogram-per-metre rail—with the first order being delivered on 8 September last year. This investment has already been of significant benefit to the region by supporting the continuation of the steelworks, which is now running near capacity and has an extra shift operating in the rolling mill. By the end of January this year, 5,790 welds had been completed at the ARTC Flashbutt Welding Depot in Port Augusta, and 125 kilometres of rail had arrived at the site ready for preparation to rail to the construction site. At the completion of the project, Arrium will have delivered over 70,000 tonnes of locally made steel to provide for 600 kilometres of completed rail upgrades. Two rails obviously make it 1,200 kilometres in total. I visited the flashbutt facility recently and was delighted to hear that, before that project, six of their 38 workers were long-term unemployed. Along with the obvious benefits the project has brought to Whyalla in supporting local manufacturing, the rail upgrade will also generate 130 direct jobs at the flashbutt facility and in laying the railway line when that project begins. The important thing about this project is that it needed to be done in the next five years anyway. Parts of the line are over 100 years old, so the investment has just brought forward necessary work. By moving to the heavier rail, axle weights are increased by two tonnes to an eight-tonne wagon. The area that the rail services is rich in copper and iron ore, with some currently mothballed and prospective mines all likely to benefit from the investment. Taxpayers' dollars are contributing to grow the economy, and it is a good investment. It is expected that the actual laying of the rail will begin in April and will be completed in 2019. The project demonstrates the government's commitment to the steel industry in Whyalla and to investing heavily in the nation's major transport infrastructure. Medicare 121 10:49 Mr SWAN 2V5 Lilley For 33 years Australians have come to regard Medicare as a national icon. Governments have come and gone, but Medicare has survived, despite the fact that particular conservative governments have sought to tear it down. There is a very good reason that Medicare has survived. It is because it brings our families the essential health security they need. It has survived because it is affordable, and it is also recognised around the world as one of the most efficient health-care delivery services on the planet. As I said before, governments have come and gone, and they have tried to take it away, but they have failed every time. The sad thing is that the attacks on Medicare are now stronger than they have ever been. That is what I am hearing from locals in the northern suburbs of Brisbane. I am not just hearing about the freeze on doctors and pathology rebates; I am hearing about the constant stream of issues that are now coming through Centrelink. The fact is that the payment system in Medicare is being deliberately white-anted by the government. They are intent on destroying the Medicare payment system. The community is suffering massive increases in waiting times for claims they lodged personally. Whether it is when they are told to put it in the drop box at the Centrelink office or when they apply through the smart phone app, those times have blown out to around six weeks for services which used to take three to five days. People can phone up and sit on the phone for hours and hours, and they are none the wiser. What I say to the public is, do not blame Medicare; blame the government. Do not blame the Centrelink staff; blame the government. They are trying to do through the back door what they tried to do through the front door prior to the last election. You cannot cut 5,000 staff from Centrelink and expect that there will not be consequences. This is a deliberate attempt to white-ant the very foundations of Medicare. Of course they try to plug the holes. They bring in a few casual workers. But these people cannot possibly cope with the volume and the magnitude of delays that are going on. People are simply not getting the service they need and desire. This is a government which is intent on destroying the social safety net. It is also intent on turning our tax system upside down: tax cuts for the wealthy, service cuts for average Australians. Last week in parliament, the Prime Minister talked about parasites. Well, there are parasites in this country. They are the ones who deliberately evade their taxation responsibilities. They are the ones who have their money cooling in the shade of the palms on the Cayman Islands. They are the parasites. The parasites in this country are those who seek to destroy the social safety net and attack the 'fair go' for all Australians. Forde Electorate: Broadband 121 10:52 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde It is always a pleasure to rise in this chamber and speak about the extensive progress that this government is making with the NBN rollout across the country, in direct comparison to those opposite and their failures with that project. I am pleased to say that another few suburbs in the electorate in Forde will soon be receiving access to faster and more reliable broadband through the National Broadband Network. The message for the residents of Windaroo, Bannockburn, Belivah and Bahrs Scrub is clear: the super-fast broadband is on its way. As you drive through those suburbs, you can see the contractors from NBN Co rolling out the cable. I was very pleased to catch up with a number of those residents in the last little while and talk to them about what the NBN is going to provide. I am also thankful to Amber Dornbusch from NBN Co for coming to that meeting and talking about some of the detail of the network as it is rolled out. The NBN has also commenced construction across the highway in Gilberton, in Woongoolba, and also in Chambers Flat and Buccan, with around 330 premises which will receive a fixed wireless network. But importantly, the next cab off the rank will be the area covering Yatala, which is the location of the Yatala enterprise area—one of the major business areas in the electorate of Forde. For many businesses operating in the area's industrial estates, this work cannot come quickly enough. The contract for this work will be released soon, and, with a community of around 1,700 premises, we expect to see workers on the ground in March rolling out the network. In the six years of the Labor government, only 50,000 premises were connected to the NBN across the country. In Forde, that was fewer than 800 homes. In the last month alone, the coalition government has connected more than 80,000 homes to the NBN network, and we have achieved the tremendous milestone of four million homes across Australia. In my electorate of Forde, more than 5,800 homes are now able to access the NBN, which is a terrific start. If you have a look at the rollout map, that is regularly being updated with new areas that are receiving the rollout. I know there are thousands of people in my electorate who cannot wait to see the NBN connected. As they say, 'Rome wasn't built in a day,' and neither is a major national infrastructure project, but it is this coalition government that is getting on with the job of rolling out the NBN to Australians right across the country. It is now rolling out efficiently and effectively, and I am excited to say that more than 80 per cent of my electorate will be connected by the end of 2018. Higher Education 122 10:55 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I rise to place on record my support for the vital role that TAFE plays in education and training in my electorate of Oxley and right across the country. Just last month, I had the pleasure of standing alongside the Premier of Queensland, Annastacia Palaszczuk, and the Attorney-General and Minister for Training and Skills, Yvette D'Ath, to officially open the $3.4 million expansion to the TAFE Queensland South West Inala campus. This critical infrastructure will upgrade and double the available space for education delivery on campus and includes 10 new classrooms, additional car parks and a wudu room for TAFE Queensland's multicultural student cohort. Everybody deserves the best possible start to getting a good job, and I have witnessed the transformational power of TAFE over a long period of time. A perfect example of this was student Becky Chan, who gave the welcome address on behalf of the students at the ceremony. Originally from Taiwan, Becky arrived in Australia six years ago speaking little English. With the help of TAFE, she not only delivered a beautiful address to the audience on the day but now runs her own successful small business. Becky is an outstanding example of the fantastic opportunity TAFE provides to both younger and older Australians and, in this example, a great role model citizen for other immigrants to our country to follow. She is a shining example of why we need to be putting more funding and resources into our TAFE system—rather than those opposite, who believe in cutting our higher education system. Premier and Member for Inala Annastacia Palaszczuk deserves thanks for making sure that TAFE in Queensland has been improved and making sure that the local campus in Inala has received such an important boost. Of course, this is in stark contrast to the previous LNP state government, which sacked TAFE teachers and tried to privatise TAFE in Queensland. We know that the ACCI have indicated that there were 308,000 apprentices and trainees in training in mid-2015, and that is from a high of 446,000 in 2012. Since then, under this government, we have seen a 30 per cent drop in volume. In my electorate of Oxley, which I am privileged to represent in this place, we have seen apprenticeships fall by a massive 53.6 per cent, down to only 1,486 places in December 2015. This government must hear the message. We must invest in higher education and particularly the TAFE sector. We need to make sure that our young people have job-ready-equipped outcomes, particularly in the south-west of Brisbane. I know, by talking to the great educators at TAFEs in my electorate and not just in Oxley but right across Queensland and Australia, what a fantastic job they do in helping and supporting our young kids and senior students to get the job skills that they need to equip them for a place in the employment situation in Queensland. I am committed to that and will always ensure that TAFE comes first. Queensland: Rail 123 10:58 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman Obviously, I think both sides of politics are massive supporters of TAFE, but only one is going to get you there by train. For a long time, governments benchmarked themselves on whether the trains ran on time, but, for the first time in the history of humanity, we now have a situation where we benchmark governments on whether they can run a train at all. That is right. What we have seen in this Queensland meltdown, which a number of those on the other side will not be intimately acquainted with because they are used to state governments being able to run train services, is a complete breakdown in commuter confidence. Economists have been studying for decades now indices of consumer confidence, but never have we had an index of commuter confidence. If there were one, Queensland would be close to zero. In fact, it has not been this bad since Annastacia Palaszczuk was Minister for Transport. That was back in 2012, wasn't it? Reliability of the train services had plummeted at that time. We never thought this could all happen again. It seemed impossible that someone so incredibly incompetent could find themselves stumbling into the highest office in the state, but indeed, that has happened. In doing so, we all expected the trains to keep running the way the Newman government got them running, with trains on time 96 per cent of the time and a completely bloated Queensland department of transport trimmed back to a more efficient size. But, no, of course not. This is a union-beholden state government. This is a union-worshipping state government. There is no better example of that than the fact that the union-dominated train drivers were not allowed to recruit anyone new at all. They said: 'No, you can't have freight train drivers. You can't have interstate train drivers.' In fact, they were training drivers, and they actually terminated the course a week before the drivers graduated and made them guards. Now we have a new rule at the Queensland department of transport: at Queensland Rail, we are only going to employ Queensland Rail staff. Why would they do that? The answer is simple: to keep overtime payments in the pockets of union members. They have a base pay rate of 120 grand. If they can puff up the overtime, they can hit 160 or 180 grand. That is what the unions want. They did not train an additional train driver. Then, of course, the system went 'pop', and there was not a train driver to run a service. Now we are short 472 services. They have been basically liquid-papered out of the Queensland Rail timetable. We have an insoluble problem now: they cannot train anyone for one, two or more years. They have started taking outsiders, but only those with previous rail experience. This union-dominated organisation is using the minister as a puppet; he has fallen on his sword. It is now impossible to fix this problem within a year or two. It is a great concern to Queenslanders. Never before have 'rail' and 'fail' been in the same sentence, but, thanks to Annastacia Palaszczuk, the two will now be forever united as 'rail fail'. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 I thank the honourable member for that contribution. In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has now concluded. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 123 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Turnbull Government 123 11:01 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I move: That this House: (1) congratulates the Government for pursing an extensive technology reform agenda that will change the way Australians interact with Government services for the better; (2) recognises the: (a) actions the Government is taking to renew Centrelink's aging information technology system through the Welfare Payment Infrastructure Transformation program, which will improve the user experience for the many Australians who access these services each week, and ensure the long term sustainability of our welfare system; (b) actions the Government is taking to upgrade and modernise the health and aged care payment system, and improve the services offered by Medicare to all Australians; and (c) investment the Government is making in digital services such as myGov, to further improve this service which is now used by more than ten million Australians; and (3) congratulates the Government on pursuing a courageous reform agenda which is sorely needed to correct six successive years of under-investment by Labor. The world has changed, and the coalition is ensuring that government services change with it. The Prime Minister has been at the forefront of spreading digital innovation in Australia for more than two decades. The PM's success in business came from his recognition that the future lay in digital communications and from his peerless ability to encourage the growth and expansion of the medium in our country. It is, therefore, no surprise that it is this coalition government which has put innovation at the centre of its agenda. Those opposite call themselves progressives, but the real progress is happening out there in the community and in small businesses, where emerging technology is changing the way that people live their lives every day. Through six years of Labor government, while the number of internet users in Australia rose from seven million to more than 12 million and while Facebook and Twitter grew and new platforms like Snapchat and Instagram were launched, Labor shut their eyes and pretended that none of it was happening. The Australian people did not close their eyes, however. What they saw was six years of Labor underinvestment and neglect. In contrast, under the coalition, take-up of the myGov platform has doubled every year. With more than 10 million accounts, the service now has 10 times more users than the UK equivalent. Already, the success of the myGov platform under this government has saved the taxpayer more than $100 million in postage alone. The Prime Minister and the government, however, are not satisfied with this success and will always push for further improvements. That is why we are investing a further $50 million to update security, improve the digital mail service and further improve user experience. This kind of constant improvement is what the Australian people rightly expect from their digital service providers, and this government is delivering. Medicare transactions are, of course, one of the most common ways that average Australians interact with the government. Under the coalition's improvements, 97 per cent of all Medicare transactions can now be completed with no action from the citizen beyond swiping their card at the doctor's clinic. In the case of those surgeries that will not install a card machine, the government has created a Medicare app that patients can use to transmit their information for processing in real time. Perhaps the most important action the government is now taking is the Welfare Payment Infrastructure Transformation—or the WPIT—Program. Put simply, this is the biggest improvement in how Australians interact with Centrelink in a generation. The system will be built across the next five years and will deliver a digital claims process, simpler processing and greater sharing of information. It will meet Australians' expectations for a 21st-century user experience. The example of youth allowance applications illustrates what a dramatic difference this system will make. Currently, a student applying for youth allowance can make their application online, but, once their application is submitted, it disappears into an administrative vacuum for more than five weeks. The only way to check the status of an application is to telephone a call centre. That process costs taxpayers millions of dollars every year. At the end of this opaque process, two students in every 10 are informed that the application has been rejected for a simple and avoidable reason. Each rejection costs the taxpayer $28, but there are nearly 100,000 of these every year. In the future, due entirely to the government's reform agenda and the WPIT, students will be able to track their application online and many will know in real time if their application has been approved. The Centrelink system will interact automatically with relevant databases, while more errors in applications will be instantly picked up. Eventually the system will even automatically update payments if a student's circumstances change. The savings to the taxpayer and improvements for users will be considerable. The government will continue to pursue an extensive technology reform agenda and has taken action to embed this agenda for the future. The Digital Transformation Agency set up by the Prime Minister when he was Minister for Communications is still part of his personal portfolio and will provide strategic and policy leadership in this area in the years to come. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 Is there a seconder for the motion? Mr Falinski G86 I second the motion and I reserve my right to speak. 11:07 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle If there is one area that highlights the complete inability of this government to deliver effective services, it is the rollout call of IT fails that we have had from the Turnbull government. I have to say that the member for Fisher is a brave man for opening up this topic of discussion. I am astounded that he got approval to do so from the Liberal powers that be. In fact, this government have been so phenomenally bad in this area that Mr Turnbull's own hand-picked digital guru and the former head of the Digital Transformation Office, Paul Shetler, resigned last November. Mr Shetler has since revealed publicly the extent of the mess in which the government's Digital Transformation Agenda rests: public service cuts are hitting hard, costly projects are running late and some are falling over completely. Let's look at a few of the more memorable failures from the past six months alone. Who could forget 9 August last year when the census website notoriously crashed spectacularly across the nation, wasting millions of hours of Australians' time and threatening the integrity of this important national data? Shamefully, the government knew about the impending disaster in 2015 when the head of the ABS penned a crisis memo, warning, 'The program will not be able to deliver on the current scope, timetable and/or budget.' Well, nothing could have been clearer, but for those opposite the choice was to sit back and do nothing to fix the problems. The next serious IT fail came only four months later when the critical ATO systems crashed, taking down the ATO website, the tax agent portal and the case management system for days, causing havoc for hundreds of businesses and individual alike. Almost two months on, the problems continued with another crash at the end of January. Still, government members have failed to provide an explanation for the mess. Barely two weeks after the first ATO crash we heard the first screeches of the slow train wreck of one of the worst IT failures in our history. Of course, I refer to the Centrelink robo-debt data-matching debacle, which has seen thousands of Australians falsely accused of debts they did not owe. In its great wisdom the government removed human oversight from the process and left the robots, with their crude algorithms, to deliver the debt recovery system. They, in turn, were coming to ridiculous and erroneous conclusions about job seekers' incomes and working circumstances, and then using the flawed assumptions to raise the bogus debt notices. Make no mistake, this is a fail so serious and so colossal that we will continue to see its impacts hitting vulnerable Australians for months, if not years, to come. Of course, we need to recognise that these stuff-ups were not just technical issues. The widespread IT mess is a completely predictable outcome of the government's gutting of the public service. Since those opposite came to power the public service has lost 18,000 staff. Those that are left are forced to survive on 2013 salaries, as the government's regressive enterprise bargaining system is stuck and has guaranteed nothing but bad outcomes for those workers. The Bureau of Statistics has lost 700 staff since the last census in 2011, the ATO has lost 3,500 staff in the same time frame and Centrelink has been crippled by years of budget cuts and massive increases in the casualisation of the workforce and has had a loss of 5,000 jobs across the department. To compensate for the damaging staff and budget cuts, the Turnbull government has gone on to waste millions of dollars on what Mr Shetler described as an 'eye-watering' level of contracting to the private sector. The IT messes that the government has created have fundamentally betrayed the trust of the Australian people, tainting future digital projects for years to come. If Australians do not trust the integrity of digital services it will be nigh impossible for governments to secure the social licence needed for the nimble, agile service delivery that our Prime Minister likes to talk about so much. From the botched census to the ongoing MyGov failures, the ATO crashes and the Centrelink robo-debt debacle, this government has lurched from disaster to disaster, all under the watch of the man whom the Liberals like to believe invented the internet. The fact that this government has chosen to highlight the digital programs area they are particularly proud of should concern us all greatly. (Time expired) 11:12 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar Like the member for Newcastle, when I first saw this motion I wondered what the member for Fisher was up to. Does he like poking the Labor Party bear? Was he trying to get you guys opposite into some sort of frothing fit of rage? Such is the member for Fisher's sense of humour, it is difficult to know what he was up to. However, as I listened to the member's speech I was reminded that this government has done an extraordinary job of fixing a mess that you blokes left behind. As the member for Fisher pointed out, do we get thanks or even gratitude from you guys? I would go for just a modicum of humility from you blokes, but we get none of it. Ungrateful is what you guys are. We are the party that in New South Wales turned what used to be a day-long excursion down to the RTA to renew your licence or car into an over-the-net experience. Dom Perrottet had to do this over the objections of your paymasters in the public sector unions to make New South Wales a better place. Russell Cassar, who is an old friend of my wife's and who happens to be the CTO of JP Morgan, says that Wall Street runs on technology. There is no earthly reason why government cannot also run on technology to improve the experience that our citizens have interacting with us. This government established the Digital Transformation Agency. The importance of this agency cannot and should not be underestimated. The DTA has focused on three key things: reducing barriers to the adoption of online transactions by encouraging the uptake of digital interaction; fully utilising and embedding open data; creating marketplaces for more efficient tendering for government supply and materially improving access that small businesses have to government contracts. The DTA has been spending just over a quarter billion dollars this year to help government agencies create digital portals that are easy to find. We have all had the experience of using government service websites where finding the service you are looking for is almost impossible and the search functionality does not produce any meaningful results. The private sector knows that consumers are not patient these days and, if they cannot find what they want within a minute or so, they move on. That is why companies like Amazon, Domain and Seek ensure that the number of clicks between you entering the website and transacting is as small as possible. The second need is security. Long before private mail servers became all the rage, the biggest resistance to online transactions was people's innate fear of losing control of their information. For government agencies to increase online interaction, people need rock-solid assurances that their information is safe. DTA has been introducing standards for security across agencies to ensure security is front and centre of any design and software architecture. As the head of Trend Micro told me recently, the average personal computer will be subject to over 900 attacks per year. Finally, DTA has set out a digital service standard similar to what Microsoft does for its Office suite of programs, so all government agencies will have similar directories and functionalities. When you go to the ATO or to DFAT, you will be able to navigate the sites more easily. In my view, the most exciting initiative of the government has been open data. The benefits are multifaceted. Sure, it can save money, but, more importantly, it can save lives and even potentially improve policy debate. But let's first deal with the practical before hoping for miracles. Ian Burnett's team at UTS and the Centre for Big Data and Analytics have been helping the New South Wales government better direct their resources to what works and, more importantly, helps improve people's lives. In the UK, open data is estimated to have saved the government nearly 100 million pounds, in one instance eliminating the purchase of 75-pound mops. But, as Laure Lucchesi of Etalab has said, the biggest beneficiaries of open data are consumers, because start-ups can now better target their resources, providing better competition. Under this government, data sets that are open to the public have increased from 500 to 23,600. In health the cost savings are huge. The information for improving your own health is huge. Hackathons are now using open data to make serious, innovative and real contributions to public policy. 11:17 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt It is a brave member who puts forward a motion congratulating the Turnbull government on information technology changes given its debacle of the census in 2016, let alone when thousands of Australians have received incorrect debt notices from Centrelink thanks to an automated system. But the member is not that brave; he is not even still in the chamber. He must instead be what Sir Humphrey Appleby would describe as 'courageous'. The flawed data-matching program recently implemented by Centrelink has been spitting out thousands of debt notices to people who have done nothing wrong, who do not owe Centrelink a cent and who have been forced to spend hours following up Centrelink over false accusations. Any member of this place who says that their electorate office has not been inundated with constituents distressed by these accusations clearly has not been paying attention at home. Labor has repeatedly called on the Turnbull government to suspend this program until its flaws can be fixed, but the Turnbull government has simply doubled down and refused to own up to its problem. But the Centrelink debt-recovery debacle is just the latest of a series of disasters for the Turnbull government in the tech space. Let's go back to that census fail. After an extensive campaign encouraging all Australians to fill out their census online in what was supposed to be the first time a majority would complete the form digitally, a 40-hour system crash left millions wondering how the Turnbull government could possibly have messed it up so badly. The Prime Minister himself described the attack that caused the crash as 'not particularly clever, utterly predictable and utterly foreseeable'. In perhaps my favourite piece of evidence to the inquiry, the contractor IBM admitted the whole thing could have been avoided if they had simply turned the router off and on again—the most timeless of all IT advice! But this government still refused to step up and take responsibility for the stuff-up, blaming the contractor, refusing to acknowledge its own culpability, despite its almost three years of preparation time for the census. The Prime Minister's cybersecurity adviser, Alastair MacGibbon, said the census fail was a serious blow to public confidence in the government's ability to deliver on public expectations. But that is not all. Then we have the ongoing issues at the Australian Taxation Office. A data storage system crash in December cause the ATO website, tax agent portal, and the case management system to go down for two days, which the Commissioner of Taxation, Chris Jordan, described as the worst unplanned system outage in recent memory. Earlier this month, the same issue reared its head again, knocking out the ATO website for another four days. I note that the member makes reference to myGov in his motion. MyGov is a fantastic idea, do not get me wrong, but has there ever been a less user-friendly system created? Even I, someone who worked as an IT technician, have trouble linking my services on myGov. Anything useful requires you to actually call the agency involved, and you cannot do that at 10 pm, defeating its purported usefulness in the first place. Last year I visited an employment services provider in my electorate with the member for Chifley. The work they do at this service is fantastic, but one of the biggest issues faced by their clients is just navigating myGov. Logging in is a headache. The former head of the Prime Minister's much vaunted Digital Transformation Office —we are well into the 21st century by now, I might point out—Paul Shetler, has slammed the culture surrounding IT within the government, calling out the digital deskilling of government departments under the Turnbull government's watch. But these individual agency issues pale in comparison to the biggest joke of all from this government, that in an era when government insists that we move most of our interactions with agencies and the public service online, the same government trashes the infrastructure rollout needed to ensure that every Australian has decent internet access. I am, of course, talking about the NBN, the rollout of which was supposed to be finished by the end of last year. In my electorate we are finally seeing the first homes connected just now, but already I am hearing stories about poor speeds and connection issues, thanks to Malcolm Turnbull's flawed fibre-to-the-node model. I would ask members opposite, what is the point of pursuing this technology reform agenda if you are going to saddle Australia with the 20th century broadband. I would welcome a federal government with a genuine commitment to modernising the way the public interacts with government, but you cannot force all government interaction online if you cannot guarantee that those systems work, let alone you do not make sure everyone can get online to access them. But, as with so much else, the Turnbull government has well and truly proven that it is all talk when it comes to tech. 11:23 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley I must confess that this resolution completely and utterly perplexed me. After the census fail, after the ATO website was down today, after the Centrelink robo-debt fiasco, after concerns have emerged about the CSA's IT system, the member for Fairfax moved 'to congratulate the government for pursuing an extensive technology reform agenda that will change the way Australians interact with government services for the better'. Seriously! My question to the Deputy Speaker is, is there a provision in the standing orders for either irony or grand self-delusion? Because that is the only way this resolution can be debated here now. You cannot be serious! It is such a bizarre resolution. I want to make these two points. First: the mover of the resolution retreated. He is not even here to listen to the debate. He left straight away. The member for Mackellar, who, in his Young Liberal days, was widely regarded as a very smart operator, in a lapse spoke on this motion but in a recovery also retreated. He was not here either to finish it off. What was also interesting is that I am now speaking after my good friend and colleague, the member for Burt, when another government member should be speaking, but they are not. Because they have heeded the wise words—I love that HBO show, Silicon Valley, where Erlich Bachman said, 'Don't touch anything—failure is contagious.' This is why they have no other speaker in relation to this resolution. The member for Mackellar, in his defence of the federal government, opened by relying on what the New South Wales government is doing on digital transformation. Successes on the digital transformation front are so sparse and unavailable that he had to quote another Liberal government because, as I said, 'Don't touch anything. Failure is contagious. Don't mention the federal government.' That was interesting. Do you know who else is missing? The Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation, Angus Taylor. Opposition members interjecting— Mr HUSIC 91219 I hear my colleagues say, 'Who is he?' They are right to ask this question. He has been completely missing in action with the census fail, the Centrelink robo-debt, the ATO tax office website failure and the child support agency failure. The only great thing I can say about Angus Taylor is that he has literally become the government's telepresence within the ministry. He is nowhere to be seen. He is a mere telepresence. He is not available, and it is disgraceful that he is not here. The ATO website went down for four days. The transmission of information back and forth went down for four days. The ATO came out and said, 'We don't know anything about what's going on.' So we do not know if this was a cyber attack. We do not know exactly what was going on. They do not know how to fix it. No-one has stepped up. When the assistant minister is not present, when the revenue minister does not step up and when the Treasurer does not step up you know there is a problem. The second thing I will mention is this: if the member for Fairfax is so confident about this resolution, I invite him to post his speech on Facebook, on his own page, and then advertise the heck out of it in his own electorate. I tell you what: no-one in his electorate will support him, and, in fact, they will probably suggest that he go and have a lie down. After all the problems they have had— Ms Burney interjecting— Mr HUSIC 91219 'A Bex and a good lie down,' as the member for Barton rightly interjects—because no-one could be serious. If he does not do it, I extend to him this offer: I will not only post his speech; I will post my response and I will advertise it in his electorate. People in his electorate should hear that when he comes to Canberra he defends the government. He does not come here to stick up for his constituents who have problems with Centrelink, the ATO, child support or the census; he comes in to defend the government. It is wrong. Labor supports, and has always supported, the digital transformation push by the government, but this has gone off the rails. This has completely gone off the rails. It has undermined the effort of digital transformation. Look at the number of areas where this has gone off track. This is a problem. Digital technology is not just about the tech; it is the end-to-end process that should be looked at and the application of technology to improve the service. Constituents, the general public, should be able to get better out of digital transformation. What is happening now is that the Digital Transformation Agency has turned itself into a think tank. It is not legitimately there to help. The problem is that, as these people get distracted in their own internal warfare, the general public is made to suffer. It is unacceptable. It should not be the case that digital transformation hurts rather than helps. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Centrelink 128 11:28 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons I move: That this House: (1) notes that; (a) it has been 41 days since the opposition formally requested that the robo-debt system be suspended while it was fixed; (b) the Minister for Human Services says that the system is working well despite reports of innocent people being targeted, Centrelink staff at breaking point and widespread concern outside this place; (c) the robo-debt system has seen hundreds of people issued with debt notices which are either false or grossly inflated; and (d) the robo-debt system is due to target Age Pension and Disability Support Pension recipients this year; (2) condemns the Minister for Human Services for his failure to respond to growing community concern and calls from welfare groups to act; and (3) calls on the Prime Minister to intervene to halt the system and fix it before age pensioners and those with disabilities are terrorised for debt they may not owe. This parliament has been witness to extraordinary arrogance over the past week. Rather than coming to this place to apologise for the robo-debt letters debacle that he has presided over and to suspend it, as Labor has asked him to do, last week the Minister for Human Services strutted to the dispatch box to effectively declare, 'Nothing to see here folks. It's all fine.' The minister has arrogantly swept aside the concerns that thousands of Australians have expressed, despite the breathtaking error rate. The government admits that 40 per cent could be wrong and that 20 per cent could be going to people who do not owe even one cent. Let us be clear: Labor supports recovering money from people who have been overpaid, whether it is from people who have sought to game the system—a tiny minority—or from people who have simply made errors or not kept their records up to date. But Labor does not support recovering money from people who do not owe it, and Labor does not support treating people who receive social security as second-class citizens, to be labelled as cheats, leaners and burdens on society, as government members have done. This has been like one of those mail scams where thousands of fake invoices are mailed out or emailed and, if even just a handful of people pay up without checking whether they are real, it nets a tidy profit for the scammers. This is what this government has been doing—sending letters to people who do not owe any money and keeping whatever is sent back from people who are too busy, too trusting or too frightened to check. Indeed, this government is so committed to taking money from people who do not owe it anything that it has instructed Centrelink staff not to correct errors unless those errors are brought to their attention by a client. It is my sincere hope that the Senate inquiry into the robo-debt letter scandal, which was initiated last week by Labor, will take a good, hard look at that instruction and get to the bottom of who issued it and on what authority, and investigate its lawfulness and whether it breaches any code of conduct, because it is an abominable instruction. Case study after case study has been presented of people being strong-armed into paying debts that they do not owe, and this minister's arrogant, dismissive reply is to say, 'Call the 1800 number.' That would be the 1800 number that it takes hours to get through on and where, even if you can talk to someone, you cannot reach an agreement, because they do not have the authority to properly help you. Last month the member for Franklin and I and Senator Carol Brown held a community forum with the shadow minister, who is here today, where we invited Tasmanians to turn up to tell their Centrelink stories. We heard from Marie and Bill and others, each of them struggling to deal with Centrelink and to meet its demands for information. Bill used to drive a bus part time and received Newstart; now he is an age pensioner. Bill received a robo-debt letter claiming he owed 3½ thousand dollars. He did not believe he owed the money but, to avoid his pension being affected or being sent to a debt collector while he sorted it out, he asked to repay $10 a week, but was told no. He had money in the bank, so the government took the lot in one go. Now it turns out the ATO and Centrelink had used different names for the same employer. Bill is convinced he does not owe the money, but he is now worried he will not get it back. This government has taken 3½ thousand dollars from an age pensioner without being certain that he owes that money. A government that cared for its citizens would be more careful, but this is a government that cares for some citizens more than others. For a week we have put up with a government road-testing its new focus group-approved slogan. We do not hear about 'jobs and growth' anymore; now it is 'hardworking Australians'. The insidious subtext is that if you are not a 'hardworking Australian' you are not included in this government's priorities—pensioners, students, people with a disability or mental illness. We get the picture, and it is not pretty. It is a deliberate plan to divide Australians, to turn them against each other, to encourage those who earn a wage or own a business to sneer at those who do not. A great strength of this country is that we look after each other. Some of our most iconic imagery and stories are of Australians lending each other a hand—whether it is through flood, fire or drought, the barricades of Eureka or the mud of Kokoda, we are at our best when we stand together. Today's cleaner is tomorrow's pensioner. A healthy firefighter today is tomorrow battling cancer. Today's farmer tomorrow busts his back. In Australia we look after each other through good times and bad. That is something this government should learn. I commend the motion to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP Is the motion seconded? Mr Conroy 249127 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 11:34 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax I am still relatively new to this parliament, but I have to say that already, sadly, I have been blown away by the utter incompetence of the people opposite. Amidst all of the bluster and all of the frothing at the mouth that we have heard already this morning, the member for Lyons—who, I am sure, is otherwise a very good man—has obviously not done his research. If he had, he would have realised that the very methodology being used for the collection of invalid welfare payments by Centrelink was actually created by the Labor Party. It was created by Richo, of all people. They may not remember Richo, but since 1990 all Labor governments—Hawke, Keating, Rudd, Gillard and Rudd again—have used the very same methodology that is being used by the coalition government today. Where there has been any tweaking it was actually done by the current Leader of the Opposition, and so the Labor Party can hardly claim ignorance in this regard. It is very simple. There are two sets of data. There is a set of data that comes in through the Australian Taxation Office, and there is a set of data that goes to Centrelink, indirectly or directly, from the recipients of welfare payments. Where there is a discrepancy between these two datasets, the system flags that money might be owed—that somebody has possibly received more money than they were due. This was also the case under the Labor Party. Labor though, being Labor, were woeful in their execution and their collection. The coalition inherited the system in 2013 and we have stuck with it. If there is a difference between Labor's system and the coalition's system, it is that the coalition has digitised the otherwise archaic manual system that the Labor Party was using. Here is how it works. The computer basically identifies a potential mismatch between those two datasets. Where there is a discrepancy, a letter is triggered and sent to the recipient. Two weeks go by. If there has been no response, if Centrelink does not hear anything, they trigger a second letter, which is a fair and reasonable thing to do, because you never know whether or not the recipient received that first one. If there is no response, or if the data discrepancy cannot be explained to justify the payments already given, then a third letter is sent, along with a debt. The debt is then pursued and recovered, subject to all the normal appeal procedures et cetera, and all the discussions that are undertaken between the recipient and Centrelink. That is what plays out in about 80 per cent of the cases. In the other 20 per cent of the cases, recipients are indeed able to explain the discrepancy and for those there are no debts collected and the case is closed. This is a normal, responsible process—one that the Labor Party was woeful in trying to execute that the coalition is doing very well. The member for Lyons mentioned that the coalition thinks that everyone who is collecting welfare is dodgy. That is unfair and an absolute porky. I personally believe there is no doubt that there are dodgy people out there—absolutely, I am sure there are. But I believe that the vast majority of people who receive welfare in this country are good, honest, decent Australians. I do not know about you, but if I inadvertently owed a debt, I would like to be told about that as soon as possible. That is the reasonable thing to do. Labor is not arguing against the methodology. Labor is not arguing about the need to collect debt. What they are arguing about is the digitisation—the efficiency by which this is done. They are happy for this archaic manual system to not tell people about it for years and years to come and to then give them a nasty surprise at the end. Look at the scoreboard. At the end of the day we have already had $300 million collected by this. The forward estimates say $4 billion will be collected by this system. This goes to the heart. We have about $170 billion in our federal budget for welfare. There is only one side that is taking it very seriously to ensure that every dollar and cent of taxpayer money spent on welfare is due. I support this, and thank God we have the coalition in government. 11:39 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Hindmarsh It is interesting listening to those on the other side talk about this issue. We just heard the member for Fairfax painting a beautiful picture of how this is working beautifully. The reality is that 40 per cent of people who query their debt are found to have no debt. That is an astronomical figure, which means that the digitisation of this system is not working. Why they have gone down this track I do not know, but you wonder if it is because they need to find the money to give the $50 billion tax cuts to their rich mates. Is that what it is? In Australia we pride ourselves on giving people a fair go, but the robo-debt collection that this government has implemented is not fair. It is hurting too many Australians and it has to stop. Despite what this government says, every member of parliament has heard stories from constituents who have ben forced to repay fictitious or over-inflated debts. I will give you a few examples from my own electorate of Hindmarsh. One constituent received a letter claiming she had a $6,000 debt to Centrelink. She was told that this was incurred during a period of unemployment in 2014. My constituent was very surprised because, as I said before in this place, she keeps meticulous records and was in constant contact with Centrelink throughout the transition from being unemployed to working. When she challenged the fee, it was reduced to $370. There is one example. Another constituent received a letter claiming that she owed over $5,000 for payments received in 2013. The strange thing was that for the short period that she was on benefits she received in total around $2,000 from Centrelink, yet she was told she had a debt of $5,000 in total. She was being asked to pay back more than twice the amount she had received. When she queried this, she was told that the letter was not meant for her in the first place. That was the excuse that they came up with. Yet another constituent was informed that she had been overpaid to the tune of almost $20,000. When this particular person queried this, her debt was reassessed to just over $6,000—a massive discrepancy. It is a big difference. We are not talking about a dollar or two here. We are talking about big differences. We have heard countless stories, and I am sure you will hear more from this side, but how can anyone have faith in this debt recovery process when over and over again the debts that people are told they owe turn out to be highly inflated or absolutely non-existent? This situation is simply unacceptable. The Turnbull government is not being honest with Australians. The government refuses to tell us how many of the debt notices which have been sent out are false, how many are being reviewed, how many are being disputed and how many are being appealed. These are the things that we need to know to get to the bottom of this particular issue. We on this side of the House are not the only ones who are worried. The Ombudsman has launched his own investigation into this, and even the Prime Minister's own Liberal colleagues are starting to publicly criticise this flawed process. That is why we on this side of the House pushed for a Senate inquiry. We are demanding that this debt recovery process be stopped immediately until the inquiry has released its findings. It is only fair that we have this inquiry, get the findings and then go to the next step. Labor supports measures to catch fraud and recoup debt—of course we do. That is obvious. But we absolutely, emphatically do not support attacking honest Australians who are being hounded by this particular system. The minister, rather than devoting his time to smearing honest age pensioners, students, people with disabilities and those trying to find work, must spend more time fixing this particular mess. The Senate inquiry's terms of reference include: a. the impact of Government automated debt collection processes upon the aged, families with young children, students, people with disability and jobseekers … What is the impact on those people? The terms of reference also include whether the Department of Human Services and Centrelink are able to cope with the level of demand related to the implementation of the program. We know that there have been job cuts. We know that there are fewer people working and answering calls. What has happened is that the human element has been taken out of this. When you have a human element where someone can answer a question, where you can actually speak to someone face to face, where you can query something or explain the intricate details of a particular case and get to the bottom of it, then solutions are found a lot quicker, but all of that has been taken out. It reminds me of the Little Britain program where the client goes in to see a travel agent and the person behind the desk keeps looking at her and staring and then says, 'The computer says no.' This is exactly the same sort of situation. No matter what information people have, the computer says no. 11:44 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney It may come as a surprise, but governments have a responsibility to spend taxpayers' money wisely. I am in this place to back hardworking aspirational Australians who want to apply their effort to get ahead. Part of this is to respect and remember that governments have no money—not one penny—because all of the funds that we have have been paid in taxes. In fact, we are the custodians of the taxes received from hardworking taxpayers. That is why it is our responsibility to respect their contribution by making sure that government funds, which taxpayers pay, are spent appropriately. Welfare debt recovery is not something new, and the Labor Party should not pretend that it is. Let me take you through the process and away from all the political misinformation that the Labor Party has tried to put out on this issue. Centrelink receives information from other agencies, including the Australian Taxation Office. That information is analysed, and, where there appears to be a discrepancy between an individual's income data held at the ATO and their self-reported data at Centrelink, a letter is sent by Centrelink requesting an update, requesting clarification and asking for a bit more information. The first letter simply notes the discrepancy and gives an opportunity for the individual to explain it. It asks people to 'confirm or update your employment information online'. It is not a debt letter. In fact, the letter actually says it is not a debt letter. The person who receives the letter has 21 days to respond. If they do not respond, another letter is sent. The second letter is also not a debt letter. It says, 'We would like some more information'—and it is right, on behalf of the taxpayer, to ask people to provide additional information to the government in relation to discrepancies between the ATO information and the Centrelink information. If the person fails to respond again, a third letter is sent, which outlines money that has been overpaid according to Australian Taxation Office information. On 20 per cent of occasions the recipient is able to validly explain the discrepancy in the data. It shows the system is working. An opportunity is being provided for individuals to provide more information to the taxpayer via the government. Seeking information from welfare recipients when a discrepancy is identified is a longstanding practice undertaken by both Labor and coalition governments. Through this whole process the person can request a review at any time; a re-assessment of the situation can be made to ensure that everything is correct; a review can be undertaken to ensure that current information is correct; and a review can be undertaken into any discrepancy between self-disclosed information and the ATO information. If people receive a debt notice, they can ask for an internal review and provide new information at any point. They can also appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. There is a dedicated 1800 number to assist people at any time. The government will continue to refine the process to ensure that people have received requests for information. But the most important thing we have learned during all of this is that you cannot always believe what you are told by Labor. Let me draw your attention to a very interesting article on Australia Day—our national day of celebration—because we have seen the Labor Party roll out a whole range of people giving their personal examples: An assessment of the 52 cases of people publicly claiming they were being harassed by Centrelink … has revealed that 18 had in fact been identified under a manual system set up by the former Labor government— by you, by the Labor Party, by your government— … a number of those who claimed to have been wrongly targeted had in fact accepted that the debt was owed, with some even having entered into repayment programs. One person that you trotted out, publicised by Labor in a television program as a victim: … was discovered to have been claiming the Youth Allowance while not studying and failing to declare income from several jobs, leading to a debt to the taxpayer of almost $12,000. So when people contact my office saying that they have lost confidence in Centrelink, that loss of confidence can be directly attributed to the misinformation peddled by Labor, trying to seek nothing but political gain. It is about time the Labor Party respected the contribution being made by hardworking aspirational Australians who go to work each day, pay their taxes and make a contribution to make this country even better. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP I thank the member. Can I just remind members to address their remarks through the chair. The use of the word 'you' implies the chair's involvement in activities, so just refer them through the chair. 11:49 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I am just astounded that the member for Tangney and the member for Fairfax believe that the briefing notes that they have received from the minister's office can be read verbatim. You may as well just table them, because we have all seen them, and they are what you are talking about. Let me just undo a few of the things that have been said in this chamber this morning. I have also thought that Tudge and Porter Debt Collection Agency Pty Ltd might be a new company that could be set up. If these two men ever lose their seats they could go into debt collection. Tudge and Porter has a certain sound around it. What has been claimed by the coalition is that somehow or other this is the exact same system that Labor used for debt recovery. It is not the same system. What Labor had as part of the quality control was human eye oversight. There is no human oversight in this. It is totally an algorithm between two agencies, fully automated. That is why there have been so many problems. What astounds me is just how intransigent and stubborn the ministers involved, Porter and Tudge Debt Collectors, have been in terms of publicly admitting that there are mistakes. Of course we know that privately they have admitted that, because there have been very quiet changes made to the system over the last couple of weeks as a result of Labor's persistence in drawing to the attention of the public just how unfair this is. What makes me very angry is the cynical decision taken by this government that they would kick welfare recipients. They would kick people that had to rely on Centrelink and had a right to rely on Centrelink, and no-one would care. Hasn't that backfired wonderfully? Hasn't that backfired, because the Australian people do not put up with what is unfair. What is fundamentally unfair about this assessment system is that those people that did not respond to an impossible 21-day deadline were forced to enter into debt repayment systems, and that is the only way that they could get a review. How criminal is that? If it were not for the legislation, that would not be allowed under the laws of this country. They had to enter into a repayment system and accept a debt that they fundamentally did not believe that they owed, or were questioning, to even get a review. On Sky last night, Patricia Karvelas interviewed Alan Tudge, and as I understand it the interview was a train wreck. Mr Tudge could not answer, even though he was asked for times, about the review process—where was it at, how many people have been reviewed and how many people have been found not to have that debt. By the government's own admission, 40 per cent of the people identified do not have debt. If you extrapolate that, you could make the assumption that somewhere around 40 per cent of people that have received these so-called non-debt-collection letters do not in fact owe any money to Centrelink. I cannot understand any government of any persuasion thinking that it was okay to slug Centrelink recipients, many of whom are now running our schools, teaching our children and running our emergency departments. Most of them have jobs. That is what is so perverse about this: this is a punishment for people who have sought employment, often under the most difficult circumstances. They would not been getting these letters had they not worked. That is what is perverse about this, because of the automation between the Tax Office and Centrelink. The other thing, of course, is that the article in The Australian that the member for Tangney and the others wave around, saying that somehow Labor, and me by implication, had given Simon Benson those examples, is actually wrong. I want to put it clearly on the record that those examples were not provided by me or my office, because I am absolutely careful about making sure that examples of people that have been victims of this system are absolutely checked out. That article that keeps getting waved around is absolutely scurrilous. Simon Benson and I have had a discussion about it. (Time expired) 11:54 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks I am very pleased to speak in support of the government's appropriate and sensible activities when it comes to protecting the hard work of Australian taxpayers and ensuring that people who receive Centrelink benefits receive the right amount. To the extent that people have received too much, whether through a deliberate act or a misunderstanding or error, it is completely appropriate and entirely reasonable that the government should do everything it sensibly can to collect that debt on behalf of taxpayers. Let us take an example of some of the success stories for taxpayers achieved through this debt recovery program. There was an example of a person in Victoria who was receiving Newstart for the financial years 2011-12 and 2012-13—that whole period. They had declared less than $11,000 in employment income during that time, but the ATO data showed that this person had earned over $50,000 in that time. This program successfully identified that there was a discrepancy between what that person claimed to have earned and what they had in fact earned. That person was then asked to substantiate or explain the issue, which they could not do, because they had earned more than $50,000. Consequently, those Centrelink overpayments were recovered—and so they should be. To suggest that they should not be or that there is something wrong with that shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Centrelink system should work. That, of course, occurred under previous ministers—the member for Sydney, Senator Carr and Senator McLucas. We saw, in that example and certainly in many others, people being paid substantially more Centrelink benefits than they were entitled to, and that is wrong. That is absolutely wrong, and it should not happen. It is often said that social security is about a third of federal budget. The federal budget, for reasons dating back to the Rudd era, includes the GST revenue gained by the state as a federal expenditure. I think there is an open argument about whether that should be the case. When you take out the GST revenue that goes to the states, social welfare is actually 41 per cent of all federal government spending—more than 40c in every dollar. It is sensible for the government to say: 'We need to ensure that that social welfare is provided to those who need it, who are entitled to it. Let's make sure people don't receive benefits they are not entitled to.' Minister Tudge and Minister Porter are saying, 'We are going to ensure that, to the greatest extent possible, those people who receive Centrelink benefits are those who are entitled to them and that people who are getting more than they're entitled to are required to pay those benefits back.' I struggle to accept the notion that there is, somehow, something wrong with this or that the average Australian would have a problem with this. The average Australian is, in my experience, supportive of a social welfare system for those in genuine need but equally supportive of the idea that those payments must be made only to those in genuine need. Rorting or ripping off the system is something that is wholeheartedly rejected by the Australian people. There are other examples of the success of this program. There was an example from South Australia of somebody who had declared less than $2,000 of employment income. Through ATO records, this program identified that they had in fact earned more than $40,000. The system identified the discrepancy and asked the person to explain the difference. They could not do so, and they were required to pay back to the taxpayer a debt of $14,000—Centrelink money they should not have received. That was completely appropriate. In 80 per cent of the cases where these letters go out, the apparent discrepancy is a real discrepancy. In 80 per cent of cases where the government gets in touch with people and says, 'Can you explain this discrepancy?' the person cannot do so and is required to make a repayment. In 20 per cent of cases, there is a legitimate reason for the discrepancy. In that case, the person is not required to make any repayments. Nor should they be, if they were entitled to those benefits. But when they are not entitled to receive the benefits, it seems to me to be entirely reasonable—it should be an unobjectionable principle, and it should be completely supported by those opposite—that we stand up and defend our taxpayers' funds while supporting those in need. 11:59 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I am pleased to support this motion moved by the member for Lyons. If the actual robo-debt debacle were not enough to prove this government is woefully out of touch, the response from the government members to this motion surely proves the case. Returning to Canberra, all 150 of us who serve here would have had one thing in common about the summer break: our offices were inundated with calls— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 12 : 00 to 12 : 23 Mr CONROY 249127 As I was saying, I, like, I am sure, every other member of the House, was inundated by distressed constituents who received Centrelink debt notices just before or after Christmas. The targeting of vulnerable people on fixed incomes by this government is a disgrace and another clear indication of how out of touch and arrogant they are. Labor has always been clear that people who do the wrong thing in relation to social security payments should be investigated and compelled to pay the money back; however, our social security safety net is one of the most important foundations of our society, and the hallmark of a civilised and compassionate country is how we look after the most vulnerable in our community. This government is targeting the unemployed, pensioners and people with disability at the same time as they are giving a $50 billion tax cut to their corporate mates. The flawed data-matching program used by the Turnbull government has resulted in the wrong outcome in about 20 per cent of the cases, although, as we saw last night with the minister, it could be up to 40 per cent of cases, and so many of these people are vulnerable Australians on low and fixed incomes. I particularly want to draw the attention of the House to the experience of one of my constituents, Emma, who contacted my office. Last November, Emma received a debt notice for $11,000. This would, obviously, be distressing for anyone. However, the experience she has had with Centrelink in trying to clarify the notice has caused her more anxiety and stress. Emma has requested a review but has been advised that, until the review is finalised, she will have to begin a repayment plan or her pay will be automatically garnished. This is the wrong way around. Emma is an intelligent and sensible woman and has stated that, if the debt is the result of an error on her part, she will take responsibility for it and pay it back. However, she is adamant that she has reported all of her income correctly and on time in the period covered by the debt. This is just not right. A hardworking young woman like Emma should not have to endure this unnecessary and distressing experience. Emma's call is just one example of the numerous calls my office has received over the last few months. Something that is causing people further distress is the fact that, having asked for a review, they are then required to provide pay slips to Centrelink to confirm that they have reported their income accurately. Some of the periods covered by these debts are up to six years ago and often cover a period of several years, so it is just ridiculous that the recipients of the debt notices have to try and gather together pay slips from years ago, particularly from former employers. In some cases, people would just not be able to do this. This motion rightly condemns the Minister for Human Services for his failure to respond to community concerns about the robo-debt system. This minister has arrogantly claimed the system is working well. I say to him, 'How can a system that is terrifying pensioners, the unemployed and people with disability with incorrect debt notices be working well?' This motion rightly acknowledges Centrelink staff are at breaking point. It was incredibly ridiculous for those opposite to keep talking about the 1800 number as if somehow that could resolve this issue. That 1800 number has wait times up to hours, and that is if you can get through in the first place and are not automatically blocked and if you can afford to spend the credit on your phone to use the line. I want to pay tribute to the employees of the Department of Human Services. They do a very difficult job in very difficult circumstances, but this government is making their job all the more difficult with this ridiculous system. The 1800 number will not solve this problem. It cannot solve this problem. We need human intervention earlier in the case to review these issues. The robo-debt debacle clearly shows not only how dysfunctional the Turnbull government is but also how out of touch it is with ordinary Australians. Pensioners, people with disability and men and women looking for work in my electorate of Shortland, and indeed in all electorates around the country, do not deserve to bear the brunt of this farcical joke of a government—a government that cannot even manage simple debt collection properly. God help us all. 12:28 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie I totally reject this motion from the opposition that has been brought to this House today. It is absolute rubbish. It is untrue and I reject it outright and completely. We have a responsibility to taxpayers to ensure that we are spending their earnings appropriately. The $400 billion that we, as a government, receive each year in income tax and company tax must be spent appropriately. If overpayments have been made, either by accident or as a result of people claiming moneys that they are not eligible for, then they need to be repaid. The system will not be suspended, because we have a duty of care. I agree with the member for Shortland on a couple of issues. He was the first opposition member to actually say that, if overpayments have been made, they need to be repaid. Even the shadow minister could not bring herself to say that. He also thanked his local Centrelink branches and the Department of Human Services. I also wish to do that. Centrelink offices in Deception Bay and Margate do a wonderful job helping the community. We have seen some great results locally in Petrie, including youth unemployment coming down in the last three years from some 19 per cent to about 10 per cent. So I put on the record my thanks to the Centrelink offices locally. The opposition's claims are merely self-serving propaganda. It fits with their agenda of reckless spending, of wanting to keep people down and reliant on the department and on government, and of self-relevance, by making up lies against the Australian government like they did in the 2016 federal election in relation to Medicare. My office has been able to help every single person who has called my office in relation to a debt inquiry—every single person. The member for Shortland said that members opposite have been inundated. That is where I disagree with him. We have not been inundated. In my office we have had 29 inquiries, including those from the GetUp! campaign that was done via email, and I have been able to help every single one of those 29 people. It is very important to note that some of these calls are from people who have received letters who do not necessarily owe a debt but who have not responded to contact over three weeks—for example, they have not uploaded a payslip, or they have not provided additional information to Centrelink that would sort out their debt. An example of this would be a young guy under the age of 25 who has not opened or read his mail within three weeks. There are also serious non-compliance issues to be dealt with. In the Department of Human Services at Centrelink there is a serious non-compliance team that has been investigating people who have a record of giving inaccurate information to Centrelink. Some of these people now think they can get out of debt because of what those in the opposition are saying. But I want to make it very clear: if you do owe money, if you have a debt, you will be required to repay the debt. As federal members of parliament we have a duty of care to help people who may need Newstart or disability payments, which is very important. They should be paid every single cent they are entitled to—not one cent more, not one cent less. But we also have a duty of care to those taxpayers who fund the $400 billion a year that we receive in income to make sure that every cent is spent well. Given that over the last 10 years—ever since John Howard left office—we have been spending $440 billion a year rather than the $400 billion we receive, it is even more important that we do so now. I want to quickly touch on how out of touch the member for Barton, the shadow minister, is. Her scare campaign is absolutely outrageous. She comes into this place and makes a joke about the 'Porter and Tudge debt collectors'. We are spending $170 billion on social services. We need to make sure, and taxpayers expect, that we are not paying one cent more than we need to, and yet the shadow minister comes in here and makes jokes. She says they have a right to rely on Centrelink. I absolutely agree. She says it is impossible to get things done in 21 days. How outrageous is that statement? She is totally out of touch. (Time expired) 12:33 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce This is a growing scandal and an important debate. We have heard that 40 per cent of debt notices are wrong—not four per cent, but 40 per cent. In any other government program a 40 per cent error rate would be an outrage. We should not accept it, but somehow it is okay when we are talking about vulnerable people. Can you imagine the reaction of those opposite if Labor were in government and sent blanket audit notices to all the super wealthy or to multinationals to make them pay their fair share of tax? What if 40 per cent of those notices were wrong? It would be a scandal. The Australian would go bananas. The tabloids would issue special lift-outs, with black borders, on struggling billionaires. But I do admit it is probably not a good idea, because the Green Left Weekly would like it, and that is never a good thing. In sending in the debt collectors, there is a presumption of guilt here. It is almost impossible for people to prove what they have done because who has payslips from five or six years ago? Even Centrelink's website—until they took it down and scrubbed it—advised people to keep their payslips for just six months, but there is no mention of that now. Businesses have closed. The lived experience of so many people on low incomes is of jumping from job to job, doing their best to declare everything to Centrelink, yet living in abject terror of getting something wrong, because they will lose their lives on a 1800 number. It is not just bad administration; it is ill-conceived and mean by design, picking on the vulnerable and with real impacts. The minister says it is just an opportunity to explain, but everyone knows that is nonsense. There is no explanation given by Centrelink; just a demand to start repaying a debt. Five dollars a week may not seem like a lot for many, but for those in my electorate who literally budget to the last dollar every fortnight, it absolutely is. The effect is compounded—I spoke to the House last week about the case of Michelle—because as soon as a debt is alleged people then lose the right that everyone else enjoys in emergencies to seek a small advance on their own family payments. I call on the government to reconsider this double-whammy rule because of the unfairness and the double impact on people who do not owe a debt and are later let out of that debt. Not being able to grab $100 or $200 to buy their kids' school books or pay a bill or an emergency medical bill is unfair. The government's reaction, having listened to it, is just astounding. It is not just denial but almost sociopathic scorn. Honestly, you opposite do not seem like terrible people. A little secret: I actually quite like a lot of you. But the response to this has been heartless and cruel. It is out of touch. There is denial, there is obfuscation, there is bewilderment at why we go on about this and there is blame and blustering like it is a crime to be poor. It is fantastic to hear that one of the Liberal members has been responding to his electorate, because my office has been deluged by people from neighbouring electorates, such as Deakin and Chisholm, whose members simply will not help them. We do what we can. We refer them to Senator Jacinta Collins, who is doing a great job. Minister Tudge's fudges in question time were policy by anecdote: 'We'll justify picking on thousands of people who don't owe anything because we found someone who cheated $100,000.' Fair enough. Get the person who cheated $100,000. But suggesting that people call a 1800 number with impossible waiting times and no discretion—all they do is say, 'Just upload what you have on the internet that you don't have'—and no explanations is pointless. It is to the state of absurd when Senator Eric Abetz, our little Aussie champion of the underdog from down under—it is such a weird world when 'Eric the Dark Lord' takes up the plight of the less fortunate. I do not believe, though, that it is an outbreak of compassion. It is a bit of Machiavellian magic to have a go at the Prime Minister. It is mainly a sign of how furious people are that even one such as Senator Abetz has spoken up. Possibly the weirdest contribution was from the member for Gilmore last week, who compared—I am not joking—running a government and Centrelink robo-debt scheme to her previous fudge packing and distribution business. I was so bemused that I popped that clip on the internet to actually see if anyone else understood it, but so far no-one has shed any light on it. My personal view, for the record—do not get excited—is that of course we should pursue significant debts from any time, and it is fair enough to seek repayment of small adjustments in more recent times if the system is right. But is it really worth pursuing tiny amounts of money from six years ago, with the cost of recovery and the incredible pain that this is causing to people? (Time expired) 12:38 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa This is nothing more than cheap, tawdry politics that has no foundation. It shows the Labor Party is bereft of ideas and policies. The reality is that in 2011 Bill Shorten introduced an automated system—the very one that we are looking at now. The hypocrisy of the Labor Party—to sit here and to try to have some game of politics that we are deluding the people of Australia around how the welfare system is in part being played out is absolute hypocrisy of the greatest level. We have a welfare system of $170 billion a year which we actually have to fund year after year after year. There are five million people across Australia that are on social security. We actually have to have a sustainable welfare system that will be able to go on for years to come. We cannot afford to play politics with this. We cannot afford to let political parties come in here, try to forget about their actions of the past and actually try to put on new governments the mess that they are trying to fix in order to give credibility and sustainability to a welfare system that is truly out of control. We actually have to make sure that we do balance the budget. That is what this government is about: it is about balancing a budget responsibly, not playing politics. This nation needs to move past the politics. The nation wants us to move past the petty politics that you guys are going on with now with this frivolous motion. It is doing nothing for the body politic in Australia. The reality around this whole system is that the letter that is sent out is not a notice of debt. People get three opportunities to declare their innocence, their actual actions, throughout this. This is an automated system that is working through government agencies to ensure that there is credibility in our welfare system, to ensure that we do look after those that are most vulnerable in our country, those that do need a safety net in terms of the welfare system that will provide that ongoing throughout the years to come. The other piece around this is that those who are the most vulnerable in the community are not part of this. We as a government have understood that there are people within our society that are vulnerable through disability or issues that they have, who we cannot undertake this type of program on. We have done that in a responsible and sensitive way to ensure that we do this in a pragmatic and sensible way to ensure that we have a welfare system that will continue on for years to come. That is an important piece of it. The other piece is that there will not be a computer system that will determine whether a debt is finally owed to the Australian people, the taxpayer, each and every one of us. It will be a human. It will be a person who will sit there and make a decision predicated on the information that has been provided. It is important that that is a pragmatic sensible way to ensure that the people of Australia, the taxpayers of Australia, get the money that they deserve. We have to be realistic. With five million people that are recipients of the welfare system, it would be very naive of any of us to think that there are not some people out there trying to defraud the system. We have to have credibility within that system. I think the Labor Party found that out quite quickly after they ran to the media and tried to make an issue out of this frivolous case. One of the examples came from Victoria. It was a recipient receiving Newstart for all of the financial years 2011-12 and 2011-13. During that time she declared less than $11,000 in employment income. The ATO data showed that she had earned more than $50,000 during that time. The customer had debt raised in relation to earnings in those financial years. I ask the question, as the federal government responsible for each and everybody's taxpayer money, why shouldn't we try to ensure that there is credibility, and not run off on some frivolous case of trying to make politics out of something that is quite important for ensuring that the Australian economy is one that has validity and sustainability, not trying to play on people's emotions when the reality does not exist. That again is another example from our friends in the Labor Party, who were quite embarrassed when they came out and made these claims. A recipient from Queensland was receiving Newstart for all financial years of 2011-12 and 2012-13. During that time he declared less than $22,000 employment income. However, ATO data showed that he had earned more than $52,000 during that time. The customer had a debt of approximately $15,000 raised in relation to that year. Those are the cases that the Labor Party had tried to politicise to try to embarrass the government. We are not embarrassed. This is about us ensuring that every Australian should have a safety net that will support them if times are not with them. That is why I am proud to be part of the government that will ensure that will happen and will ensure the sustainability of that system. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Australia Day Honours 136 12:43 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar What an honour it is to stand here today and congratulate those amongst us that have made an outstanding contribution to my own community and the nation at large. There is no shortage of men and women who go above and beyond on the northern beaches, be it in science, education, government, business, community service or sport. We are a people that get involved, not relying on others. We roll up our sleeves and give things a go. The hard work of 14 Mackellar residents was recognised in the 2017 Australia Day Honours. Dr Christopher Graham Roberts from Warriewood was made an Officer of the Order of Australia for his distinguished service to science and the development and commercialisation of medical biotechnology. Amongst other things, he has worked with the cochlear implant program—and the management of respiratory conditions has been instrumental in the Australian medical science field. He was the chief executive officer of Cochlear, and a non-executive director of ResMed and Research Australia. Janette Ailsa Davie from Palm Beach was made a Member of the Order in recognition of her significant service to the tourism sector through executive and advisory roles with travel industry associations and the community. President of the Visit USA Organisation Australia, she has represented travel agents and tour operators and is actively contributing in our community. Melinda Maree Gainsford-Taylor from Collaroy Plateau became a Member of the Order in recognition of her work as a role model for young athletes and her contribution to the sport of athletics as a nationally and internationally ranked sprinter. Spending significant energy in giving back to the sport, Melinda continues to coach Little Athletics and was chosen as ambassador for the Road to Rio mentoring program. Russell Grant Hammond, who resides in Bayview, joined fellow Members of the Order for his significant service to the performing arts and professional associations, particularly to music, as a conductor and administrator. Christine Julie Hopton from Clareville, as president of the Avalon Surf Life Saving Club—her contribution to surf lifesaving and passion for empowering women and girls was recognised with a Medal of the Order. Robert John McInerney, who lives in Newport, also received a Medal of the Order for his contribution to surf lifesaving and for his service as chair of the Veterans' Centre for Sydney Northern Beaches. Anne Marie Salvador from Beacon Hill, who has served the international community through numerous humanitarian programs, received the Medal of the Order. As founder and coordinator of Network Heaven, Anne supports orphanages and street children in Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Romania, Moldova and Zimbabwe. Finally, I would like to recognise an inspiring group of girls who took a non-existent team to the highest possible achievement in sports, winning a gold medal at the Rio Olympics. What an extraordinary feat in sportsmanship. Ellia Green and Shannon Parry from Dee Why; Alicia Quirk, Emma Tonegato and Chloe Dalton from Mona Vale; and Amy Turner and Sharni Williams from Newport: you proved that tenacity and teamwork can get you to the very top—and, best of all, you beat the Kiwis in my favourite sport, rugby. You represented Australia, you united a nation and you made us proud. With your teammates, you will continue to inspire young boys and girls on the beaches and across the country in years to come. I wish to thank all of those who were recognised here today. You have, and continue to demonstrate compassion, civility, dedication, courage, kindness, tolerance and energetic ambition. Thank you also to all the anonymous men and women who work tirelessly for the benefit of our entire community. You are an inspiration. There is no greater value to our younger generation than role models and to see firsthand people who put others before themselves. It is an absolute privilege to represent the Northern Beaches where there are so many of you. 12:48 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce The Australian honours system is an important part of our social fabric, and recognising outstanding community contributions helps us to define and demonstrate our national aspirations, ideals and standards. Recipients of Australian honours and awards are people whose actions have set them apart and enriched our community. In their daily lives, recipients demonstrate those values that we hold dear: compassion, civility, dedication, courage, kindness, ambition and tolerance, and they inspire us all to be more fully engaged citizens. Humble acts over many years are recognised as are more visible, striking acts that have already brought a recipient fame and glory. Whole segments of the Australian community receive special and separate recognition through complementary streams like public service, emergency services, military and so on, which is appropriate. I firmly believe that culture—the way we do things around here, as they say—is largely set by leaders, and national awards also help develop our national culture. The motion before us touches on the history of the order. The order, as we know it now, was instituted by Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth Regina, on Valentine's Day 1975. It is funny how the motion includes mention of her given the Order of Australia in 1975 replaced those hideous, nonegalitarian relics of royalty, empire and colonialism, the British imperial honours, which had been in place here prior to 1975. It is amusing, though somewhat nauseating, how many of those opposite just cannot miss a chance to mention the British monarch. Before anyone squawks that she is not the British monarch, that is actually how the Prime Minister described her in his remarks to the House last week, fawning over her long reign. Even deigned, she did, we heard, to visit Australia 16 times in 65 years. Like, wow, amazing; our head of state came to visit! So revered here, apparently, that few could say they are not Elizabethans. Well, I am not. While we are on history and royalty, knights and dames were removed from the general division in the Australian awards in 1986. Hurrah, we thought. But no; in an inexplicable move just three years ago then Prime Minister Tony Abbott had a total brain fail and surprised everyone, including his cabinet, by reintroducing them. He caused a moment of national hilarity, the likes of which I cannot remember, by creating Sir Prince Philip. There are really no words. Anyway, sirs and dames seem to have gone away again, so enough on royalty. I congratulate and thank all recipients from this year's Australia Day honours and awards and I want to pay particular tribute to four outstanding people in my electorate of Bruce. Three were awarded OAMs in the most recent round. First is Mr Timothy Disken, who I had the pleasure of meeting last year and have already spoken to this House about, for service to sport as a gold medallist in the Rio 2016 Paralympics. Tim, when he competed at his first Paralympics, was just 19, yet he returned to Australia with gold, silver and bronze medals. He has already competed in the world swimming championships, Para Pan Pacs in California and many other games and he has a bright future in front of him. I am delighted that one of the largest and best special schools in my electorate, the Glenallen School, has recently named their swimming pool after him. There was also Captain Donald Beresford Bergman (Retd) of Noble Park for his service over many years to veterans, their families and the community, including work over decades at the Shrine of Remembrance as a marshal on Anzac Day in the city, at Noble Park RSL's parade and for his work in the Noble Park RSL and for various amateur theatre causes. There was Dr Ranjana Srivastava for service to medicine, particularly in the field of doctor-patient communications. She is a medical oncologist, general physician, member of the health complaints commissioner review council Victoria and adjunct professor. She has been a Fulbright Scholar, a regular columnist, an essayist, an author and, indeed, a nominee and recipient of distinguished literary prizes, a medical volunteer at the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre and in Calcutta—and the list goes on. Finally, I also acknowledge Ms Gemma Varley, who received a public service medal for outstanding public service through the drafting of legislation in Victoria. She was in fact the parliamentary counsel, as I recall, for many years in the Victorian government. From my former life as a public servant in Victoria, I can assure the House that the entire public service and senior echelons of the bureaucracy lived in fear and respect of Gemma returning a brief with a semicolon moved that her eagle eye never let pass. Congratulations to all the recipients. 12:54 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on this motion and I thank my friend the member for Berowra for proposing it. My home, the Sunshine Coast, has been proud to boast many recipients of awards in the Order of Australia, and this year's 2017 Australia Day honours added more to that illustrious list. In support of the motion, I would like to tell the chamber about some of them. Kevin Carroll, from Maroochydore, close to my electorate of Fisher, has been involved in the vital work of our nation's defence for almost 60 years. Mr Carroll spent more than two decades as an avionics technician and engineer in the Royal Australian Air Force. In that role alone he was critical to the operational effectiveness of his RAAF units, conducting flight-line maintenance of instrumentation, communication and weapon systems. Mr Carroll went on to become a squadron leader in the RAAF with many deployments, including the Australian embassies in Washington DC and Malaysia. His citation, however, lists his significant service to business as an advocate for Australian manufacturers. Professor John Yeaman, of Buddina, was also recognised with a Member of the Order of Australia award. He, like Kevin Carroll, served in our nation's armed forces as a soldier in the Royal Australian Engineers. Almost 60 years ago, however, he began the work for which he received his honour, in roads and civil engineering. Following a number of roles in industry, Professor Yeaman began his own business, Pavement Management Services, which he ran for nearly 30 years. During that time, he took part in innumerable industry organisations. He was a committee member of the National Association of Testing Authorities, a board member of the Universities Accreditation Board and Engineers Australia and a fellow of the Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation, among many others. More recently, Professor Yeaman has made a commitment to keep young people interested in the science of engineering. Finally, I am pleased to tell the chamber about my good friend Don Moffatt. Don is a Sunshine Coast legend, and I know that everyone in our community was delighted to hear that he had been made a Member of the Order of Australia. His citation lists his significant service to the community of the Sunshine Coast, and it is fair to say that this is an understatement. More than 1,000 people every year owe Don and his work a great debt of gratitude. In many cases, without his efforts, their very lives would have been in serious danger. Don is the founder of the Sunshine Coast Helicopter Rescue Service, Australia's first voluntary helicopter rescue organisation. As a young man, in 1968, Don flew choppers over the jungles in Vietnam for the Australian Army. He knew firsthand what an enormous relief and life-saving presence rotary wing aircraft could be for those who are injured or ill in hard-to-reach places. On his return to Australia, Don could see how Queensland's expansive land and sometimes isolated communities could benefit from that same help. As Don himself has said, if you have an accident and you are out on a property somewhere, there is no better noise to hear than the woop-woop of those helicopter blades, because then you know that someone is coming to take care of you. In 1979, Don began the process of building the Sunshine Coast Helicopter Rescue Service with Queensland government support. In 1985, he bought the organisation's first Jet Ranger helicopter for half a million dollars. Don continues as the deputy chairman of the Sunshine Coast Helicopter Rescue Service, and he has improved that service over many years, increasing the number of helicopters that that service has operated. But he does not rest there. Don has found time to pursue his passion for horseracing. He has been the Director of the Sunshine Coast Racing Unit Trust and the Deputy Chairman of the Sunshine Coast Turf Club. In those roles, he was a significant part of getting lights and synthetic track installed at the club, which allowed it to become one of the very few night-time racing venues in Australia. Don, you are an absolute legend, and your order is well deserved. 12:59 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand A national honours system should reflect the values of that nation. It should celebrate the values that we hold dear as a country and the achievements of individual Australians in furtherance of these values. It should both reflect and represent the best of our nation. As Australia has changed over time, so too has the way that we recognise Australians for outstanding contributions to our nation. Reflecting the proud, independent nation that Australia had become, state and federal Labor governments ceased making recommendations for awards under the British imperial awards system in 1972, and the Whitlam government created the Australian honours system in 1975. That is why the public's reaction to the Abbott government's reinstatement of knights and dames was so strong: it is just not a reflection of who we are as a nation. Since the creation of the modern Australian honours system, many great Australians have been recognised through these awards. However, the contributions of many other deserving recipients have been overlooked during this time. The primary purpose of the Order of Australia is: … to recognise … those who have made outstanding contributions that benefit their communities, and ultimately our country. That is all well and good, but the stated secondary purpose of the Order of Australia is: … to define, encourage and reinforce community standards, national aspirations and ideals by acknowledging actions and achievement and thereby identifying role models at all levels and in all spheres of the community. By this count, Australia's honours system is failing to deliver for our nation. The sad reality is that Australia's honours system continues to overlook important contributions to our communities and our nation as a whole made by women and people from minority backgrounds. Since the inception of our modern awards system in 1975, to date, women have been recipients of just 30.3 per cent of all Orders of Australia. This has barely improved in recent times. Between 2012 and 2016, women received just 31.4 per cent of awards. The problem is more acute at the top. Over the history of the awards, women have received barely 15 per cent of the ACs—the highest award—issued and not even 20 per cent of the AOs, the second highest. This year's awards show only marginal progress. It is pleasing that 45 per cent of this year's ACs—five out of the 11 awards—were women, including our first female Prime Minister and a long-time resident of Melbourne's west, Julia Gillard. Only 35 per cent, however, of the 2017 honours list are women—just 252 women, barely half of the 475 men. This figure is up three per cent since 2016, but it is still a long way from equality. This is not just a selection problem but a problem of recognition that extends to individual nominations by the public. Indeed, just 320 women were nominated for the general division of the Order of Australia awards this year, in comparison with 651 men. Does anyone still think this is about merit? Does anyone think that in 2017 men are making twice the contribution to our communities and our nation that women are? There is clearly something else at play here. Unfortunately the current model of community nomination is perpetuating the enduring inequality of recognition in our communities in our national awards. The Australian Honours and Awards Branch does not even collect data on the CALD, disability or ATSI status of recipients of these honours. The Governor-General's office indicates that, for orders, this information is not collected 'as it does not affect a person's eligibility for recognition in the Order of Australia'. Given the near ubiquity with which this information is collected across other government activities, this is peculiar indeed. Collecting this information might provide those responsible for these awards with valuable information beyond the mere eligibility of an applicant. It might indicate that we need to do more work to promote and encourage nominations from CALD communities. You cannot improve what you do not measure. We do know that just 12 per cent of award recipients between 1975 and 2016 were Australians who were born overseas. Given that 28 per cent of the Australian resident population, not the citizen population, were born overseas, we should expect to see a similar underrepresentation on this front. While in the past Australia has periodically sought to move our national award system away from the elitist and exclusive imperial awards of Great Britain, the Old Dart has, shamefully, moved ahead of us in creating a national award system that reflects a diverse modern nation. The United Kingdom's 2017 New Year's honours list was 'the most diverse ever'. Women received more than 50 per cent of the honours. People from black, Asian or minority ethnic backgrounds picked up 9.3 per cent of the awards, and 8.5 per cent of the awards went to people with a disability. Unfortunately, knights and dames are not the only anachronism that has plagued Australian national awards in recent years. It is time that the recipients of Australia's honours looked like the nation that they came from. 13:04 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde It is with great pleasure that I rise today to recognise one of the wonderful constituents of the electorate of Forde and acknowledge her efforts in receipt of her OAM. The Order of Australia is the highest national honour awarded to Australian citizens for outstanding contributions to our country and humanity. It was quite disappointing to listen to the previous member's contribution to this debate. Since being established, there have been more than 30,000 recipients of this award. This Australia Day, one of those recipients was Forde's very own Robin Gallen. Robin was awarded the OAM for her service to community health. She is one of our region's finest examples of a person who serves the community with selflessness and dedication. Robin has been heavily involved in the local community since moving to the region in 1988. Her time as a girl guide instilled a passion for community spirit which followed her throughout her life—from her time as a teacher to her work as a diversional therapist in nursing homes throughout southeast Queensland. Robin's involvement in the Forde community and, more broadly, the Logan community ranges from helping to establish the Logan Seniors Network to serving as the president of the Crestmead 40+ Club, being a youth leader at the Girls' Friendly Society, volunteering with Guide Dogs Queensland, assisting the RSL Care Talbarra community and contributing her time to the Saint Marks Anglican Church. At one point, she went on to work as a diversional therapy teacher and coordinated the Logan City Business Academy. More recently, she has served on the board of the Wesleyan Methodist Church at Logan and has volunteered at the Logan Entertainment Centre. It is always a pleasure, when you go to events at the Logan Entertainment Centre, to see Robin as part of the greeting team, so warmly welcoming everybody who is coming to attend the function. Robin's hard work and commitment to the community has been recognised on many occasions locally. She was presented with the first-ever life membership award for her efforts with Diversional Therapy Australia; she was a founding member of the Queensland branch. She has received the prestigious Mayor's Spirit of Logan award from the city of Logan. In 2009, she also won the esteemed Most Active Senior award. I am so proud to have somebody like Robin living in my community—somebody who goes above and beyond to help others. But more importantly, I am blessed to be able to call her a friend. Robin has always put her passion to help others at the forefront of everything she does. Her community spirit shines everywhere she goes. It was my pleasure to support the application for Robin's Order of Australia. Robin is a very deserving recipient, and I have no doubt that the people of our community of Forde feel enormously proud of her achievements and her involvement in our local community. Robin, thank you for everything that you do for the community of Forde and, more generally, Logan. Congratulations on your Order of Australia award. 13:07 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin The Order of Australia awards were introduced in 1975 to recognise Australians who made an outstanding contribution to our country. The awards have a secondary purpose as a national expression of thanks to those same people. In a similar vein, Australian and local government awards are conferred each year on thousands of local residents who are equally deserving of public recognition and thanks. Determining who should receive the awards is often difficult. I have no doubt that, over the years, many deserving people have not been recognised. Regrettably, there is a widely held perception in the community that, too often, the recipients of the major awards are people who hold senior or influential positions in society or people who have been in the public spotlight and who have been more than adequately recognised and rewarded for their contributions. It is a perception which serves to diminish the value of the awards in the minds of many Australians. For that reason, it is important that public faith is maintained in the award and that not only is the award process free of political influence but the awards are given on merit that will withstand public scrutiny. I noted the comments of the member for Gellibrand just a moment ago in respect of that, and I appreciate the points that he brought to the attention of the House. Having said that, I congratulate the recipients of this year's Australia Day awards, and I add my thanks for their efforts in making a difference to the country and the world in which we live. Although time does not allow me to read the full citation for each of them, I take this opportunity to acknowledge locals within my electorate who were recognised in this year's awards. Corey Dunn received an Australian Fire Service Medal. Corey, of Tea Tree Gully, has been with the South Australian Country Fire Service since 1993. He started out as a volunteer brigade firefighter with Salisbury, and then Tea Tree Gully, and has since gone on to develop curriculum and leadership initiatives, implement national work safety training packages and personally facilitate more than 30 tactical command and leadership courses across South Australia. He has been the air attack supervisor for the South Australian CFS since 2001, performing the highly demanding role in major bushfire incidents, including the Kangaroo Island fires of 2007 and the massive Sampson Flat bushfires that threatened metropolitan Adelaide in 2015. Glenn Benham also received an Australian Fire Service Medal. Glenn, of Wynn Vale, joined the South Australian Metropolitan Fire Service in 1982 as a firefighter and has progressed to the rank of assistant chief fire officer. He has been a mentor to many firefighters throughout his long career and a member of the SAMFS executive and has helped the South Australian Fire and Emergency Commission in the areas of harmonisation, modernisation and alignment. Glenn has also been doing outstanding work helping the Tongan fire and emergency service rebuild their country following major civil unrest, in which 80 per cent of the capital was destroyed by arson fires. I also mention Charles Figallo, who was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia. Charles is a successful businessman and industry leader through his company, Basetec Services. I have known Charles for many, many years. He also serves on several industry bodies. More important is the long list of community organisations that Charles has been associated with, including, but not limited to, the Make-A-Wish Foundation, Diabetes SA, the Variety SA, the Fred Hollows Foundation and Doctors Without Borders. I particularly single out Charles's role in fundraising and in having an Anzac memorial established in Malta, in recognition of Malta's assistance in caring for wounded Anzac soldiers from Gallipoli, with some 300 ultimately having been laid to rest there. I also congratulate David Adamson, who was awarded Citizen of the Year by the City of Tea Tree Gully. In the City of Salisbury, Christopher Moore was awarded Citizen of the Year; Damien Walker, Young Citizen of the Year; and William Leslie, Senior Citizen of the Year. Yunus Noori was awarded Citizen of the Year by the City of Port Adelaide Enfield, and Kyran Dixon was Young Citizen of the Year. I take this opportunity to recognise a local legend, Ray Goodes, who this year celebrates 60 years of service as a member of the Tea Tree Gully Country Fire Service. Ray, who turns 88 this month—in fact, in a week's time, and I wish him a happy 88th birthday!—has seen it all when it comes to fires and emergencies, including the Ash Wednesday fires in South Australia nearly four decades ago, and, more recently, the 2015 Sampson Flat fires. Indeed, when I visited the Tea Tree Gully CFS during the midst of those fires, there was Ray giving his advice and experience to the other volunteers. Ray is still volunteering, and his personal experience and knowledge is invaluable. To all of those people, I extend my congratulations and thanks for their service to our local community. 13:12 Mr DRUM 56430 Murray I would like to congratulate the member for Berowra, Julian Leeser, for bringing to the parliament this motion in relation to the Australia Day 2017 honours list. I have the opportunity here to talk about a range of community minded champions in my electorate of Murray who have received various awards on Australia Day. We have two members of the Order of Australia, four new medals of the Order of Australia and 62 people who received Australian citizenship at the ceremony in Shepparton. Firstly, the members of my electorate who received a Medal of the Order of Australia. Brian Cossar, from Yarrawonga, was honoured for his service to veterans and their families through the RSL and Legacy. Brian served in the Vietnam War. Bruce Pigdon, also from Yarrawonga, was honoured for his services to Yarrawonga Health. He has been on the Yarrawonga Health Board as a director for 23 years. Eleanor Hardie, from Echuca, had a significant career with the Mid Murray Flying Club as a director from 1966 to 2004 and with the Royal Federation of Aero Clubs as a board member from 1998 to 2008. Malcolm Whyte, from Echuca, has a record of amazing service to youth and has been recognised for his work with the scout group, the Echuca primary school, the Echuca Historical Society, the Apex Club, the Navigation Society and the Echuca Port restoration. In relation to members of the Order of Australia, Mr John Dainton was given this honour. He was recognised for his significant service to the environment through natural resource management. In the 1980s, John carried out critical work in fixing salinity throughout the Goulburn Valley. He was paramount in the formation of the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority. He is extremely excited about this award, although he was at pains to suggest that this is very much a team effort. Also we have an absolute champion in the Goulburn Valley. The Order of Australia medal was given posthumously to Chris McPherson. Chris McPherson had an amazing career in the print industry as one of the McPherson media family. He had grown up in this particular industry. As soon as he could walk he was tearing around the offices of the Shepparton News,fidgeting on his grandpa's knee and scampering out amongst the printing machines. He also mixed his love of cars and speed with his work in getting to the Kyabram Free Press on time. Sometimes he created a bit of a cloud of dust when he was dropping off various amounts of copy for the next publication to go out. I think Chris is going to be best remembered not only for his love of newspapers, cars and speed, and the Melbourne Football Club but for his love of family and the work he did in the last 10 years of his life in relation to the Biggest Ever Blokes Lunch, which he founded in Shepparton and has since spread right around the state of Victoria and Australia, raising more than $2.8 million for the Prostate Cancer Foundation. This work has enabled so many normal, everyday Australians, particularly men, to understand the dangers and harm in doing nothing and taking it for granted that they will be one of the lucky ones. It is continually pushing people—pushing men—to hear the stories of those who were taking their health for granted and not getting the test done. The message is: go and see your GP, make sure you get tested and keep control of your bloods. I think this will be the work that Chris McPherson is going to be best remembered for, but he was an amazing board member of the GOTAFE as well. He was the Australian Volunteer of the Year in 2015 in recognition of the amount of work that he put into raising these phenomenal amounts of money. I was lucky to play a small part in bringing the Biggest Ever Blokes Lunch from Shepparton across to Bendigo, which was one of the very first places outside of its birthplace place in Shepparton to run the Biggest Ever Blokes Lunch. It has grown and grown since those early days. This year we had bowel cancer contributions to the program as well. We are going to find now a whole range of specialists employed to assist with the detection to ensure that people take a proactive role in the fight against prostate cancer. Certainly the work that Chris McPherson, along with his great friend Graeme Johnson, did in this field in 2009 to get this thing started has raised money and spread the word not to take your health for granted. 13:18 Ms BRODTMANN 30540 Canberra Australia's honours system provides us with the opportunity to acknowledge the achievements of outstanding Australians and to thank them for their contribution to our community, our nation and our world. I congratulate the many Canberrans who are honoured this year, particularly our proud servers of democracy and members of the Australian Defence Force. I single out just two, not because they are more exceptional than the others but because of my personal connection to them and their nominations. The first is Peter Ryan OAM. I am the daughter-in-law of a late Vietnam veteran. I know the struggles that many of them have endured—struggles that have not been confined to them alone but experienced by their spouses, partners and children. As the former local President of the Vietnam Veterans Association, Peter Ryan has been the go-to guy for vets for years. He has worked for decades and on countless committees and organisations to help vets through their personal struggles and to support vets in navigating the DVA process. He has also been instrumental in fostering a greater appreciation and understanding of their service and sacrifice in the broader community. One of Peter's proudest achievements is seeing the annual ACT Vietnam Veterans Day service grow from 50 borrowed chairs and a ghetto-blaster in 2000 to more than 3,500 people in 2016. I want to thank Kevin Gill and the many others who have worked tirelessly on Peter's nomination. Peter is battling cancer, and time has been of the essence. His main focus now is on making the investiture, and I am very much looking forward to seeing him there. The second is Kim Brennan, AM. Kim was honoured for her mentoring and for her significant service to rowing, to the welfare of elite athletes, to sport—as a gold medallist at the Rio Olympics—and to the community. In writing a reference for Kim, I was struck by the fact that she is an incredibly impressive woman. She is a dual world champion. She is the chair of the Australian Olympic Committee Athletes' Commission. She sits on the Australian Olympic Committee executive board. She is a qualified lawyer. She graduated from the University of Melbourne with first class honours. She was a winner of the Joan Rosanove QC Memorial Prize. She is also a rower, but she is not just a rower; she was a silver medallist in hurdles. She is an extraordinary woman. Congratulations, Kim. We are proud you call Canberra home. One of the great disappointments about reading the list this year was again seeing more men than women, despite a 20 per cent increase in female nominations and honours in the last decade. This Australia Day, 651 men were nominated for the general division of the Order of Australia awards, compared with 320 women. That is 66 per cent men and 34 per cent women. The honours list recognised 475 men and 252 women. That is 65 per cent men and 35 per cent women. What is worse, according to an excellent article by Fairfax's Tom McIlroy, is that there were no female nominations in six of the 31 categories, including building and construction, engineering, information technology, and surveying and mapping. Only one woman was nominated in science, technological developments and research development— compared to 20 men. Despite the parlous nomination rate, particularly in these six categories, nearly 79 per cent of women who were nominated made the list, compared to 73 per cent of men. So there is a better chance of women receiving awards if they are part of the mix. So I am urging every member of this chamber to make a call out to their communities to nominate women in advance of the 2017 Queen's Birthday and 2018 Australia Day honours lists. That starts with identifying and nominating women. How about we all nominate, look for, one woman a week. Think laterally. Do not just default to the CEOs, the managing directors, the entertainers, the professors, the heads of departments, the deans or the VCs. Think creatively. Think about all the extraordinary women you meet each day in your role as their representative and, most importantly, nominate them. Nominate these extraordinary woman because, as I said, the more women in the mix, the more women who will get up. On Australia Day, I proudly renewed my membership of the Australian Republic Movement. I also started compiling my list of extraordinary Canberra women. I am looking forward to getting underway with those nominations. I encourage Canberrans to find out how to nominate at www.gg.gov.au. We need one woman a week, Canberra. We need one woman a week, Australia. Let us get these figures from one third to one half to reflect the population and contribution of today's modern Australia. The diversity, the depth and the sophistication of today's modern Australia mean 50 per cent women. 13:23 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo This motion gives all of us a chance to stand up and acknowledge our recipients of OAMs on Australia Day. In Bendigo, we had two brilliant Bendigonians acknowledged. I would like to acknowledge their achievements and recognition at the beginning of my contribution. It is fitting that the member for Murray is in the chamber whilst I mention these two outstanding individuals because, when he was the Minister for Veterans' Affairs in Victoria, he would have worked closely with Cliff Richards, OAM, and Susan McQueen, OAM. Both have been acknowledged for their contribution to veterans in central Victoria. Cliff, who is a well-known and well-loved character— not just amongst the veterans' community but amongst the Bendigo community—served in the Australian Army during the Vietnam War. On his return, he joined the RSL, even though it was not popular to do so at the time. He has also been actively involved in Scouts. In 1997, Cliff was elected as the Senior Vice-President of the Bendigo District RSL. In 2002, he became the president. One of the things that Cliff has done so well is the way in which he has reached out to schools, to the younger generation, to involve them in the veterans' community. A number of innovative and amazing programs have flourished under his leadership at the Bendigo RSL. I must acknowledge the work he has done with the Bendigo South East College as well as the work he has done with the Bendigo redevelopment and revitalisation project in both Pall Mall and their outdoor museum. Susan McQueen was also acknowledged, receiving an Order of Australia Medal for her services to veterans and their families. It is an odd place to have it, but there is a wonderful volunteer based service being run from the Bendigo Railway Station. On the left-hand side is the home of the veterans support group and organisation that they run. She began volunteering for the Central Victorian Vietnam Veterans Support Centre 30 years ago and, today and for many years, has been the centre's administrator. She now oversees a team of about 30 volunteers. Her husband is a Vietnam veteran, and he currently works alongside her to assist veterans and their families. What is remarkable about this service and it being volunteer based is that they support people from all over Australia. They support veterans and their families navigate their way through a complex system. Susan talks about how quite often when veterans come to see her or to speak to her they put their hand up to say, 'Look, I'm not as bad as others,' or 'Do I really need this?' or 'Can you help me find my way through the system?' She is wonderful in the way in which she receives them and does the work, day in and day out. She was completely overwhelmed and shocked to receive the reward because she says she does it for the veterans, for their families and for the love of the community. These are just two of the many people who have been recognised over the years from the Bendigo community. I would also, in this speech, like to acknowledge the ongoing contribution of other OAM winners, including: Valerie Broad, recognised for the tireless work she has done for the local arts community, in particular the Bendigo Youth Choir; and Dr Adel Asaid, who is ensuring that so many people in central Victoria have access to GP services. He has clinics in multiple locations and, without his GP clinics, people in towns like Elmore, Rochester, Boort and Heathcote would not have access to GP services—from the clinic based in Strathfieldsaye all the way out to these small towns in the area. You cannot list recipients of this great honour in Bendigo without acknowledging the ongoing contribution of Gordon McKern. He is an institution within himself in Bendigo, and it is hard to go to a public function in Bendigo without bumping into Gordon McKern, whether it be on the arts, the inventors awards or a citizenship ceremony. Gordon is a great advocate for Bendigo—a great advocate for Bendigo businesses, community and council. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the tireless efforts and ongoing contribution that Patti Cotton makes to our community. She is somebody who speaks her mind and stands up for those who are most in need. We are very lucky to live in a part of the world like central Victoria, and it is great that so many central Victorians continue to be acknowledged through this program: the Order of Australia. Congratulations, once again. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Sitting suspended from 13:28 to 16 : 00 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 144 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Burt Electorate: Broadband 144 16:10 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt Over the past six months in this place, I have spoken several times about the NBN rollout in my electorate and particularly in the suburb of Thornlie—or at least the lack of NBN rollout, because up until a month ago Thornlie was not even on the NBN rollout map. So I was pleasantly surprised to see on the NBN Co website this January that my lobbying had finally paid off. Thornlie is finally on the NBN rollout map. While I am glad that the Turnbull government has finally realised that Thornlie exists, we are once again seeing the Liberals put Perth's south-east last. The earliest that Thornlie will receive the NBN is June 2019, almost three full years after Malcolm Turnbull's promised deadline for when every household in Australia would be connected. Earlier this month, I hosted a forum with my colleague the state Labor member for Gosnells, Chris Tallentire, to hear from constituents about their internet issues. I can tell you this: Thornlie residents are angry. We have some of the poorest internet speeds in the country in Thornlie, and some homes cannot even get access to ADSL. Indeed, some of these homes are even in 4G black spots, so they cannot even get wireless broadband. Yet this Liberal government's mismanagement of the NBN will force residents and businesses to wait another 2½ years for access to decent broadband, and even then they will still be only connected to a copper 'fraudband'. I will keep on fighting for a faster NBN rollout in Burt, and I am glad to see that WA Labor is joining the fight, committing—unlike the WA Liberals—to standing up for a better deal from Canberra for WA. La Trobe Electorate: Little Athletics 144 16:11 Mr WOOD E0F La Trobe I recently had the great pleasure to attend the Sherbrooke Little Athletics Annual Royal Children's Relayathon. Amazingly, the club ran an incredible 92 kilometres that morning to raise money for the local hospital and in fact raised $450. It was very impressive. I got there at seven o'clock in the morning, and they were running 100-metre splits, so basically every minute or so you would be running again. The guys did an incredible job. I would like to make a special mention of Daniel Fisher, who ran nine kilometres that morning. The club has been going for 47 years. When I was younger, I was at that club. It is a great club. It runs on a grass track, which makes things a bit tough. We recently gave it some funding for a long jump, and the club greatly appreciated that. Credit definitely goes to Chris Crennan, the president of the club; Ed Thomson, the vice president; Greg Carroll, the secretary; and Stewart Brock, the treasurer. These members have committed a lot of their time to helping young people getting involved in athletics in the area. In fact, there are over 160 members between the ages of five and 15. I again congratulate the club and thank it—especially the committee members—for all of its efforts, and encourage parents to get their kids involved in Little Athletics. Western Sydney Airport 144 16:13 Ms HUSAR 263328 Lindsay I rise once again to draw attention to the complete disregard that this government is showing my community through its plans to build the Western Sydney Airport. This is an airport that has been in the public sphere for decades, and my community have made it perfectly clear to anyone interested in listening that they support the airport, but only if it operates with the same curfew conditions given to the eastern suburbs, only if there is an operational train line from day one to stop our roads being further clogged, and only if our local community benefits from the jobs that this airport claims it will create. These are entirely reasonable expectations from a community, and they have been put to successive governments time and time again. It should come as no surprise that these are conditions that a large majority of my community have based their support for the airport on. It is an absolute affront to the people of Lindsay for this government to completely ignore these community expectations and then seek to ram down our throats an airport that the minister himself and the Prime Minister would never consider for their own communities, while this arrogant Liberal government continues to wage a dishonest and deliberately misleading campaign about this airport and who it does and does not support. Now is the time to make sure that the final product fits within my community's expectations. That is my job, and I will not sit idly by while my constituents are sold a pup. I call on the government to listen to my community and to be fair to my constituents, instead of asking Western Sydney to yet again suck it up and cop what the eastern suburbs would not. Flynn Electorate: Boyne River 145 16:15 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I rise today to raise awareness of the fight currently faced by farmers along the Boyne River in the Burnett region of my electorate of Flynn. The Boyne River is home to a suite of high-value agricultural operations and products, producing citrus, pecan nuts, blueberries and smaller crops, utilising water from the Boondooma dam. Irrigation agriculture on the Boyne has an estimated value of $90 million. Boondooma dam sits across the Boyne River between Boondooma and Okeden in South Burnett. Built in 1982, it has a capacity of 204,000 megalitres. A pipeline built in 1983 which was badly damaged in the flood of 2001 needs search repair. The Tarong powerhouse and the Boyne River irrigators are the beneficiaries of these two pieces of infrastructure established in the 1980s under Joh. Irrigators along the Boyne River have been notified that they will have no water come March as the 70,000-megalitre threshold is getting very close. It is currently at 72,000 megalitres. Losing this water will have a devastating effect on the local communities, as it will on agricultural output. Up to 900 people work on these farms in peak season. I want the Queensland government to look at water infrastructure. It is a very valuable part of our increase in agricultural products. Bruce Electorate: Chinese New Year 145 16:16 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce 'Xin nian kuai le', 'Gong xi fa cai' and 'Da jia hao'—these phrases which mean 'May you have a prosperous New Year', 'Happy New Year' and 'Hello, everybody' are ones which more and more Australians have heard in the last few weeks. I rise to acknowledge the Chinese New Year or the Lunar New Year, which is widely celebrated in my electorate of Bruce. I have attended many fantastic community celebrations in Springvale, Dandenong and Glen Waverley, welcoming the Year of the Rooster—a year of energy and excitement. It is a chance to reflect with family and friends on the year gone and the year ahead. I think it is especially interesting, as I reflect on my time attending high school—last century it was, now—in the northern part of my electorate that Chinese New Year, at that point, was not a mainstream thing but a fringe thing that happened over in the corner. But it is now firmly part of the mainstream Australian community. It is a great thing that people can remember their identity, language and culture and celebrate that while they integrate, not assimilate, to life in Australia. I also think it is fantastic for Australia's future in Asia that we encourage a society where people can learn culture and languages and use those skills and networks to our benefit. It is a wonderful thing how many Chinese Australians have chosen to become citizens and great citizens of our country. I congratulate Vincent Chow in particular and Daniel Cheng on their role in organising community celebrations. Xie xie. Lavender Bay Railway Line 145 16:18 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney Twenty-five years ago, Sydney's well-known 'red rattlers' were decommissioned from service following a final journey across the Sydney Harbour Bridge. They were single-deck ageing trains without air conditioning. Some of the rolling stock entered service in the 1930s. Yet they held a special place in the hearts of many Sydneysiders. Yesterday, the red rattler returned to North Sydney and, for the first time in many years, residents were able to travel along the historic Lavender Bay Railway line. The event was, however, about more than just our rail heritage. It was an opportunity for residents to see a rail track that many of us hope will one day become Sydney's very own high line, based on the success of those that have been created in New York and Paris. This rail line could be one of Sydney's great harbourside walks. Linking, as it does, Milsons Point with Waverton through the historic McMahons Point tunnel, it provides incredible views of our harbour. It would also provide new access to places like Wendy's Garden, that marvellous creation of Wendy Whiteley, along with Sawmillers and Balls Head reserves. I am confident it would become one of Sydney's great tourist attractions. Heritage train events are a great first start. What I hope will follow will be the opening of the line to pedestrians, perhaps even shared with the rail line while it is needed for operational purposes. There is certainly room to do so. With some vision for the future, this incredible legacy of our transport past could become one of our city's great public spaces, enjoyed by people from near and far. Rugby League All Stars 146 16:19 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I wish to pay tribute to the National Rugby League's All Stars program, which, following a week of terrific community events, culminated last Friday night in the Indigenous All Stars versus the World All Stars match in Newcastle. I was especially privileged to be there along with 20,000 other loyal rugby league fans in Newcastle. The Indigenous All Stars teams were particularly strong on the night, taking out both the men's and the women's matches. I think it significant to note that this is the first time that an All Stars fixture has been taken out of Queensland—a fact I enjoyed immensely—and played in an important regional centre like Newcastle. I thank the NRL for having faith in Newcastle and choosing our city to host such an important event. I was absolutely thrilled that the NRL showcased the women's game before the men's fixture and that there was such a number of strong, local Aboriginal women taking part in that game. I particularly want to acknowledge the team captain, Bec Young, a Worimi woman from north of Newcastle; and the star centre, Caitlyn Moran. Both women, of course, are vital members of the Jillaroos squads as well. Again, I thank the NRL for staging such an important event and strongly urge the continuation of this tradition. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 16:21 to 16:33 Durack Electorate: Mental Health 146 16:33 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I am pleased to speak about my contribution to address one of the largest health issues in Durack: mental health. Last week, I announced that the Mid West Mental Health Service will have a suicide prevention trial. Mental health, especially suicide rates, across the country, particularly in regional and rural Australia, is a growing concern for me, and I am pleased that there will be a suicide prevention trial in the Mid West. Following consultation with the community, the WA Primary Care Health Network will run the suicide prevention trail site and target the trial specifically to the needs and demands of the mid-west in WA. The targeted suicide prevention trial site illustrates that, as the federal member for Durack, I am listening to the needs of my constituents and not just adapting a model that does not suit Durack. This follows on from the work that we are doing in other parts of my electorate, namely the Kimberley. Earlier this month, I joined Minister for Indigenous Health Ken Wyatt at the working group meeting in Broome, which is the next step in planning for the suicide prevention trial in the Kimberley. I want to take this opportunity to thank all the members of the working group in the Kimberley who are indeed our eyes and ears in the Kimberley. Wehbe, Ms Gabriella 146 16:35 Ms OWENS E09 Parramatta On Australia Day a very special young woman became the 2017 Parramatta Young Citizen of the Year. Gabriella Wehbe was the assistant head girl of Our Lady of Mercy College in Parramatta and completed her HSC last year. But, unlike many other young women of her age, Gabbie finished the HSC at the same time as she battled cancer. While running in the 2015 City2Surf, she felt a twinge in her foot, an operation was performed and rare cancer cells were discovered. A week later the family found themselves in the Chris O'Brien Lifehouse receiving the bad news. Gabbie was diagnosed with an aggressive tissue cancer that affects teenagers between the ages of 15 and 20 and has a 15 per cent mortality rate. Throughout her treatment, Gabbie continued to attend classes and play netball, She emceed her school's graduation ceremony and won the prestigious Catherine McAuley prize. But that is not why she was awarded this prestigious young citizen of the year award. It is not what she did for herself and her community; it is what she did for others. Through all that, while she did her HSC, while she was treated for cancer, while she supported her school as assistant head girl, she managed to raise $200,000 for the Lifehouse foundation that had so supported her through her illness. This is an extraordinary young woman. She has already done more than many of us will in our life, and I wish her all the best for the next chapter. Fairfax Electorate: Bushfires 146 16:36 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax So busy are the lives of everyday Australians that it sometimes takes a major event for us to pause, take a step back and reflect on how lucky we are and to remind ourselves of how fundamentally decent, brave and generous our fellow Australians are. Such an event occurred in my electorate of Fairfax only last month when, on Thursday, 19 January, a small flame became a roaring inferno lasting five days and threatening Coolum, Peregian Springs and surrounding areas. This fire would have become a catastrophe for not only properties but lives if it were not for those who put themselves in harm's way to protect others. I rise today in this, our federal chamber, with a message to the rural fire brigades of Doonan, Valdora, Maroochy River, Bli Bli, Eumundi, Maleny, Verrierdale, Ilkley, Landsborough, Beerwah, Tinbeerwah and Kiels Mountain and to the staff from the Rural Fire Service in Caloundra, the Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service and Sunshine Coast Council crews and also to that legendary aviation business McDermott Aviation. On behalf of this parliament and on behalf of the Sunshine Coast community, to you who serve, to you who protect, for you who have protected us from the recent Coolum-Peregian Springs fires, I offer my very sincere and heartfelt thankyou. Centrelink 147 16:38 Ms BIRD DZP Cunningham I would like to take the opportunity to report to the House an initiative that has had a significant impact on many, not just in my electorate but across the country, and that is the government's cruel, unfair and unnecessary Centrelink robo-debt disaster. I have been contacted by a large number of my constituents who have been very unfairly subjected to threatening letters from the government demanding they immediately repay a debt that they often do not actually have. These are not people who have been rorting the system, as the government has attempted to accuse them of; they are people who went to Centrelink for help in a time of need—as they are, and should be, entitled to do—and they reported their earnings when they were asked to do so. The stress that this has caused to many people in my electorate is severe. For many, the task of having to prove their income and earnings from upwards of six years ago has been very difficult. Even those who are able to obtain records are forced onto repayment systems while a review occurs. I want to take the opportunity to share the personal experience of one of my constituents, and this is with his permission. This constituent is a former police officer and a current senior legal professional. He expresses great concern about the difficulties that he had in dealing with an incorrect debt and reflects on the fact that, with all his skills and knowledge, it was a very stressful and difficult process. He can only imagine how hard it is for people who do not have those resources at their disposal. Fadden Electorate: Prawn Industry 147 16:39 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden In January this year we had an outbreak of white spot disease on the Gold Coast, which devastated the local prawn industry. The prawn industry at the Logan River on the GC produces about 25 per cent of the annual production in Australia. Whilst the cause is not definitely known, what I do know is that the disease did not start on any of our farms. No-one had been to Asia where the disease first broke out in 1992 in China. No product had been imported from there. Our farmers are the victims. Minister Joyce rapidly closed the borders and in early January banned all green prawn importations. This was the right decision, considering that, I am led to believe, 73 import consignments had tested positive for white spot between May and December 2016, which is unacceptable. A $1.74 million assistance package has already been provided, with up to $400,000 in direct funding for the affected farmers, but the impact will be in the millions and tens of millions of dollars. We are working hard to make sure Australia can be free of white spot. What is needed next is a structural adjustment package to assist these farmers to adjust the way they produce prawns, as they cannot farm in the same way again. Likewise, the import ban on green prawns must remain at our borders and should only be lifted when we have a strict compliance framework for any imports. This government will support our farmers on the Gold Coast. Boochani, Mr Behrouz 147 16:41 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne Mr Behrouz Boochani has been imprisoned by the Australian government on Manus Island since 2013. I would like to tell the parliament some of his story. Boochani was a founder, editor and writer for a magazine in Iran that addressed human rights and Kurdish culture. He faced severe restrictions on his freedom of expression. He was denied a visa to travel and placed under surveillance and he was threatened and interrogated. In the February 2013 army officers ransacked the office of Boochani's magazine and arrested 11 of his colleagues. Six were imprisoned, and Boochani was forced to go into hiding for three months. No longer safe he sought asylum in Australia. But rather than welcome him the Labor and Liberal governments have kept him locked up in offshore detention. From the Manus Island detention centre Behrouz Boochani continues his journalism. Using social media and writing for publications in Australia and overseas, he is documenting the reality of Australia's cruel policies—the reality that this government has tried so hard to keep from the Australian public. He has spoken out about the cruel limbo faced by Manus Island detainees as a result of the government's plan to send them to Donald Trump's America. Boochani has been supported by PEN International and the PEN Melbourne Centre. PEN International stands against the persecution of writers who peacefully exercise their right to freedom of expression and speaks out on behalf of writers who are imprisoned. I would like to acknowledge my constituents who form the local branch of PEN Melbourne. I support their call for Boochani's claims to be processed immediately. Nobody should be in offshore detention simply for seeking asylum. We must close the camps. Gilmore Electorate: Apprenticeship Challenge 148 16:42 Mrs SUDMALIS 241586 Gilmore In January we had the Gilmore Apprenticeship Challenge. The whole idea was to try and encourage 52 local businesses to take on an apprentice or a trainee. So with Guns and Roses going, we had a display, we had TAFE, we had the apprenticeship support networks and we had some young people looking for apprenticeship positions. The government has $3.2 billion over four years to support Australian apprenticeship arrangements with incentives, support programs, loans and pilot programs. But, more importantly, what we really need to do is encourage our young students to see that university is not the only aim that is required. Right now we need to get young people into trade skills in particular, because in one, two or three years we are going to be desperately short of these trades. We are trying to encourage young people to get into apprenticeships—and guess what? We have almost got our 52 placements. As at the end of last week, we have 50, with another 90 already registered with the state government ready for the final tick off there. I am so excited to see the enthusiasm that has been met in our community by our employers demonstrating that they want to take on these young people to gift their skills. As some of them have said: 'If I do not teach them how to do some of the special things in my trade, where are they going to learn them?' I congratulate all our employers who have taken up the challenge. I am really proud of them, particularly George the landscaper, who has taken up George the apprentice. McKay, Mr Ross, Johnston, Mr Jon 148 16:44 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I rise today to pay tribute to two outstanding members of our community who sadly recently lost battles with ill health. I recognise two great people of the mighty suburb of Inala: Ross McKay and Jono Johnston. Both of these legends contributed greatly to my community, were good friends and were the truest of true believers. They were staunch advocates for our community and contributors for decades to the great Australian Labor Party. Ross McKay was a gifted educator who taught in local schools in the Oxley electorate. Ross truly understood the transformational power of education. He was devoted to his wonderful family—his wife, Sandy, children, Kathryn and Ken, and his much-loved granddaughters, Penelope and Siobhan—who are continuing Ross's deep commitment to social justice in the work they do. Jono Johnston lived in Inala for many years and was a stalwart of our community. He was a character of life in his own time, a straight-shooter and an amazing community activist, particularly through his leadership of the Blue Fin Fishing Club, the largest and best fishing club in Australia. I send my condolences to Jon's wife, Sharyn, and his whole family. Both Ross and Jono gave me enormous guidance and support in my time as a councillor and, of course, in becoming elected to the federal parliament. I speak for many of our community when I say that both will be missed and that both will be remembered for many years to come. Rest in peace, Ross McKay and Jon Johnston. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 148 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Northern Australia Beef Roads Program 148 16:45 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) the Government has committed $700 million to improve roads in Northern Australia including $100 million through the Northern Australia Beef Roads Programme (BRP) to improve roads essential to cattle transportation and to help producers to transport cattle to market more safely and efficiently; (b) upgrades under the BRP will be delivered to many areas including the:    (i) City of Rockhampton (upgrading between Gracemere saleyards and the Rockhampton abattoirs to provide access for Type 1 Road Trains), as well as upgrades to the Hann Highway, Barkly Highway, Flinders Highway, Capricorn Highway and Clermont to Alpha Road in Queensland;    (ii) Great Northern Highway and Marble Bar Road in Western Australia; and    (iii) Outback Way, Arnhem Highway and Keep River Road in the Northern Territory; and (c) under the BRP the Government recently committed to further upgrades including to the:    (i) Peak Downs Highway (Clermont-Nebo, Logan Creek to Nine Mile Creek), Port Alma Access Road near Rockhampton, Bowen Developmental Road and Landsborough Highway (Longreach-Winton) in Queensland;    (ii) Tablelands Highway, Barkly Stock Route and Buntine Highway in the Northern Territory; and    (iii) Cape Leveque Road and Great Northern Highway in Western Australia; and (2) commends the Government for recognising the potential of Northern Australia and investing in these key transport links. We all know that in regional and remote Australia a good road network is vital for the safety of travellers and the efficiency of local industry to get goods and resources to market. A good road is something that city slickers and those aligned with city-based Labor MPs, the Greens, take for granted. Today, we specifically look at the vast network of roads in northern Australia. Northern Australia is one of the most important regional areas in terms of both future and current agriculture production. The official gateway and the official farm gate to northern Australia starts at the Tropic of Capricorn. Previously, Labor has all but ignored our regional road network. The Turnbull-Joyce government, with a huge push by the National Party, is investing heavily to improve rural and regional roads that are important to industries such as the transportation of cattle. The Turnbull-Joyce government has committed $700 million to improving roads in northern Australia, including $100 million through the Northern Australia Beef Roads Program. This is essential to help producers to transport cattle to market more safely and efficiently. Upgrades under the first round of the beef roads program will be delivered to many areas across Northern Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory. In my electorate of Capricornia I am pleased to inform the House that $20 million will be spent on a new type 1 road train route from Central Queensland's Gracemere Saleyards to two abattoirs in Rockhampton city. This city is Australia's beef capital. I am sure all here will agree with that. Most significantly, upgrading this transport corridor will allow type 1 road trains into the city without the need to uncouple. Previously, these cattle trucks had to leave one of their trailers full of cattle at Gracemere and return for it, doubling fuel and transport costs and leaving cattle in the sun. The second major work in Capricornia under the beef roads program will see $6.97 million spent to help gradually bitumen another three sections of the Clermont Alpha Road. This area has been crying out for funding for some time. This is a start, and I will be fighting for more funding for future stages of this road. Other beef road upgrades in Queensland include the Hahn Highway, the Barky Highway, the Flinders Highway and the Capricorn Highway. In Western Australia, beef road upgrades are occurring on the Great Northern Highway and Marble Bar Road. In the Northern Territory, beef road upgrades will be underway on the Outback Way, the Arnhem Highway and Keep River Road. Coinciding with the beef roads program, we also have a special Northern Australia Roads Program to enhance the future development of our North. Under this program, the Turnbull-Joyce government recently committed to further upgrades, including the Peak Downs Highway at Logan Creek to Nine Mile Creek between Clermont and Nebo, in my electorate of Capricornia; upgrades to the Port Alma port access road near Rockhampton, in Capricornia; the Bowen Developmental Road, near Capricornia; and the Landsborough Highway from Longreach to Winton, in Queensland. Under this program, in the Northern Territory, work will be done on the Tablelands Highway, the Barkly Stock Route and the Buntine Highway and, in Western Australia, on the Cape Leveque road and the Great Northern Highway. Today I also commend the Turnbull-Joyce government for recognising the potential of northern Australia and investing in these key transport links. The National Party plays a key role in standing up for regional Australia and ensuring that industries get the resources required to get on with the job of producing meat and foods that benefit our national GDP. That is the difference between us and the Labor Party. The Leader of the Opposition has no plan for northern Australia; the Leader of the Opposition has no interest in expanding industry and jobs in northern Australia; and the Leader of the Opposition wanted to move $1 billion from the northern Australia fund, leaving it high and dry. On the subject of roads, I am pleased to update the House on three other key road projects which have received funding from the federal Liberal-National coalition. In the Capricorn Coast area, works are now complete on upgrading a notoriously dangerous intersection at Hidden Valley Road and the Rockhampton-Yeppoon Road, making the journey safer for motorists. An honourable member interjecting— Ms LANDRY 249764 I already talked about that. The $958,000 upgrade was fully funded through our coalition government's road Black Spot Program, one of the many initiatives in place to improve road safety and reduce road trauma. The intersection was a longstanding issue in the Capricorn Coast community. The upgrade was undertaken in two stages. The first stage involved extending Hoskyn Drive to Hidden Valley Road. The second stage involved the recent upgrade of the notoriously dangerous Hidden Valley Road turnoff onto Rockhampton-Yeppoon Road. The work is expected to reduce the number of collisions at this intersection. Meanwhile, I am pleased to report to the House that work to repair Pilbeam Drive up to Mount Archer and the city of Rockhampton has been completed. Pilbeam Drive partially collapsed under rockfalls following Cyclone Marcia in 2015. The two-year repair work was undertaken thanks to joint federal and state NDRRA, natural disaster assistance. Mount Archer is an important asset to our region, and it was important to restore access to the summit by repairing the damage to Pilbeam Drive. In addition to the road repairs, I am pleased that the federal government is also contributing $1.5 million towards the first stage of a walking track up Mount Archer and is providing funding for further developments for mountain biking. In a third update, I am pleased to advise the House that upgrades to the Gregory Highway between Emerald and Clermont are well underway in the electorates of Capricornia and Flynn. This $25.5 million project is delivering a series of new intersections, lane widening and overtaking lanes. It has been funded through round 4 of the coalition's Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program. These upgrades will allow type 2 road trains to use this road safely and efficiently. They will also ensure that the needs of the agribusiness, mining and construction industries are met so we can get goods to market in a competitive manner. I am advised that an average of 50 direct jobs will also be supported over the construction phase of this project. This is evidence that the National Party continue to ensure that our government supports investment in regional Australia. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 Thank you, but I do note that I was very concerned earlier, though, about the 'beef capital of Australia'! I ask the member for Maranoa to second the motion. Mr Littleproud 265585 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 16:54 Mr SNOWDON ( IJ4 Lingiari ) ( ): Deputy Speaker, you said you were the beef capital of what? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The country. Mr SNOWDON IJ4 What? You are kidding yourself! Despite the misinformation which you have just perpetrated on the House, I am pleased to be able to speak to this motion, and I thank the member for putting it on the Notice Paper. As you would be aware, the government has committed $700 million to improve roads in Northern Australia, including $100 million for the Northern Australia Beef Roads Program to improve roads that are essential to cattle transportation to help producers transport cattle to market more safely and efficiently. The BRP spend in the Northern Territory will be $30 million. It is welcome, but it is stretching credulity to say that it will make any damn difference. Given the hundreds of kilometres of roads which are essential to the economic development of Northern Australia—particularly in this context, the beef industry—$30 million, while welcome, will not go very far. I was talking to some people this morning, the wonderful people from the Outback Way, and I was not aware of this fact: currently it costs anywhere between $500,000 and $1.2 million a kilometre to do a road in the Northern Territory. God knows why! But if this is correct, it means the $30 million is not going to go very far. It is important that the Northern Territory government will contribute 20 per cent toward the projects. But the fact is that we have hundreds of kilometres of roads that need work and the Northern Territory simply does not have the revenue base to cover them. So this money coming from the Commonwealth is very important, and the small amount that it is is quite welcome. The two priority upgrades announced for the Northern Territory—the Barkly Stock Route for $10 million and the Tablelands Highway for $20 million—are both in the Barkly region of the north-east of the Northern Territory. We do not have enough money for roads. This is important and, given the way in which the money is being allocated, I would like to think it was being based on the strategic, economic and social importance of the roads rather than the political priorities of the government. Sadly, I have the view that this is more politically motivated than it is in terms of the strategic, economic and social importance of the road infrastructure of the north. To highlight one of these roads: the Tanami Road, for example, has been closed. The Granites Gold Mine has lost road access, as of last week, for 57 days. So for almost two months the Tanami gold mine has had no road access. And this is the case across the north, particularly in the Northern Territory. So I say to the government that whilst we accept the benefits that have accrued to us as a result of this small amount of money, it is simply not enough and we need to do a great deal more. It is symptomatic, Deputy Speaker: I do not think that most people in this place—I am sure you will agree with me and I know my friend here will agree with me—have no idea about remote Australia. They clearly do not understand the economic imperatives and drivers that make it important to invest in the north in the way that we currently do not. We have seen that writ large in the stupid decision by the ABC to cease shortwave services in the Northern Territory. In doing so, without any consultation whatsoever with the people of the Northern Territory and those most affected by it—including those who rely on it for emergency advice and for their own entertainment—the ABC believes people can get access to the ABC through AM and FM, but that is simply not the truth. I have had discussions with the ABC and made it very clear to them how unacceptable this position is. The cattleman are some of the strongest voices opposing the decision by the ABC, just as it is the cattleman who are demanding that we invest more in roads, and we should do. I say to the members opposite that those of us who live in remote Australia ought to unite together to make sure this place understands the imperatives, priorities and needs of the people in the bush. 16:59 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I rise today to speak on the member for Capricornia's private member's motion. It highlights exactly why I decided to run to be a Liberal, regional member of parliament—to develop regional, rural and remote Australia. Pardon the pun, but, as I said in this chamber earlier today, the federal government is making significant inroads in developing regional and rural Australia across all states and territories, not just New South Wales and Victoria. Following my election in September 2013, the northern Australia white paper, Our North, Our Future, was written and published, and as a result we now have a minister for northern Australia for the first time in over 20 years. The federal government is investing in the most comprehensive infrastructure program in Australia's history—a $50 billion infrastructure program, which will create jobs and stimulate economic growth in not just the metropolitan cities, but also regional, rural and remote Australia, both north and south. The $50 billion infrastructure program is part of the long-term economic plan of those of us on this side of the chamber, and, as you know, Deputy Speaker Wicks, there is no alternative from those on the other side of the chamber. Transport infrastructure, including the beef roads program, can change people's lives and save lives. That is why in September last year I announced 12 road upgrades in my vast electorate of Durack through the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program. Transportation of essential basics such as food and other supplies, especially for mining operations, is vital in Durack, which spans over 1.6 million square kilometres from Southern Cross in the wheat belt to Wyndham in the Kimberley. The North West Coastal Highway is an incredibly important road in Western Australia, connecting Geraldton to the Pilbara, one of Australia's economic heartlands. A truck bay will be constructed on the North West Coastal Highway near Ogilvie, just north of Northampton, which will enhance the safety for all commuters along one of WA's largest roads. This is a welcome addition to what is a very busy passage in regional WA. A new road train assembly area will be constructed in Port Hedland adjacent to the Town of Port Hedland's area zoned for heavy vehicle industries, which will be another mammoth blessing for the safety of people passing through this very busy town. The Marble Bar Road upgrade will improve the safety of Pilbara road, with a four kilometre section of the road to be realigned and reconstructed to a single carriageway, fixing the current narrowness of the road. The truck bay on the North West Coastal Highway and the Port Hedland road train assembly area are just two of the 12 projects I announced last year, all of which will make our roads safer in the bush in WA. As well as other benefits, such as creating jobs and economic growth, building roads has a greater effect in the community. The $52 million upgrade of the Great Northern Highway in the Kimberley will improve freight access to and from the region. The Great Northern Highway is a major freight route in the Kimberley, providing access to the Wyndham port, the only deepwater port between Broome and Darwin, which is vital for expanding the local mining and agricultural industries. About 90,000 head of live cattle and minerals from mines in the East Kimberley are exported through the Wyndham port annually, with this figure to rise as the region experiences strong growth in this particular industry. The upgrade will ensure continued access for heavy vehicles travelling to the port and residents and tourists travelling between Halls Creek, Kununurra and Wyndham. As I have said before in this place on a couple of occasions, the Cape Leveque Road upgrade will open up the tourism potential of the Dampier Peninsula, a gorgeous tourism destination in the Kimberley, and support the local communities that live along the Cape Leveque Road. As I have just illustrated, seven months after being re-elected, I am getting on with the job I promised to do, and I am delivering for regional, rural and remote WA to make Durack a better place to live. Often things like safety relating to roads is not talked about enough. But I can assure those people who may have an opportunity to listen to this speech that it makes a big difference to people who live in regional Australia, including those who travel the great lengths of the Great Northern Highway and the North West Coastal Highway, and I am very proud to represent those people. 17:04 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler As always with members of the government with private members' business, this is a self-congratulatory motion, but it is somewhat misplaced. The Northern Australia Beef Roads Program typifies this government when it comes to building infrastructure: an announcement with much fanfare followed by little action on the ground. The program was announced in June 2015, when Tony Abbott was the Prime Minister. However, not a single actual project was announced until 16 months later, in October 2016, after the election campaign when, essentially, this program was used for election announcements. Then, 15 priority projects were announced with only half the funding—some $56 million—that was originally announced, and, as we stand here today, in 2017, not a single project from this program that was announced in 2015 has begun. It has taken two years, and not a hole has been dug for any project under this program. This stands at a time when, just last week, the Reserve Bank Governor, Philip Lowe, again reiterated the need for investment in infrastructure. The previous speaker, the member for Durack, spoke about the fantasy of the government's so-called $50 billion program. But the answers in Senate estimates indicate that that program is, in fact, only $34 billion, with $8 billion in the future at some unspecified time. Indeed, the Australian Bureau of Statistics figures show that for every single one of the 12 quarters that the coalition have been in office, public sector infrastructure investment has been less than for every one of the 21 quarters that the former Labor government spent in office, from the time of our first budget in 2008. We did not just make announcements; we actually went ahead and did it. Our total commitment to Northern Australia over that time was some $5.5 billion. Some $500 per person was spent in Northern Australia on an annual basis. The Bruce Highway upgrade, the Cape York package, the Kennedy Highway upgrade and the Peak Downs Highway upgrade are all in Queensland. In the Northern Territory, there was the community, beef and mining road package, and the highways package, including the widening of the Victoria, Barkly and Stuart highways. There was the regional roads productivity package; some $90 million in the Northern Territory alone. There was the Tiger Brennan Drive upgrade, the Great Northern Highway upgrade in northern Western Australia, the Dampier Highway duplication, and, of course, the North West Coastal Highway. So we did not just talk about infrastructure in Northern Australia. We got on with the business of ensuring that it happened. As it is, you can see there has been an underspend on a project like the Bruce Highway, where the government has wound back the spending that it allocated, if you look at the forwards from the 2014 budget. What we need to do is make sure that we step up infrastructure investment, particularly in the context of the resources sector moving from the investment to the production phase. Of course, the member who represents the area around Gladstone will know full well that the investments we made in roads in his region—in terms of access to the port and other projects at and around Gladstone—were significant after years of neglect under the Howard government. What I want is for the government to match its rhetoric with actual investment on the ground that will lay the groundwork for future economic growth. 17:09 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I rise today to support the motion by the member for Capricornia. I have listened to the member for Durack and also to the member for Lingiari, and I agree with a lot of their comments. But I am here to talk about central Queensland and my electorate of Flynn, which straddles the boundary of northern Australia. It could be said that central Queensland is the epicentre of the Australian beef industry. We have nearly 2.2 million head of cattle, roughly 7.5 per cent of the total Australian herd and 17.5 per cent of the Queensland herd. Rockhampton, just to the north, has a beef capital expo every three years. We have visitors from all over the world. It is really world standard. We get a lot of people in the international cattle industry as well as people in the national cattle industry. Throughout the financial year 2015-16 some 362,000 head, or 18.2 per cent of the state total, went through saleyards in Flynn. Major saleyards in Flynn include Gracemere, 200,000 head; Emerald, 117,000; Biggenden in the south, 35,000; and Biloela, 10,000. There are other, much smaller, saleyards, like Miriam Vale. Many of these cattle will travel to the four major abattoirs in Queensland—Biggenden, Biloela, Lakes Creek and Fitzroy in Rockhampton. These sometimes have to travel hundreds of miles to get to their final location. This all adds up to central Queensland's beef industry being worth over $950 million per annum—that is 20 per cent of Queensland's total beef industry value. In order to keep the beef industry going, we need export markets, good season and a supply network—that means roads for the safe, efficient handling of these cattle. The work already done by the government—the FTAs et cetera—has been instrumental in seeing Australian cattlemen and cattlewomen being awarded record prices at saleyards in the last couple of years. The eastern young cattle index is currently at 639.5c per kilogram. We have a good industry, a very viable industry, but the road network does not match the extra movements and the growth in the industry. Rail services now hardly exist for livestock. We are forced to see more and more decks of cattle on the roads. This in turn means more investment in our roads, something that I am very, very passionate about: we have to improve the standard of our roads. The government has committed real funding to our supply network, with $700 million committed to improving northern Australian roads, including $100 million under the northern Australia beef program. As the member for Lingiari has said, you do not get a lot for a million dollars or for $700 million. I think we need to improve that level of investment to help our farmers get those cattle to markets safely and securely, without bruising. Two great projects in Flynn at the moment are the upgrade of the Capricorn Highway, $80 million to upgrade from the Gracemere saleyards to the Rockhampton abattoirs, so that road trains no longer have to uncouple and cross-load at Gracemere, a dangerous practice that has already cost the life of 28-year-old truck driver and father Bryson Mayne; $15 million for the overtaking lanes on the Capricorn Highway between Rockhampton and Emerald; and two uncoupling stations between Emerald and Clermont. That project is being done at the very moment. While these investments are welcome and are very useful improvements to our network, more roads are in desperate need. The Dawson Developmental Road between Springsure and Tambo is one of these roads. It is Queensland's central link in the movement of livestock and grain to population centres on the eastern seaboard. Cattle numbers around the Salvator Rosa and Ka Ka Mundi sections of the Carnarvon Gorge national park including from big stations like Mantuan Downs, Castlevale, Tanderra— (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. National Swimming and Water Safety Framework 153 17:14 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith I move: That this House: (1) notes: (a) that Australians live by the water, and being in and around water is part of our nation's culture and our identity, but this regular exposure to water brings risks that can be fatal; (b) that so far this summer in Australia, 69 people have drowned on our coastline and in our pools and waterways, and paramedics report responding to 225 drownings or near drownings in November and December 2016; (c) that in 2015-16, 280 people drowned in Australia, a 5 per cent increase in drownings from 2014‑15; (d) with concern that there is no national approach to swimming and water safety education in Australia, and that:    (i) the water safety education Australian children receive depends on where they live and in some cases on their parents income level;    (ii) not every Australian child is receiving the necessary instruction in swimming and water safety; and    (iii) in some states and territories there is no swimming and water safety program at schools; and (e) studies have consistently shown a concerning trend in children starting secondary school without the ability to swim and research shows that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students are less likely to achieve identified benchmarks for water safety competence compared to non-indigenous students and this is also the case for children not born in Australia; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) implement the National Swimming and Water Safety Framework (the Framework) and ensure every child has access to water safety and swimming education by the time they complete primary school with every child given access to instruction in swimming and water safety in accordance with the Framework; (b) conduct a parliamentary inquiry to investigate why many Australian children are not receiving adequate swimming and water safety education consistent with the Australian Water Safety Strategy and what measures it can adopt to improve access to swimming and water safety education; (c) establish a national water safety education fund to provide support to the states and territories, water safety organisations and communities to ensure access to swimming pools, accredited trainers and water safety education for schools in communities which lack such facilities and services; and (d) provide water and surf safety messages in foreign languages via tourism operators, flights, hotels and tours across Australia highlighting the importance of swimming and water safety on beaches, rivers, lakes and swimming pools. At 8.30 pm on 27 December 2016, two teenage boys, Tui Gallaher and George Lopeti, decided to go for a swim at Maroubra Beach. Almost immediately, the pair were swept into a powerful rip. A passer-by saw the boys in distress and went to rescue them. Seeing his cousin in trouble, Tui told the rescuer to rescue George first. The rescuer did that, and when he went back out to retrieve Tui, he was gone, swept away by one of the most powerful bodies of water in Sydney. In the ensuing days, I was at the beach, and I met with the rescuers—the police and the surf lifesavers—as they searched, ultimately in vain, for the young boy. I saw his mother collapse in despair on the beach as time ran out for her son. Two days later, Tui's body was discovered by a young surfer. The sad fact of Tui's drowning, and almost every drowning, is that they are preventable with the right training and education. Already this summer in Australia, 69 people have drowned on our coastline, in our pools and in our waterways. In 2015-16, 280 people drowned in Australia, representing a five per cent increase on drownings in 2014-15. The increase in drownings that we have seen over summer is sure to see another spike this season and is a worrying trend. Australians live by the water. Being in and around water is part of our nation's culture and our identity, but this regular exposure to water brings risks that can be fatal. The challenge is not to avoid being around water but to learn how to live safely around it. Government has an obligation to ensure Australians are educated in water safety. The statistics indicate we as a nation are not doing enough to prevent drownings in Australia. Every child has the right to learn to swim and be safe around water, but alarmingly, Australia has no national approach to swimming or water safety education. The water safety education that Australian kids receive depends on where they live and, in many cases, on their parents' income. Not every Australian child is receiving the necessary instruction in swimming and water safety. In some states and territories, there is no school-delivered swimming and water safety program, while in others, swimming is an essential part of the school curriculum. Studies have consistently shown a concerning trend of children starting secondary school without the ability to swim. Research shows that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students are less likely to achieve identified benchmarks for water safety competence, compared to non-Indigenous students. This is also the case for kids who are not born in Australia. For children engaged in formal swimming lessons, there is much emphasis on stroke technique and a better stroke, but little on teaching water safety survival and basic rescue skills. Quite simply, we are letting our kids down when it comes to teaching swimming and water safety and reducing the rate of drowning. We do not have a national strategy to teach swimming and water safety. Historically, the Commonwealth has just left the issue to the states. It is time for a national approach to swimming and water safety education. It is time for the Commonwealth government to show leadership and to work with the states to ensure that every Australian child gets the necessary training and education to be safe in and around water. Every child should undertake swimming and water safety education and training by the time they complete primary school. This training should be provided by accredited trainers. The Australian Water Safety Council, made up of organisations like the Royal Life Saving Society, Surf Life Saving Australia, AUSTSWIM and Swimming Australia, recommend that children should receive training consistent with level 4 of the National Swimming and Water Safety Framework, commonly known as Swim and Survive. This is not currently the case. I am calling on a parliamentary inquiry to be established to inquire into why drownings in Australia are increasing and why we are not implementing the National Swimming and Water Safety Framework. Teaching Australian children to swim and be safe around water is an essential life skill, and no child should miss out on the opportunity to learn to be safe around water. The Commonwealth should also establish a national water safety education fund which would provide additional funding to states and territories to support schools to ensure students have access to swimming pools and accredited AUSTSWIM trainers. Teaching swimming and water safety is a vital life skill. The Commonwealth must show leadership and work with the states on this important issue. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 Is there a seconder for the motion? Ms Claydon 248181 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 17:20 Ms HENDERSON ZN4 Corangamite It is my pleasure to speak on this motion today, and I thank the member for Kingsford Smith for bringing this to the parliament. The member and I are co-chairs of the Parliamentary Friends of Surf Life Saving, and we work together in a bipartisan way to celebrate the achievements of surf lifesaving and to support the wonderful work that surf lifesavers do right around the country. And it is very significant: in any year there are some 12,000 rescues and some 32,000 first aid treatments on beaches all around the country. I really do want to commend Surf Life Saving Australia, all of the state bodies and the 12 wonderful surf lifesaving clubs in my electorate who work so, so hard to keep our beaches safe and also to look after the thousands of tourists who come on to the beaches every summer. As the member for Kingsford Smith has mentioned, it is really quite tragic to see the number of drownings over this summer: 69 people have lost their lives and, as we all know, one drowning is too many. In my electorate of Corangamite, three people lost their lives very tragically. A young man, Winchelsea father Mark Jordan-Hill, lost his life when he came off his kayak at Whites Beach at Torquay. There was a man in his 70s who also died at Torquay surf beach just a day later, and then a missing 60-year-old male scuba diver was found some weeks later at Lonsdale Wall, Port Phillip Heads. As I mentioned, these drownings should not occur, and I do support the member's motion with respect to increasing water safety and water education. But it remains the case that the federal government is doing an enormous amount to support all of the key peak organisations that make up the Australian Water Safety Council and to support this report, the Australian water safety strategy 2016-2020, which underpins a lot of that work. Every year the federal government provides $11 million to these organisations, which supports them to do the great work that they do. The government is also providing $8 million under the Beach Safety Equipment Fund to support the wonderful work of surf lifesaving clubs right around Australia. While the member has raised a number of very good points, this is very much in the domain of the states. Whether it is swimming classes in schools, swimming instruction, beach safety, water safety education or even signage—converting some signs into foreign languages—these are most often the domain of the states, because the states have sole jurisdiction in relation to schools, or in many respects the domain of local councils. At a Commonwealth level we are absolutely supporting this strategy, which is very important, but we do want to see greater consistency between the states to make sure that every single child has that fundamental education. It is unacceptable that a child can reach the age of secondary school, in year 7, and be struggling to swim. I have just raised this issue with my son's school, as I believe that every single child must learn to swim. Some schools do it very well and others do not. I commend this report to anyone; it is a wonderful strategy. In this report there are drowning prevention pillars which basically summarise the ways in which we can work hard as a nation to reduce the drownings. Certainly the Australian Commonwealth government supports the aspiration that we must see a 50 per cent cut, at the very least, in the number of drownings. Really, we need to see no drownings, but we absolutely must see a dramatic cut. Then there are things like safe venues. I know that in my own region of Corangamite there has been a huge controversy over funding a local swimming pool on the Surf Coast because there is no proper swimming pool in Torquay, where, as I have mentioned, there were some terrible tragedies over this summer. We need to see greater action from councils to make sure that we have safe venues to learn to swim, that we have the workforce, that we have the policies and that we also have the education. Policies go down to issues such as swimming pool legislation to make sure proper regulations are in place in relation to issues such as swimming pool fences at home, because we know that many young children die at home. It has been my pleasure to speak on this motion. (Time expired) 17:25 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I rise to support the motion today by the member for Kingsford Smith on the importance of water safety. This is a very important issue for my home city of Newcastle and for the Novocastrians, whom I represent in this parliament. My electorate is lucky enough to have 11 kilometres of pretty stunning coastline complete with ocean baths and convict-built swimming holes. We also have inland swimming pools at Wallsend, Mayfield, Lambton and Stockton. The water and our healthy beach lifestyle are integral to the way that Novocastrians live our lives and, indeed, see ourselves. We are also blessed with a wonderfully temperate climate where swimming is an enjoyable activity for most of the year, but we must never forget that coastal living brings its own risks. It is a sobering reality that 280 people drowned at Australian beaches, pools and waterways in the past year. The cost of responding to drownings caused by a lack of knowledge or skills is substantial, but of course the toll on families and communities is unspeakable. Studies have found that between 20 and 60 per cent of children finish primary school lacking basic water-safety knowledge and unable to swim 50 metres. The number of kids participating in formal swimming programs is dropping. We also need to recognise that water safety knowledge and swimming skills are not evenly distributed. Children from low-income families and those from rural and remote areas are far less likely to develop water safety knowledge and skills and as a result are at greater risk of drowning. The disparity is even greater for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and children not born in Australia. It is true that there are some fantastic organisations. I am fortunate to have six incredible surf-lifesaving clubs in my electorate, namely Stockton, Nobbys, Newcastle, Cooks Hill, Dixon Park and Merewether, and each of those is taking on excellent initiatives focusing on improved water safety and achieving good outcomes. In my local area I want to focus on just two recent examples. One is based at Nobbys Surf Life Saving Club, which runs a buddy swim program for people with disabilities. I have had the extraordinary pleasure of joining them on a Sunday morning, where lifeguards and volunteers alike are out there in the water teaching kids with disability great water safety skills and knowledge, knowledge about the surf and necessary skills to keep them safe. Likewise, the Cooks Hill surf-lifesaving club is running a terrific refugee and multicultural swimming program, ensuring that people who were not born in Australia who are not familiar with coastal living receive the best tuition so they can enjoy beaches in the safe way that we in Australia would hope for for everybody. There is also the $4 million Kids Alive initiative, which is doing excellent work across Australia. So much has been achieved, but obviously much more needs to be done. We urgently need a coordinated and properly funded national water safety initiative. I hear the members opposite suggesting that there is a lot of onus on state and local government in this area of water safety, but there is a critical role for the national government to play here as well. Before the 2016 election, Labor announced a very clear plan to improve water safety and decrease the number of drownings. We committed to establishing a $40.9 million water safety education fund to support the states and territories to work with the federal government, Catholic and independent schools, local swimming clubs and lifesaving clubs in improving education and equipping our young people with the knowledge and skills they need to survive. We also committed to work with the state and territory governments to roll out a national water safety program, Water Safe, across the country so that all Australian children have the training and skills they need to stay safe in Australia's myriad beaches, waterways and pools. Regrettably, these commitments were not matched by the coalition. I am by no means suggesting that we on this side of the House somehow have a monopoly on the concerns of children and water safety. There are many members opposite whose communities have been tragically impacted by avoidable drownings and who care deeply about improving outcomes. Certainly, I think together we should support call by the member for Kingsford Smith for a parliamentary inquiry into why children are not getting the water safety education they need and what the federal government needs to do to ensure they are. We should also back his call for the government to commit to implementing a national swimming and water safety framework, ensuring every child— (Time expired) 17:30 Ms MARINO HWP Forrest I acknowledge the work of the member for Kingsford Smith in bringing this motion to the House, his genuine and deep concern and even his role on the Parliamentary Friends of Surf Life Saving group. It is quintessentially part of who we are as Australians—that wonderful coastline. The one thing that all of us who have coastal electorates see on Australia Day is so many of our people out enjoying the water in some way, shape or form. It seems to be one of the things we do. We in this House all know that every single drowning is one too many. We see the great work that has been spoken of here earlier today through the water safety organisations like Surf Life Saving Australia, AUSTSWIM and Kids Alive - Do the Five—which I am going to talk a bit more about later. The report done by the Australian Water Safety Council is a very sobering one. I think all members of this place remain committed to the target of 50 per cent less fatal drownings by 2020. There is $11 million going to the likes of Royal Life Saving Society Australia, Surf Live Saving Australia, AUSTSWIM and Laurie Lawrence's swimming enterprises. There is a range of different programs being run in various places. The Australian Water Safety Council highlights the 283 drowning deaths on average over the years of the work that has being done. One of the things that hit me yesterday, when I read The Sunday Times in Western Australia, was that it said that over 17,000 backyard swimming pools across Perth failed safety inspections. This comes back to each one of us taking responsibility if we have a swimming pool. The other thing that was mentioned in the article was that spas and inflatable pools deeper than 30 centimetres are also required to be fenced off. That is something that not everybody is aware of or understands is part of the rules. The other thing mentioned was the risk involved with inflatable pools that are just brought out and used for a period and put away. There is a risk and a great need for vigilance in that situation. With Kids Alive - Do the Five, Laurie Lawrence sells it beautifully: 'Fence the pool; shut the gate; teach your kids to swim, it's great; supervise, watch your mate; and learn how to resuscitate.' They are very, very good messages. In Western Australia with our 12,000 kilometres of coastline our surf lifesaving clubs patrol 30 beaches from October to April. There is a Beachsafe website with specific information on the beaches that are not patrolled. In my part of the world I have beaches at Binningup, Bunbury, Bunker Bay, Busselton, Dalyellup, Meelup and Yallingup withwonderful surf lifesaving clubs. Bunbury was the surf lifesaving club of the year a few years ago. One of the things that all our surf lifesavers do really well is training. Nearly 12,000 people in Western Australia have been trained in first aid—to resuscitate—one of the most important things that Laurie Lawrence also works so hard on. I want to spend a couple of minutes talking about the drowning deaths known to be related to alcohol and/or drugs. It is a very great concern that, according to the report, 46 per cent of these drowning deaths are in rivers, creeks or streams. For those of us like me who live in rural or regional Australia, that is a really big issue: young people—or people of all ages—out having a good time with their mates. This is where the message of, 'Look out for your mates,' is so important. On a farm, one of my greatest fears as a mum was our dams and our drains. The need for constant vigilance as a parent was extreme, and that goes for all of us who live in and around water of any sort. So any way that we can encourage and help young people to learn to be able to save themselves, but equally to take responsibility ourselves as parents and as community members as well—and for goodness sake watch your mates— (Time expired) 17:35 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I rise to speak on the motion put forward by the member for Kingsford Smith. I thank him for the motion and also for the great work that he does as a clubbie for Maroubra. We are fortunate in Australia to have some of the most beautiful coastline in the world. We are drawn to its dazzling beauty just as much as to its cooling waves, particularly in hot weather such as we had in South-East Queensland over the past weekend. Even coming from the country, as I do, I know that many Australians make the trek to the beach in summer. Swimming at the beach is a part of our Australian life. Not many people had swimming pools when I was growing up, but now, particularly in Queensland, they are much more common and much more affordable. In humid Brisbane, an after-school swim on a hot day is almost mandatory before kids start their homework. Sadly, the climate change scientists tell us that Australia is getting hotter. South-eastern Australia was reportedly the hottest place on the planet last Saturday, and such heat blasts will become the norm for our grandchildren. With temperatures spiking to 47 degrees on the weekend, Australia's obsession with the water is likely to continue every summertime. Sadly, what is usually a source of fun and relaxation can have deadly consequences. So far this summer, 70 people have drowned on our coastlines, in our pools and in our waterways. Tragically, there has been an increase in drownings in recent years, something that all politicians should be concerned about. Although my electorate of Moreton is sadly not on Moreton Bay or the coastline, it does have the Brisbane River and Oxley Creek, and there are many riverside homes and parks in my electorate and, of course, many pools, both privately owned and great local public pools like Yeronga, Corinda and Runcorn. Many of our children have swimming lessons from an early age, particularly at school, and some, with a little talent, go on to represent Australia in international competitions. But, sadly, not all Australian children are so lucky. In 2017 there are still swathes of children who cannot swim to save themselves. Studies have shown that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and children who were not born in Australia are more likely not to be water safe. There are some very generous people who are doing all they can to ensure that children do not drown, such as one of my constituents, Craig Tobin, who operates Craig Tobin Aquatics. In fact, Craig was recently the recipient of a Moreton Australia Day award for his generosity in subsidising swimming lessons so children will be water safe, and I particularly note here in parliament his dedicated service to the Corinda community when he held the Corinda pool lease. Craig understands that swimming lessons can be a burden on families struggling to make ends meet. He has subsidised hundreds of hours of swimming lessons for families facing financial difficulties. Many of the children he has taught are from refugee backgrounds or are children with disabilities. Milpera State High School in my electorate is dedicated to the settlement and English language development of recently arrived migrants from non-English-speaking backgrounds. These students have even greater hurdles when it comes to water safety. Studies have shown that, for children not born in Australia, achieving the identified benchmarks for water safety is less likely to have occurred by the time they enter secondary school. Sadly, several years ago three children associated with Milpera school—one current student and two past students—drowned over the summer break. The school now provides two swimming instruction programs each year. Each program runs for five weeks, and 90 per cent of the students now complete that program. The principal, Tom Beck, and deputy principal, Julie Peel, both said how grateful they are to be able to run this program for their students. They would like to be able to do more water safety programs with their students, but obviously, like most schools, they are limited by funding. For instance, they would like to reinstate a surf and safety program that exposed their students to the beach with the help of the Surf Life Saving association. This would be very useful for their students when they inevitably make their way down to the beaches on the Gold Coast or Sunshine Coast, which, I am sure the member for Kingsford Smith would agree, are the best beaches in the world. For all children in Australia, learning to swim is vital. Lifesaving is essential. Perhaps because most of us have grown up frolicking in our beautiful waters, we have taken water safety for granted. We cannot afford to keep taking it for granted. There are many children in Australia who are not water-safe and not water-wise, and this is not good enough. We need to change the approach to water safety. We need to take a national look at this problem and find a national solution. In this country, in Australia, learning to swim should not be something that is dependent upon where you live, where you go to school, or whether your parents are wealthy enough. Every child should have basic swim-safety competence by the time they complete primary school. It makes economic sense to make this investment, and obviously when it comes to children we would all agree it is definitely the right thing to do. I commend the motion by the member for Kingsford Smith to the House. 17:40 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher As one of Australia's 169,000 volunteer surf lifesavers, this issue is one that I confront on a regular basis. I, and my fellow volunteers at Alexandra Headlands Surf Lifesaving Club, have seen too many times the consequences of bad decision-making and a lack of knowledge around water safety. I am grateful to the member for Kingsford Smith for the opportunity to discuss the important issue of water safety this afternoon. Though always conscious that there is much to do in this space, we should congratulate this government on the efforts it has already made in this area. I have certainly seen some of the impact of this commitment in my own volunteering. Conscious that in many cases it is volunteers embedded in the community that can deliver the best services, between 2013 and 2018 the government has allocated $15 million to the Royal Life Saving Society, Surf Life Saving Australia and AUSTSWIM to help them save lives. These funds are being used to pay for initiatives to improve water safety in homes, pools and rivers, and to teach the necessary knowledge and skills to children in early education. Of course, in 2016 there were still far too many drownings in Australia, but not one of them happened on a patrolled beach between the red-and-yellow flags. That is thanks to the tireless work of our surf lifesavers. Without all the thousands of men and women, young and old, who don the red and yellow every week these sad statistics would be considerably higher. I have no fewer than seven surf lifesaving clubs in my constituency alone, from Alexandra Headland in the north to Bulcock Beach in the south. The government has rightly recognised what a critical part of our nation's water safety infrastructure these surf lifesaving institutions represent. As such, we allocated an extra $11 million last year to Surf Life Saving Australia. I understand that around $7.5 million of this money is being invested in upskilling volunteers with vital extra training, while more than $1 million is being invested in recruitment. The government also knows how important rescue equipment is to our lifesavers. We have therefore allocated an additional $25,000 over five years to each and every single surf lifesaving club out of the $8 million Beach Safety Equipment Fund. My own club has recently seen the benefits of this particular policy in Fisher. Yesterday I went down to the surf club for the under-17 to open-age branch championships surf carnival in the middle of an intense Queensland heatwave. It was a very hot day and there were clubs gathered from all around the region. It was a lot of fun and we learnt a lot about water safety and the competitive spirit that is surf lifesaving. While I was there I took the opportunity to speak to the club's president, Peter Duffy; its general manager, Ashley Robinson; and other members about the grant of $5,000 that our club, like every other, has received this year from the federal government. Peter and Ashley told me that the federal government's grants will allow the club to buy new rescue boards, rescue tubes and oxy-viva gear to name just a few. This kind of equipment can make all the difference in turning around a terrible situation and avoiding tragedy. Human courage and selflessness can achieve a great deal, and they are the most important things that every lifesaver has at his or her command. But, against the power of the surf, it is not always enough. In a life-or-death situation, these sorts of equipment can be the final difference between life and death. Though much remains to be done, the government should be congratulated for its ongoing commitment to Surf Life Saving Australia and the Royal Life Saving Society, and for their wider efforts in supporting the Australian Water Safety Strategy. 17:45 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle I thank the member for Kingsford Smith for bringing this motion, and I thank all those who have contributed to the debate. From Maroubra in Kingsford Smith to Sand Tracks Beach in Fremantle or from Coogee to 'Coo-gee'—as we call it—our electorates pretty much span the country. Considering the size of our nation continent, it is amazing to reflect on the fact that 80 per cent of the population lives within 50 kilometres of the coast. With 37,000 kilometres of coastline and 11,000 recognised beaches, there is a lot of ocean to choose from. For those not near the sea, there are great rivers, waterholes and, of course, swimming pools. Strangely enough, Perth, as a capital city, leads the nation in terms of swimming pool ownership, with 18 per cent of residents living in a house with a pool. Recreating in and around the water is one of the defining features of Australian life, but it has associated risks. The joy of being in and around the water is balanced with dangers and, unfortunately, in 2016 accidental death by drowning cost the lives of 260 people, as detailed in the Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report. I draw attention also to the emphasis in the report on the often severe consequences of non-fatal drownings. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, in the period 2012-14 drowning was the fourth-leading cause of death for people between one and 14 years of age, and in 2015 alone it was the second-leading cause of death for that age group. We have also seen the number of drownings in the 55-to-64 and 65-to-74 age brackets climb above the 10-year average. It is understandable that priority area No. 1 of the Australian Water Safety Strategy 2016-20 is to take a life-stages approach, and goal No. 1 is children between zero and 14 years of age. But, for the strategy to be effective, we need a comprehensive and consistent approach from east to west and north to south, so I endorse the motion's call for a national swimming and water safety framework and a national education fund. I represent an electorate that enjoys a beautiful stretch of the Indian Ocean coast as well as the Swan River Foreshore and the island of Wadjemup, or Rottnest Island. Swimming, fishing, boating and water sports of all kinds are commonplace. I want to take this opportunity, as other members have done, to recognise organisations in my electorate that contribute a great deal to water safety and do so chiefly through the time and energy of volunteers. Fremantle Surf Life Saving Club and Coogee Surf Life Saving Club provide safe beach swimming in the form of flagged beaches and patrols. Both clubs run education programs that take children from their first year, as nippers, to the completion of their surf rescue certificate and beyond. They are not only equipping young people to safely enjoy the ocean but providing the next generation of beach patrol and emergency response personnel. As an example of the scale of the BeachSAFE effort, which is the name of the surf lifesaving WA program, it is my understanding that in 2014-15 there were 33,000 BeachSAFE participants who, together, took something like 43,000 preventative actions in Western Australia. I would also like to acknowledge the work done in recent years by the cities of Fremantle and Cockburn to improve safe but also universal access to swimming. Fremantle has invested in upgrades to its leisure centre to introduce ramp access to its main pool, and the new Aquatic and Recreation Centre in Cockburn incorporates state-of-the-art design to make universal access safe for all of its seven swimming pools. While it is natural to think about water safety in the context of swimming, the Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report for last year shows that 60 per cent of drownings occur through accidents related to boating. Both Cockburn and Fremantle sea rescue provide radio monitoring and rescue services around the clock, year round. This involves the work of dozens of volunteers, who give up their sleep and their weekends to stay vigilant 24/7 and to crew rescue vessels at all hours. I pay tribute to all the volunteers at surf lifesaving clubs and sea rescue organisations in my electorate and around the country, without whom there would be much greater harm and loss. I note that, in many cases, this work assists people who are visiting Australia. It is important, as the member for Kingsford Smith has identified, that we extend our care to those who may be unfamiliar with an ocean or a river environment. One in 11 of all drownings last year was a visitor from overseas. The first story I saw on the news this morning was about a young boy who lost his life on the weekend while swimming with a friend to escape the heat. I can only imagine what that must be like for his family and friends. I hope this debate on the motion brought by the member for Kingsford Smith, and all the contributions that people have made, can assist in delivering on the Australian Water Safety Strategy target of reducing drowning deaths by 50 per cent by 2020. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. National Stronger Regions Fund 159 17:51 Mr GEE 261393 Calare I move: That this House: (1) congratulates the Government on the success of the National Stronger Regions Fund (NSRF); (2) acknowledges the significant and positive impact that the NSRF is having in rural, remote and disadvantaged regions around Australia; and (3) notes that the: (a) Government is investing $205,622,942 in 70 projects around New South Wales under 3 rounds of the NSRF; and (b) NSRF is delivering infrastructure projects to create jobs in regional areas, improve community facilities and support stronger and more sustainable communities across NSW. The Australian government is committed to building stronger regions. After all, regional Australia allows our cities to exist. Regional Australia supplies our water, our food and, indeed, our natural resources. Additionally, regional Australia has a vital role to play in driving economic development, lifting productivity and fostering innovation. To strengthen communities in our regions and to drive new growth there, the coalition government established the National Stronger Regions Fund as part of its 2013 election commitments for regional Australia. Over three rounds of the National Stronger Regions Fund, over $632 million was invested nationally into 229 projects. A total of $205,622,942 was invested into 70 projects across New South Wales. At the recent federal election, the coalition government refocused the National Stronger Regions Fund to be available only to regional, rural and remote Australia and broadened it to include small community groups. This is a development which has been extremely warmly received out in country New South Wales and Australia. The majority of the $297 million is expected to go to infrastructure. However, the new fund will, for the first time, provide an opportunity for those smaller groups and volunteer organisations to access the funding where they cannot contribute matching dollars themselves, which is often the case with small, country community groups. As a regional MP—a country MP—I have seen firsthand the enormous benefit these programs bring to our rural communities. I would like to mention some of the projects in the Calare electorate that have received funding over three rounds under the National Stronger Regions Fund. Firstly, $747,000 was provided for the redevelopment of the CareWest Community Connection Centre in Orange. This new facility was officially opened on Monday, 12 December 2016—and what a day it was. This centre provides people with a disability, older people, youth and those seeking social inclusion with a modern, regional hub for connecting them to the community. It includes access to recreational, health and wellbeing facilities and services. It will cater for up to 1,000 people every year. During construction, the project created 83 jobs, and another seven ongoing jobs were also created. I would like to pay tribute to the vision of Lesa Dunn, who was formerly the community engagement manager at CareWest and one of the key driving forces behind this project; George Blackwell, who is the president of the CareWest board; and Tim Curran, who has been the chief executive officer of CareWest for a decade and provided wonderful leadership. I would also like to mention Sim Madigan, who is the marketing and public relations officer, and the community engagement coordinator, Alicia Price, who took over from Lesa Dunn and saw the project through to its completion. In addition to that project, Lithgow received over $1.3 million to revitalise its main street and create a vibrant public domain within its central business district. That, again, was a project very warmly received. It certainly encouraged Lithgow Council to move that project along, because everyone is very excited about it. Bathurst Regional council received $2.5 million for the upgrade of Bathurst Airport. I was out there recently with the federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Darren Chester, and we inspected the airport. Again, the community is very excited. It is going to make a real difference when big events such as the Bathurst 1000 is on. At the moment there is a limit on how many planes can land there for events like that simply because they do not have the capacity on the tarmac and the aprons to cater for them. Bathurst Regional Council also received $965,000 for the construction of a rail museum at the Railway Institute site on Havannah Street. Again, this is a project with huge community support. It has been widely welcomed, particularly by people like John Hollis, who is the chair of Rail Action Bathurst and was instrumental in getting the Bathurst Bullet connected to the railway that goes to Sydney. It was very warmly received. In addition, Lithgow has received $545,000 for the upgrade of its iconic Blast Furnace Park. We had Senator Fiona Nash out there late last year to make that formal announcement. It is going to help revitalise that section of Lithgow and be a true community asset. Those are just a few examples I have given today which demonstrate the value of this funding program. I commend the motion to this chamber. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 241590 Is there a seconder for this motion? Mr Morton 265931 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 17:56 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I echo the honourable member's motion that the National Stronger Regions Fund was indeed successful for New South Wales. However, in areas of Australia it did not reach the lofty heights that it did for the honourable member's home state, or indeed the honourable member's electorate. The National Stronger Regions Fund invested $632 million into 229 projects. Yet in my home state of South Australia there were only 18 approved projects over the three rounds of funding, with a total investment figure of just over $56 million. Unfortunately, there were no projects deemed worthy of federal funding in my electorate of Mayo, which has two of the fastest-growing regional areas in Australia. Despite this surprising anomaly, I do support a government initiative that seeks to assist in the strengthening of our regional areas. It is vitally important to continue to invest in regional Australia. Too often, our regional centres have been left to fend for themselves whilst major metropolitan areas secure buckets of money. I was initially excited when it was announced that there was going to be a new funding pool for regional infrastructure known as the Building Better Regions Fund, but imagine my dismay when I examined the funding guidelines to find out that much of my electorate, including the regional centres of Mount Barker and most of the Adelaide Hills, has been excluded from being able to access these funds. Mount Barker sits roughly 40 kilometres from the Adelaide CBD on the eastern side of the Adelaide Hills. The region's population is currently estimated at 30,000 and it is predicted to rise to 50,000 within 20 years. It is exactly the kind of area that would benefit most from this funding pool. Whether it had been an upgrade for a major road or the building of a community hub, these are things that we desperately need in our community. It has been raised with me that Mount Barker and the Adelaide Hills are not situated far enough away from Adelaide to be considered regional. To those people I say: you must never have visited my area. There are several factors that make our region a true regional centre distinct from the Adelaide metropolitan area. We have a lack of transport, we have long, windy roads and the topography and geography make us far, far away. What makes this decision by the federal government even harder for me to understand is the fact that the following population centres have been deemed eligible to receive funding under this new scheme: the Gold Coast, with a population of over half a million; Newcastle, with over 310,000 people; the Sunshine Coast, with a population of just under 300,000; and Geelong, less than an hour away from Melbourne and with nearly 200,000 people. And yet Mount Barker, with its modest regional population of just 30,000 has been deemed ineligible. Townships of 1,000 are not included. In my opinion, this is inconceivable. I would like to hear what the argument is in favour of including the Gold Coast, which is the sixth-biggest city in Australia and a mere 70 kilometres from the third-biggest city in Australia. In a state such as South Australia, where manufacturing is closing down and our unemployment is rising, the federal government has not seen fit to invest in a region that is ready to boom. Food producing and agriculture in the Adelaide Hills are crying out for national building infrastructure projects to allow them to display their talents to the world. The best way to attract investment is to build better regions, not throw money at major urban centres like the Gold Coast. I recently met with the National Growth Areas Alliance, a coalition of local government councils from outer urban and inner regional areas in Australia, and they have put forward a policy plan for long-term government investment in the outer suburbs of our major cities. This is a dedicated infrastructure fund to replace the ad hoc nature of grant funding. They say that we are about $50 billion behind in investment in these areas. I fully support this idea. These areas are home to families with small children, retirees and migrants, and they are constantly ignored in favour of metropolitan infrastructure projects. And so, while the honourable member is correct in saying that the National Stronger Regions Fund was successful in helping strengthen many regional areas around Australia—especially in New South Wales—I say that work is not yet finished. Every state and territory must receive investment in it to make sure that Australia grows well into our future. I will continue to fight for the regional areas in my state that have been incomprehensibly excluded from this new fund. 18:01 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I thank my colleague the member for Calare for providing this opportunity to speak on one of our government's great success stories: the National Stronger Regions Fund. I certainly acknowledge the significant and positive impact that the fund is having on regional areas of Australia like my electorate of Capricornia. I take this opportunity to update the House on several significant projects that the coalition has invested in in Capricornia. Just prior to Christmas, the first sod was turned to launch construction of a new Capricorn Helicopter Rescue Service hangar in Rockhampton. About 50 per cent of this $4.8 million project is being funded by the coalition government's National Stronger Regions Fund. This amounts to $2.34 million. Meanwhile, in the Mackay part of my electorate the National Stronger Regions Fund has contributed $10 million towards stages 1 and 2 of the Mackay regional sports precinct at CQ University campus at Ooralea. Overall, this entire project is worth about $85 million. Stages 1 and 2 are worth about $20 million in total and are expected to provide 104 jobs during construction and another 33 new jobs once the facility is built. In other areas, the summer break saw the soft launch of the multimillion-dollar Yeppoon town centre car park. The multistorey facility is a key stage of supporting infrastructure to be built in the Yeppoon foreshore and town centre revitalisation project. I am pleased that the federal coalition government committed $10 million towards this revitalisation plan under our NSRF. The car park will eventually take vehicles off the main beachfront and allow that area to be used for other activities to attract more visitors and business opportunities. The anticipated increased visitor numbers are expected to inject up to $6 million a year into the local economy. Meanwhile, I was recently also fortunate to attend the official opening of stage 1 of the Rockhampton riverbank revitalisation. I am pleased our federal government was able to contribute $7 million to the project under our National Stronger Regions Fund. This development provides an opportunity for increased economic activity along the river and historic Quay Street which will help to create future jobs in Rockhampton city. Today I also want to touch on an offshoot of the National Stronger Regions Fund titled the National Stronger Communities Fund. The following are some of the key community projects that have received funding. There is $20,000 for a new Barmoya bushfire shed, $8,835 to St John Ambulance Rockhampton for new emergency equipment, $7,500 for a new food trailer for the Rockhampton Mt Archer Lions Club, $20,000 for new toilets at Twin Hills Race Club, $11,454 for Clermont Kindergarten Day Care Centre to construct nature inspired play areas, $10,000 for a dentist's chair at Nebo rural health clinic and $7,600 for the Wongabeena Aged Housing Sarina facility to install a cement path and ramps for safer mobility. There is $20,000 for Rockhampton Mountain Bike Club stage II bush track around Mount Archer; $5,000 for Yeppoon Surf Life Saving Club to acquire new water rescue dummies and training gear; $5,942 for Rockhampton Heritage Village to build a boardwalk viewing area; $10,317 to the Blair Athol recreation hall; $6,624 to the Clermont Rugby League club towards an electronic scoreboard at Clermont sports ground; $20,000 to the Pioneer Valley Golf Club for secure storage for golf buggies; $20,000 to Lions Club of Emu Park for the expansion of its clubhouse; $20,000 to Yeppoon Surf Life Saving Club for a fit-out of an education and training facility; $6,562 to Emu Park Surf Life Saving Club for training equipment; $17,395 to Emu Park sports and recreation association for the multipurpose building at Bicentennial Oval; $20,000 to Clermont Kindergarten Day Care Centre for a new phase 2 toddler playground; and $8,250 to the local outriggers at Yeppoon for a waterproof GPS location tracking device. These are all examples of how our coalition government is helping communities in regional Capricornia. 18:06 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam I am always delighted to welcome programs which are aimed at delivering more funding to regional Australia. As a representative from the regional area of Whitlam, I know how important it is to get federal funds supplementing local and state funds for new infrastructure projects into regions like ours. I was very pleased to welcome $10 million worth of funding for the Fowlers Road to Fairwater Drive road link, a project in my electorate. This was evidence based policy at its very best—a four-lane, 1.3-kilometre road link that will enable the construction of over 1,300 new dwellings and ease the pressure on local roads. With housing affordability being the crisis that it is, infrastructure that supports new housing and new housing developments is absolutely critical. Investing in the right projects will now support economic growth and jobs in the long term. I was very interested and concerned to hear the member for Mayo say that her region attracted no funding. Perhaps, if the government had not been funding projects in inner-city Kooyong out of this regional investment program, they might have been able to fund some projects in the member for Mayo's electorate. Be that as it may, ever since the 2014 budget the coalition has claimed it is delivering $50 billion in infrastructure investment, but it is not. The Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development has revealed the current investment program is worth just under $34 billion over five years, with another $8 billion proposed to be invested onwards in the unspecified future. In contrast, Labor has always had a strong commitment to funding nation-building programs. I think the House needs to remember that when we came into office in 2007 we were ranked No. 20—that is right, Deputy Speaker; you heard me right—in the OECD for infrastructure investment. When we left office we were No. 1—top of the podium, gold medal—when it came to investing in infrastructure. Labor's $60 billion Nation Building program covering roads, rail and ports cleared a hell of a lot of the bottlenecks that the Howard government left it with and ensured that we would continue to export and continue to grow our economy during the global financial crisis, when all of those other economies were going backwards. Almost two-thirds of the investment went into regional Australia, which is something we are very proud of. Since the coalition came back to government, most of this good work has been undone. There has been a cut to infrastructure spending of 30 per cent. The coalition have frozen financial assistance grants indexation, taking about a billion dollars. They are slapping themselves on the back for the roads building program that they fund local councils for, but they have ripped exactly the same amount of money out of the financial assistance grants. That is called a Peter and Paul operation, where they pull money out of one of your pockets and put it in the other and ask for a lot of thanks for the pleasure. I want to talk about inequality, because on the one hand you see National Party MPs running around the country pushing each other aside to cut the ribbon on small infrastructure projects in the electorate, but the real story is inequality. Inequality is growing. It is growing across the economy, but nowhere is it growing more than in regional Australia, where the gap between what is happening in the city and what is happening in the country is growing and growing. So we see National Party MPs and regional Liberal MPs roar like lions in their electorates about how they are going to go down to Canberra and stand up to those people in government—that would be them—and ensure that their electorate gets a fair deal. Meanwhile, they come down here and they are like lambs in the party room. They file into parliament and stick their hands up and vote for every one of the member for Warringah's and every one of the Prime Minister's budget cuts. When it comes to people and the impact it has on the electorate I am talking about the cuts to health and hospital funding and the cuts to education funding. In the area of skills development—now this is a real crime—$1 billion was taken out of traineeship and apprenticeship systems at the same time as they were saying, 'We have to do something to get our kids a job.' So here is a message to those regional MPs: it is all very good to stand here in parliament and give a great tub-thumping speech about the work that they are doing back in their electorate to attract funding, but while they are down here in Canberra how about they stand up in the caucus room and the parliament for the interests of the people who they represent? Some of them are the poorest people in Australia and they need better representation. 18:11 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo I am quite surprised that I am speaking after my colleague because this is a government motion about the National Stronger Regions Fund. A government and a party—the National Party and the Liberal Party—that claim to represent the regions, yet they cannot fill their own speaking list. What a joke! They cannot fill their own speaking list to speak about their own government program. How can they really care about the bush? It just demonstrates in volume that they cannot stand up here and defend their own funding program. As my colleague has said, they are not the first to have a Stronger Regions Fund: we had one, when Labor was last in government—the RDAF fund. A lot of people are saying to me in the community that there was a fairer distribution of funding and resources. The projects that were being put forward had been through a process. They were prioritised by local government and local communities, they were prioritised by the state and then they were prioritised by the Regional Development Australia bodies and organisation. In my part of the world, I have to confess that we are doing quite well at the process. We have received lots of projects. They have been through the vetting process and they have been funded—like the Ulumbarra Theatre, which received $12 million of federal Labor government money to help build a build a 1,000-seat theatre. There was the Elmore Field Days, which received $500,000 to build stables for their events. There was Hanging Rock, where just this weekend we saw the success of that funding, with Bruce Springsteen playing at Hanging Rock. It received $2 million to help power the site and build picnic infrastructure. There is the Bendigo Tennis Centre, which is a story we cannot forget. It was funded by Labor. Funding was announced in round 5A and then this government was elected and Warren Truss, who was the minister at the time, scrapped it. He said, 'It is not a priority. That was a Labor election commitment and we're not funding it.' Even though funding was allocated, this government cut it on coming to office. The community did not give up and they kept fighting for it. We committed to it again at the last election and then—lo and behold!—it was successful in the last round of stronger regions! It did come as a surprise, because we knew the Liberals and the Nationals did not support the project and they had not prioritised it in the lead-up to last election. But, do you know why it was successful, Deputy Speaker? Because the local government, the City of Greater Bendigo, are very good at paperwork. They nailed the brief and when the department put forward its priority lists it must have been near the top. This is my point: the way the government has structured the current fund, it favours well-resourced local government areas. It favours cities that have strong economic development units that can nail the brief the government puts forward. It means that our smaller councils struggle; they struggle to compete because it is a competitive tender process. Councils in my area, like Mount Alexander, Loddon Shire and the Macedon Ranges have always struggled against big regional cities when it comes to completing this paperwork. We have received $5 million funding for the Bendigo Airport and $5 million for the Bendigo Aquatics Centre. These projects have been bipartisan. There is also money that will be delivered for the Bendigo RSL redevelopment project. But, I say it again and stress that communities should not have to fight so hard to receive funding. I also want to point out the fact that, every time a group or an organisation asks for funding, the default position of every minister the moment they realise you are in a regional area is: 'Apply to the National Stronger Regions Fund.' It does not matter whether you are in health care or you are in women's sport or you are a community group or organisation. The default is: 'We're not going to help you. Go and apply for this fund.' This government pretends that this fund can be everything to everyone. Take the situation of women's AFL in Victoria. It is brilliant. Women are engaging in AFL. They are playing sport, yet we do not have the facilities for them in their sporting clubs. Their sporting clubs want to have female-friendly facilities, but they just do not have the resources right now, and they say it could take 25 years of sausage sizzles to get the dollars. This is an opportunity for the federal government to get on board and embrace what is happening right now in women's sport. Instead, the only response that I have got from the Minister for Sport is: 'Go and apply to this fund that everybody else is applying to'—that is, compete against airports, compete against child-care centres and compete against roads projects. It is not good enough. It is again very disappointing that, on their own motion, the government cannot even fill the speaking list. It speaks volumes to how much they really do care about the bush and really do care about standing up for regional Australia. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 260805 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Schools 164 18:16 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I move: That this House: (1) notes the Government's failure in school education policy, including:    (a) a cut of $30 billion from schools (Budget 2014-15 Overview, 13 May 2014, page 7), breaking an election promise to match Labor's funding plan dollar for dollar;    (b) a proposal to cut all federal funding from public schools; and    (c) tearing up agreements negotiated by the previous Labor Government, that required states and territories to:       (i) maintain and grow their funding for schools, in return for increased Commonwealth funding; and       (ii) improve teaching quality, literacy and numeracy; and (2) calls on the Government to:    (a) urgently share a detailed plan for future funding of our schools, including the funding each state, system and school will receive from 2018 onwards;    (b) reverse the cut of $30 billion from schools;    (c) explain why they tore up agreements that required states and territories to increase funding for schools as Commonwealth contributions increased, and improve teaching, literacy and numeracy; and    (d) prioritise funding for disadvantaged schools and introduce a proper students with disabilities loading, so all schools and students have the resources they need for a great education. Every Australian child deserves a great education because it opens up a lifetime of opportunity, and that is why we believe that every school should be funded properly. In contrast, we have got a government that say that, if you give extra money to very large businesses in the form of a tax cut, that will be great for those businesses and it will mean that they perform better, at the same time as they are trying to say that extra money does not make a difference in schools. It is an absolutely logically inconsistent argument. At the very same time as they are cutting $30 billion from our schools, they want to give a $50 billion tax giveaway to the biggest businesses in Australia. They say that money does not matter to schools, but it does matter to big business. We will never accept the notion that extra funding, particularly for our most disadvantaged schools, cannot make a difference for Australian students, and I will never accept that, because I have seen the difference it makes. At every school I visit, principals tell me, teachers tell me, teachers aides tell me, parents tell me and, perhaps most importantly, students tell me about the difference that those early years of needs based funding has made to schools. Children who have got speech pathology for the first time or occupational therapy, those kids who started school not able to hold a pair of scissors properly or form a sentence, are catching up so quickly to their peers, so they are able to properly undertake their literacy and numeracy studies with their peers and not be left behind. There has been an enormous amount of confusion from the government about what they actually intend when it comes to school funding. Originally, the then shadow education minister, the member for Sturt, said that Gonski was a gone-ski, and then he was forced, just before the 2010 election, into a backflip as his then leader realised how popular needs-based funding was. The government then came up with, 'You can vote Labor; You can vote Liberal; there's not a dollar's difference to your schools.' In fact, they had the bunting, they had the posters—I saw it on polling day. Sadly, the difference has been $30 billion, not $1. In fact, the average school has a $3 million difference when it comes to school funding because of that broken promise. The May 2014 budget is the only indication we have of what this government intends when it comes to school funding. That shows a $30 billion cut; it is there in black and white in the graph on page 7 of the budget overview—a $30 billion cut to school funding. We have been told again and again that we will get a concrete proposal that the states and territories can evaluate, the Catholic sector can evaluate and independent schools can evaluate sometime, with plenty of time for consultation. Time is fast running out. The government absolutely must provide detail of what they intend with school funding for the future. Schools are making decisions today about whether teachers will be on a one-year contract at the end of this year and whether they will have another year's contract next year. They are deciding whether to invest resources in helping their children catch up with their literacy and numeracy. They need to know whether they can offer a catch-up program for one year or whether it will be a multi-year program. They need to know whether to target the kindergarten kids or the older kids who are about to go to high school. These decisions are being made in schools right around Australia as we speak. The disability student loading has been promised again and again by this government, and we still have no detail about what is intended. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 260805 Is there a seconder for the motion? Mr Giles 243609 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 18:21 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde I thank the member for Sydney and the shadow minister for education for bringing this motion to the House because it gives me and my colleagues the opportunity to once again correct the record. I must say I was somewhat underwhelmed at the conviction of the member for Sydney's contribution. You would think she was just going through the motion of presenting it and does not actually believe it. Once again, we are dealing with more of Labor's politics of scaremongering and misinformation over education funding. It is interesting that, in the last federal election, they mounted this campaign, as well as many others. In order to facilitate that campaign, they press-ganged people who were teachers and members of the union into handing out how-to-vote cards at polling booths, despite the fact they did not want to and did not agree with the union's position. But they were told that they had to hand out how-to-vote cards for the Gonski campaign. These people and many others see through this charade; that is exactly what it is—a charade. Those opposite pretend there was all this money for education in 2017-18 and 2018-19. That money never existed because it was never budgeted for. I can say to those opposite who are listening: those schools in Queensland that I represent are $800 million better off under the coalition government than they would have been had Labor got re-elected in 2013. When I go and talk to the principals in those state schools, they are very thankful for that extra money. We have worked very hard to continue to ensure we can grow education funding for our schools. We on this side of the House recognise how important it is that our schools are properly resourced. In that regard, the coalition government have provided record levels of funding to schools across our country—some $69.5 billion in total over the forward estimates in all states and territories. In my state of Queensland alone, the Australian government has increased funding for schools by 29 per cent from 2014-15 to 2018-19. There are no cuts to school funding, and the coalition will continue to build on the existing base of school funding from $16 billion in 2016 to $20 billion in 2020. Unless those people opposite cannot read a budget paper, and 2016 was the most recent budget paper, it shows that funding for schools continues to increase every single year. The most important thing is that it is funded. Unlike those opposite—who like pixie fairy dust and want to sprinkle it everywhere and promise people money on the never-never—this coalition government is actually promising to deliver the funding. You never, ever funded the additional funding. Unlike Labor, this government has a plan and a purpose for education funding, and that is to continue to grow the quality of education in our schools. We have tremendous teachers in our schools. I meet with them on a regular basis. It is the resources that we have given them under a coalition government that have allowed them to do tremendous things in some of our hardest, low-socioeconomic schools. We have committed to them that we will continue to build on that funding base, through our Quality Schools, Quality Outcomes document. We are currently in discussions with the various states around funding models for the years to come, because we understand that they need that certainty, and I accept that. I have had that discussion with my principals. It is a coalition government that is going to deliver the funding and the support necessary for our schools to continue to grow and prosper. 18:27 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin You hear some extraordinary things in this place, but the assertion that the previous speaker, the member for Forde, just made that this government has a plan for school education is right up there. Minister Birmingham has shown, in more than a year of being responsible for this critical area of Commonwealth government responsibility, that he is not so much concerned with the three R's when it comes to schools but his own three D's—dissembling, distraction and disingenuousness. The one thing he has consistently shown is he has no plan for schools and no plan to look to Australia's future. That is something that I think government members should reflect on when they talk up their willingness to engage in this debate. The history is tragic. There was, finally, before the 2013 election, a commitment from then Minister for Education Pyne to a unity ticket on school funding. Promises were made at every polling booth around the country that, whether you voted Liberal or Labor, you would get the same in school education. The Liberal Party and the National Party then paid lip-service to needs based funding of our schools—lip-service to Gonski. What a cruel hoax this has turned out to be. I do not want to go into the distractions, the comical, Ali-style homage to his minister that the member for Forde ran through, but just one point needs to be explored: this notion that Labor did not fully fund the National Plan for School Improvement. The proof, again, is in the 2014 budget papers—the $30 billion save that was claimed and continues to be claimed by this government. Turning to the government's plan, they had a few ideas before the last election. One was that the Commonwealth would simply withdraw from funding our public schools. What a great idea that was! It was very quickly abandoned. Since then, though, we have not had a plan. We have had two meetings of education ministers, each preceded by media drops orchestrated by the minister, each followed by no plan and no proposition for school funding whatsoever from Minister Birmingham—not in September and not in December. Uncertainty is compounding inequity. This just is not good enough. When we look at the challenges Australia faces and when we look at the challenges of sustaining living standards into the future, giving every child every chance to succeed at school is fundamental. It is fundamental on a moral basis, recognising that talent is evenly distributed in the population and it is only barriers that prevent kids from getting every chance to succeed in school. It is also fundamental to meeting our economic challenges. This is why the failing of the government in this area is so egregious. There is a clear choice when it comes to school funding and it carries enormous consequences—enormous human consequences that I and my colleagues see every day in the schools we visit in our electorates and some of the schools I have been fortunate to visit as I have gone about my work supporting the shadow minister, the member for Sydney. These wider economic consequences need also be attended to. It goes to Australia's future as a high-wage, high-skilled economy. We are turning our back on that future. Mr Deputy Speaker, I turn your attention and the attention of members present to paragraph (2)(d) of the motion that is before us because it bells the cat in a couple of really important aspects. Firstly, it talks about prioritising funding for disadvantaged schools. This is something Minister Birmingham is very keen on talking about but is completely oblivious to doing something about. He is unconcerned with supporting our most disadvantaged schools. He knows that. If the truth were otherwise, he would put a plan on the table and he would treat Australian schools, their principals and school communities with the respect they deserve. That paragraph in the motion also goes on to talk about introducing a proper students with disabilities loading. This is the key piece of Gonski that remains unfinished. The minister promised the work on the loading dataset would be completed by 2016. It has not been. We are not serving the interests of students with disability or their parents. We are letting them down. We have not done enough to make sure that every Australian counts when it comes to school education. This motion should be supported by all members of this place. The minister should be called upon to do his job, to do his duty, and to do the right thing—to commit to genuine needs based funding and offer schools certainty and students equity. The minister has not been listening to the experts, to the teachers, and, most importantly, he has not been paying regard to the interests of Australia's students. 18:32 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra This is the second time in less than seven days we are debating this issue. We debated this issue in a matter of public importance in the House of Representatives only last week and we are here today in the Federation Chamber debating it again. Labor's conduct in this debate is typical of their conduct generally. They have been misleading and deceptive on 457 visas. They have been misleading and deceptive on Medicare. They have been misleading and deceptive on Centrelink. They have been misleading and deceptive on tax cuts. Now they are misleading and deceptive on education funding. A number of times Labor have made the allegation that there has been a $30 billion funding cut to education. Just because they keep repeating the allegation does not make it true. You would expect me as a member of the government to say that Labor are not telling the truth here, but you do not need to believe me on this point. You can believe that well-known, right-wing mouthpiece, that well-known centre of conservatism, the ABC. ABC Fact Check has denounced Labor on their continued deception. It has said: 'The government did not cut $30 billion from schools. Labor is spouting rubbery figures.' Let me say that again: 'The government did not cut $30 billion from schools. Labor is spouting rubbery figures.' Other independent experts have said that Labor is wrong to say that it was going to spend an extra $30 billion on education. They never guaranteed the funding. Let us go back to 2012-13, when we were in the death throes of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government, and provide some background to this phantom $30 billion. The Leader of the Opposition was the Minister for Education and the Labor Party were facing their worst defeat at an election since 1975. We knew they would lose, they knew they would lose and the Australian people knew they would lose, so what did they do? They played politics with education funding. They played the worst sort of politics. They played gesture politics. The worst part about gesture politics is that it always hurts those who it is designed to help. So they did two things. First, they dreamt up an education budget in which all the expenditure was in the outyears out to 10 years, where they knew there was no chance of them being in government, and they made a range of predictions they would never be able to meet along with their own fiscal targets. They were as likely to meet these predictions as they were likely to deliver a surplus. But do not believe me on this point; believe some independent experts—believe people like Professor John Wanna from the Australian National University, who said: Mostly funding envelopes running out 10 years are fiction. No-one knows what the circumstances will be so far ahead. Or Professor Sinclair Davidson, of RMIT: A 10-year forecast is very likely to be overtaken by events, given Australian governments only have a life of three years and the budget must be reframed and recast every year. So you have independent expert looking at their claim and saying that there is no truth in it. Then they came and cut a range of asymmetrical deals with different states and education systems, which created a mockery of the so-called needs-based funding system. They did these different deals with different states. The Leader of the Opposition, when he was education minister, was so desperate to get anybody to sign up to things that he would give anything away. Some schools, as a result of this particular funding deal that he had done, do not attract their needs-based funding—and that is what they say is the benefit of the fair funding agreement—for over a century. That is not a good education policy. That is not good education funding reform. Their funding arrangements are not only unfair; they do not deliver performance improvements. Again, do not believe me: on this point, believe the independent, respected education policy analyst and former departmental secretary, member of the Gonski review panel, Ken Boston. This is what he said about what Labor implemented: … this was not what the Gonski review recommended. It was not sector-blind, needs-based funding. It continued to discriminate between government and non-government schools. He went on to say: … Shorten hawked this corruption of the Gonski report around the country, doing deals with premiers, bishops and the various education lobbies. These bilateral negotiations were not a public and open process, as would have been achieved by the National Schools Resourcing Body; they dragged on for twenty-one months up to the September 2013 election; and they led to a thoroughly unsatisfactory situation: agreements with some states and not with others, and – among participating states – different agreements and indexation arrangements. That is not me: that is Labor's own hand-picked expert for the Gonski funding panel, Ken Boston. The truth is there are no cuts to education. School funding under the coalition between 2014 and 2017 has been at record levels, and it is projected that Commonwealth school funding grows year on year from $16.1 billion in 2016 to $20.2 billion in 2020. I am pleased to oppose this motion. 18:37 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson I rise to speak on the private member's motion moved by the member for Sydney and Deputy Leader of the Opposition on the government's failure in school education policy. The member for Berowra says that the worst kind of politics is the politics of gesture. I would say that the worst kind of politics is the politics of deceit—saying that a vote for the coalition/Liberals is the same as Labor on education. We heard that loud and clear. The bunting was everywhere in that election. I say to you that that is the worst kind of politics: saying to the parents and children of Australia, 'A vote for us is the same as a vote for Labor on needs-based funding.' Clearly it is not. Again, I pick up on the member for Berowra's point that funding has increased. Of course it has: the population increases, inflation increases, teachers' wages increase. That is not the same as a unity ticket on education. Let's be absolutely clear: this government does plan to cut $30 billion from school funding—breaking that election promise to match Labor's Gonski funding dollar for dollar. In my electorate of Paterson it will mean $43 million. Let me say that again: $43 million. The very fact that schools in my electorate have benefited so greatly from the first years of Gonski means that they will be hurt so greatly by the cuts in coming years. Gonski funding has meant so much to so many. For this government to go back on its words and rip the funding out of schools is shameful. For example, my old school, Kurri Kurri High, has received $244,000 in Gonski funding to date. With that they have employed a full-time teacher to work with Aboriginal students. They have seen writing results improve by 200 per cent. The employment of two experienced HSC markers and retired teachers to work with every individual HSC student has doubled the number of band 5 results its students attained in the HSC and resulted in a 75 per cent reduction in the number of students not completing the HSC. An extra deputy principal has been employed to focus on creating world-class teachers who learn from professional development and the latest research, and this has led to an introduction of an innovative project with year 7 working in hubs to increase their engagement. So Kurri Kurri High has had $244,000 in three years, and that has dramatically boosted Aboriginal performance, improved HSC retention and HSC results, and improved learning for year 7s. Because this government has gone back on its word to deliver the full Gonski rollout, Kurri Kurri High School will miss out on $1.1 million. Imagine what they could do with that. Maybe that is all they will ever get to do. Another school in my electorate making great leaps and bounds for students with Gonski funding is Rutherford Public School. Rutherford Public, to date, has received $595,407 in Gonski funding and has invested in substantial additional professional learning for teachers. Through the employment of extra staff it has provided innovative transition programs for students entering kindergarten and for students moving from year 6 to year 7. We all remember what it was like thinking about going to high school; it really can be a traumatic time. They have employed additional literacy and numeracy teachers to help students with those critical skills. The Gonski funding has contracted health professionals, including a speech pathologist to work with teachers in language development. It has employed a community liaison officer to promote school attendance, parent inclusion and community engagement. It has been able to fund extracurricular activities such as a gymnastics program, a school band, physical education and student welfare programs. With its $595,407 Rutherford Public School has invested in its teachers, in programs to help students transition between stages, worked on literacy and numeracy, engaged a speech pathologist, engaged a community liaison officer and funded student welfare and extracurricular activities. Unless Gonski funding is fully rolled out, Rutherford Public School will miss out on $2.7 million. Imagine what they could do with that. Mr Deputy Speaker, I could be here all day telling you all the important steps forward that have been taken under Gonski in my electorate of Paterson, but time does not permit it. What I do want to say to you is: we cannot afford to miss out. These are not just large sums of money; they are opportunities for us and our country to prosper. 18:42 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson I am delighted to be up here, speaking on this motion. I commend the speeches that have been made by my colleagues the member for Forde and the member for Berowra. They certainly put into context the debate that we are having today. It is important, though, that I also put on the record, in support of my colleagues' and the government's position, that as we promised at the last election the coalition does continue to provide a record investment in our schools to the tune of $73.9 billion over the next four years. Education funding under this government will increase from $16.1 billion this year to $20.2 billion in 2020. So there are no cuts—let's be very clear on that. The funding under this government to education is increasing over the forward estimates. When I spoke on school funding in the MPI only last week—I certainly look forward to speaking on future MPIs on education more generally, but I am very happy to speak on the specifics on school funding as well as my own area of vocational education—what I said was that of course the quantum of the funding for education is important, but it is just as important, if not more so, that we are very aware and conscious of how that funding is actually being used. If I could just pause for a moment to pass on my congratulations to the principals, teachers and all staff at our schools around Australia, who have done a fantastic job in the past and I know are very committed to improving the education outcomes for our students in Australia. That is what my government—the Turnbull government and the coalition—is committed to: ensuring that the education outcomes for our students increase. We all know that when we look at Australian students' performance and compare it to the outcomes of a number of overseas countries, our performance is not where it should be. We have turned our minds to what we can do to improve our performance and make sure that the students of Australia have the opportunity to compete globally because, quite frankly, that is the market that our students, now and into the future, will be operating in. We know that that there is a lot of work that needs to be done. We have already commenced work on the plan that we put in place some time ago to ensure that our students are at world standard as soon as we can possibly deliver that for them. We have made an announcement; we have presented our Quality schools, quality outcomes paper and we have focused on five key areas. I will not go through them because of the time available today, but I certainly do commend that document to those opposite, so that they are fully aware of what the government's program actually is. In the brief time that is remaining, I want to talk about the skills of the future that we know we need to develop for our students, and they are particularly in the STEM field: science, technology, engineering and maths. I listened to the former chief scientist, Professor Ian Chubb, speak on many occasions about the need to improve the STEM skills of our students. The statistics that he used are particularly important. He talked about the statistics over a 20-year period from 1992 to 2012. He looked at year 12 students over that time frame. In 2012, there were 30,800 more students in year 12 than there were in 1992, but there was a significant decrease in the number of students who were studying maths and science subjects. Of that 30,800, there were 8,000 fewer physics students, 4,000 fewer chemistry students and 12,000 fewer biology students. Of that significant increase of 30,800 year 12 students over that 20-year period, we saw an unsustainable decrease in students who were studying maths and science subjects. As a government, we have recognised that and taken some action to address that issue. We have provided over $64 million in initiatives to improve the teaching and learning of STEM in the early learning areas and schools under the National Innovation and Science Agenda, which we announced just over 12 months ago. This is in addition to the additional $12 million that was previously allocated to increase the uptake of STEM subjects at school. This government is committed to producing outcomes. 18:47 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie I rise to support the motion by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition on education funding. Let's be clear: there is no longer a unity ticket on Gonski. The funding for year 4 and onwards that schools would have seen is not going to happen under this government. I will never forget the man who stopped me a few months ago as I stood outside Windsor South Public School with Gonski flyers in my hand. He had not paid much attention to me as he walked his young son into school 10 minutes earlier, but on his way out he stopped. South Windsor is in one of the most disadvantaged areas in my electorate, with higher unemployment than average and lower income levels. But, like every community, it has families who want to see their children do better than they did. This dad definitely wanted it for his young son. He told me that his son had been struggling to read, but the extra resources that Windsor South Public School had been able to invest in, thanks to Gonski, meant his son could now read books. I think we both had tears in our eyes as he described the joy he felt at being able to read a home reader with his son. Gonski funding results in nearly $5 million more in school funding than my local public schools would otherwise have seen in the current school year. For Richmond High School, it has meant $1 million more; for Windsor Park Public School, it is $400,000 more; and Freemans Reach Public School, which celebrates its 150th birthday later this month, is a quarter of a million dollars better off this year thanks to the New South Wales government getting in behind the Gonski funding model. The stories of the difference that the early years of needs-based funding have made include extra teachers at Hawkesbury High School, which let teachers pair up and learn from each other. They have been able to employ Aboriginal support officers to help with literacy and numeracy skills. At North Richmond Public School, Gonski funding means every student, from kindergarten onwards, learns computer coding. At Oakville Public School, speech therapy and new maths and reading programs for children, sometimes with one-on-one teaching, have transformed children's educational futures. In the Blue Mountains side of my electorate—where, I should add, we have more teachers per capita than any other part of Australia—the examples of Gonski go through every single school, but I am just going to talk about one. Katoomba High School has seen student engagement soar. Katoomba High has a diverse school community with a mix of low-SES and medium-income families, and 10 per cent of the students are Aboriginal. The initial 2015 extra Gonski funding was only about $120,000, but that led to a host of programs that the school has subsequently built on. A bush regeneration project has turned two hectares of eucalyptus forest into a classroom. Called 'Birraban', the project was originally an alternative to sport as a way to connect Aboriginal students to their culture and heritage, but it is now used across the curriculum to teach art, science, poetry, geography and maths. This could not happen without extra staff, and there is also a full-time teacher who runs a learning hub for kids with emotional and behavioural needs. All in all, these programs are turning school from being something that a lot of kids did not want to be anywhere near into a place where they look forward to coming. There may not be a highlight in every subject every day, but Birraban means that there is part of a day where students really connect with their teachers and other students. At Winmalee High School, lower down the mountains, a similar concept of a learning hub has been developed, and what it means is that kids can turn up with whichever subject area they are struggling with, so high school kids from year 7 through to year 12 have a place where they can go just to get help from teachers. You cannot do that without extra funding, because you can have a space but it is of no use without one or two teachers there to help. This is what Gonski does. It is really practical. All I have heard from the other side is ideology; I have not heard any practical examples of where they think schools could do without funding. It absolutely appals me that those on the other side can be ignorant of the difference that this needs based funding is making to our kids, and I do wonder how they can deny them the continued benefits of Gonski. This is why we need to see a reversal of the $30 billion cut that is coming from schools, for the government to urgently share a detailed plan for future funding and to explain why they tore up agreements that required the states and territories to increase funding for schools. All of these things need to happen now. 18:52 Mr BROAD 30379 Mallee I do enjoy talking about education, because education is very dear to my heart. I must say that there were some people who are great at maths when it came to education. There were some people who were great at English. There were some people who were great at theatre—everyone has their own passion. But I remember, on a cold June day, handing out how-to-vote cards and my Labor opponent—and I might point out that there are only 15 Labor members in the seat of Mallee—was handing out how-to-vote cards and she was saying: 'Health and education. Health and education.' I thought, 'Well, that's very good, and I said, 'Health and education, border security and lower taxes.' And do you know what? It actually worked. This is the great irony of the debate: whilst you guys know about literacy—you do it very well—we know about numeracy. Numeracy is called making provision for the things that you want to spend your money on. Numeracy is about being responsible and saying, 'I want to fund $30 billion more, so I'm going to make provision in the forward estimates to fund that.' But they did not. They come in here and talk about a cut, but they never put the money aside and, unless you put the money aside and put it in your forward estimates, it is phantom money. It is a mystery. It vanishes. They say that 87 per cent of all statistics are made up, and I guess I am being a little hyperbolic there, but I am pointing out that what we are doing is arguing about fluffy air that was never dedicated to education. In contrast, in 2016 the government I am a part of spent $16 billion. In 2017 we are going to spend $17 billion; in 2018 we are going to spend $18 billion. By 2020, it will be $20.2 billion of federal money into education at the same time as our state governments, whose job it is to administer and also to contribute, have been declining in their contribution to education. Not only have they been declining; but they have been forgetting about regional areas. I represent a third of the state of Victoria, some of the toughest areas, some of the areas that have as many problems as anyone, and you reckon that the state government can actually get the money to my patch? No, they do not even know it is there. I cannot recall when the Minister for Education for Victoria was even in my patch. You come in here and talk about cuts. What I see is reality and what I see are state schools that are administered by the Labor state government of Victoria full of white ants. So I do not like to be lectured to when in real terms we are making provision in our budget and increasing the money year on year on year. There was no $30 billion cut, because you never put the money aside. You are great at literacy. You are great at spinning a line as opposed to us who have put the money aside. If you are going to make a commitment, make a commitment where you really put the money aside and account for it. There are three things that deliver great education, and they are not just money. They include whether a child has a good home life. One of the things I am passionate about is seeing more breakfast programs in our schools. I have the 10th-poorest electorate in Australia and I see children coming to school without breakfast. The second thing, I think, is the culture. We have some really hardworking, dedicated teachers—teachers who go over and above what they should be doing. It is the culture of our schools—which is largely forgotten by the state Labor government, I have got to say—that really drives home education. The third thing, of course, is the infrastructure, but it is only part of it. I have got to say real solutions to real problems have been addressed by our schools, because they are rolling up their sleeves and getting on with it. They are delivering breakfast programs at their own cost with very little help from the state government. They are delivering a great culture of education and they are putting up with white ants eating schools. So don't come in here and tell me about a $30 billion cut. When the state Labor government continues to increase education at the same rate that the government I am a part of, I will stand by and say, yes, there is a future for it. But the government I am a part of is spending $16 billion, $17 billion, $18 billion and, by 2020, $20.2 billion on education. This is what real government delivers for real people. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 260805 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Safe Schools Declaration 170 18:57 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) children in conflict zones around the world are in danger and live in fear within their schooling environments as schools are being attacked or occupied by military forces; (b) classrooms are being used to house munitions and sports fields are becoming battlefields, denying children their right to education; (c) 57 countries have already endorsed the Safe Schools Declaration to protect education in armed conflict situations; and (d) the Safe Schools Declaration aims to build an international community committed to respecting the civilian nature of schools and to develop the best practices for protecting schools from attack and military use; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) work with governments internationally to discourage the military use of schools, and promote security force policies and practices that better protect schools; (b) consider Australia's participation at the Safe Schools Conference to be held in Buenos Aires on 28 and 29 March 2017; and (c) condemn attacks on schools and education, particularly the recent incidents in Nigeria, Syria and Yemen. The Roman philosopher Cicero said, 'In times of war, the law falls silent,' and it is the vulnerable who suffer most when the law is set aside. Two weeks ago Australian kids returned to school in classrooms across our country. We take for granted that our children have a right to a good education and to be safe in their school environment. We expect schools and universities to be safe havens. But children in conflict zones around the world often associate schools with danger and live in fear instead of learning. Schools are being attacked or occupied by military forces in conflict zones. Sporting fields become battlefields, classrooms become munitions stores, schools are used as battlements and students are used as human shields. This has a devastating effect on children It exposes students and teachers to harm, denies children their right to education and deprives communities of the very foundations upon which to build their future. According to the Global Coalition to Protect Education from Attack, since 2009 at least 31 countries have experienced patterned attacks on students, teachers and schools. The majority of these countries are in conflict areas in Africa, the Americas, Asia and the Middle East. This is a global problem and requires a global response, which is why 57 countries have already endorsed the Safe Schools Declaration, a global statement that aims to protect education from armed conflict. The declaration came out of the Conference on Safe Schools in Oslo in May 2015. Countries that have endorsed the declaration include war-scarred countries such as Sierra Leone, Afghanistan and Nigeria, which have experienced firsthand the terrible effects of attacks and military use of schools. But they also include countries like New Zealand, the Netherlands and Malaysia, whose leaders recognise the importance of global support to keep schools safe. Countries that sign the declaration not only agree to restore access to education faster when schools are attacked but also agree to make it less likely that students, teachers and schools are attacked in the first place. They seek to deter attacks by making a commitment to investigate and prosecute war crimes involving schools, and they agree to minimise the use of schools for military purposes, which in turn makes schools less vulnerable to attack. Perhaps most importantly, the declaration builds an international community committed to respecting the civil nature of education and developing and sharing examples of best practice for protecting schools from military use. Australia has previously demonstrated a commitment to protecting children in armed-conflict areas by endorsing the Paris Principles and commitments as well as signing the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. When Australia was in the United Nations Security Council in 2014, we voted for resolution 2143, which encourages all countries to consider concrete measures to deter the use of schools by armed forces and armed militias. But Australia has not yet endorsed the Safe Schools Declaration. I take this opportunity to urge the government to endorse the declaration and encourage Australia's participation in the next international safe schools conference, which is being held in Argentina in March of this year. We should condemn, in the strongest possible terms, attacks on schools and education when they occur, particularly in chronic situations like those in Nigeria, Syria and Yemen. Where Australia is providing assistance for foreign military forces, for instance in Iraq and Afghanistan, I believe we should be working with those governments to discourage the use of schools and to promote security policies that better protect schools and students. If we truly believe that education is the key to our future development, how much more important is education in regions of conflict and turmoil? Peace and prosperity only come from education and the empowering of the next generation through knowledge. The alternative is, however, a situation which is now being faced in Syria, where there is almost a lost generation of uneducated children. We owe it to children to act, and we should act now. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 260805 Is there a seconder? Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 19:03 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney Can I start by commending the member for Werriwa for bringing forward this motion, which I think is an important one for this chamber and this parliament. It is imperative that governments unite to pursue strong international action to prevent all unlawful attacks on schools and other educational facilities in conflict zones. All Australians would be appalled, I think, that, in the 21st century, schools, child-care centres and universities are bombed, shelled and burned or used for military activities or recruitment. This has no place in modern society. Yet, tragically, we know that this is occurring in many conflict zones from Afghanistan to Syria to South Sudan. Indeed, instances of attacks on schools and students have been documented in 30 countries since 2010. The actions of those engaged in military activity can have both immediate and longer term impacts on students and their places of study. Often schools and universities are commandeered by military forces. In some cases this occurs while schools are still operating and, remarkably, students are still present. The impact of such deployments can be devastating. Essential civilian infrastructure becomes overnight a military target. Students can find themselves literally in the firing line because what should be a sanctuary of learning has become the centre of a battle zone. Students and their teachers are often the casualties of war, and it is hard not to hypothesise that, at times, armed forces will use schools in the hope that the young students present will act as some kind of barbaric human shield. In some cases schools are deliberately targeted, even when not occupied by combatant forces. Such attacks are designed to demoralise and cause harm to civilians. I think we are seeing that most dramatically in Aleppo in recent times. In addition to the loss of life, the use of education facilities during conflicts can have a devastating impact on the education infrastructure of a nation. The military occupation of education premises will often have the immediate impact of closing schools, denying their students an education, often for long periods. Their destruction as part of military conflict can take a generation to rebuild. The UN declaration on human rights says that education is a fundamental human right. It promotes individual freedom and empowerment, and yields important development benefits. During and in the aftermath of conflict, this right can be so easily extinguished, setting back the progress of both individuals and entire communities and nations. We cannot and must not stand by as children in conflict zones around the world have their opportunities ruined. Schools and childcare centres should be places of friendship, learning and, above all, safety. They should not be places where students and educators live in fear of attack or have been captured by military forces. We must unite with our international counterparts to say that schools are no-go zone for conflict and military action of any kind. I note that under international humanitarian law education facilities are ordinarily protected from military conflict as civilian sites and that the Australian government works extensively to encourage respect and adherence to those requirements of international law. I am proud of the fact that Australia, during its time as a member of the Security Council, so vigorously supported the adoption of resolution 2143. This was an important resolution from the Security Council which clearly sets out in strong terms the expectations of the global community in relation to the protection of children in armed conflicts. Clauses 16 to 18 of that resolution make clear that during conflicts and postconflict periods children should have access to health and education facilities. It reiterates that attacks on education institutions are contrary to international law. Resolutions such as this along with established international law provide a strong framework for responding to and deterring the military use of schools and universities. Many NGOs working in Australia are also at the forefront of international efforts—for example, UNICEF, Save the Children and Human Rights Watch have been very active in trying to highlight concerns about this area. I am pleased that the government is supportive of the guidelines for protecting schools and universities from military use during armed conflict, which have been endorsed by the Safe Schools Declaration. I do understand, however, that the government does have some concerns about the language of the Safe Schools Declaration and its consistency with international humanitarian law. I would hope that these can be overcome. Nonetheless, the sentiment of the motion of the member for Werriwa is an important one in reminding us all of the importance of international vigilance. More can be done and more must be done; that is stating the obvious. We must work with all governments around the world to prevent attacks on schools and condemn the use of school grounds and facilities for military action and training. They should be places of learning, not places of death and suffering. Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT I am pleased to speak to the motion moved by the member for Fowler in relation to the Safe Schools Declaration. The declaration is committed to making schools safe from military action by encouraging member states to express broad political support for the protection and continuation of education in armed conflict and for protecting the civilian nature of schools. I note that as of 20 January 2017 some 57 countries have endorsed the Safe Schools Declaration. Sadly, Australia is not one of those countries. It is disappointing, given that we are providing assistance already to foreign military forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and we settle refugees from a large number of war zones, including Somalia, Sudan and, more recently, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. Our world at the moment is a very dangerous and unsafe place, especially for children living in armed conflict zones, and for children, that fear for their life is extended to the classroom. Ordinarily a place of sanctuary, safety and learning, schools in war zones are being targeted for attack and being occupied by military forces. I speak on this motion because it is important to protect schools in order to secure a child's right to an education and to give children hope and the best possible chance of a future. These sentiments are passionately held by many of my constituents who have come to Australia as refugees. Last Friday I attended the 2016 VCE and VCAL awards presentations at Sydenham catholic college and I had the honour of presenting the award of dux for the school year to Saad Al-Kassab, a refugee from Syria. Saad was only 14 when the civil war broke out in Syria, and he said: During the Syrian Civil War, I—like most of the students in my city—was not able to attend school. I missed nearly two years of study. My school became an army base and snipers occupied the top of it, stealing lives and causing fear and not allowing even cats to pass through. Soon after, my school playground became a centre for shelling and bombing. They turned the school from a place that gives hope and life to a place that causes death and destruction. It was really heartbreaking for me to know that I will no longer be able to go to school, that not only my past is being destroyed but my future is being stolen as well. According to UNICEF, the continuing war in Syria has seen thousands of schools damaged, destroyed, militarised and used as detention centres or shelters for displaced persons. Some 1.7 million Syrian children are out of school in their country due to the conflict. Aid organisations and human rights groups have pointed out that the dwindling school attendance rates, particularly in rebel-held areas, have pushed children into the labour market, fuelled displacement and, in the case of girls, led to disturbing increases in child marriage. But it is not just in Syria where children and schools are subjected to military attacks and violence. The 2014 Israel-Gaza war took a heavy toll on Gaza's children. More than 500 were killed; 3,374 were injured, nearly one-third of whom suffered permanent disability; more than 1,500 were orphaned; and hundreds of thousands were left in trauma. During the 51-day conflict, 258 schools and kindergartens were damaged, including 26 schools that are beyond repair. Two years later Gaza's children and their families continue to suffer. The damage to school buildings has placed additional strain on the education system, which was already operating on double shifts before the war, with half the students attending in the morning and the other half attending in the afternoon because of a shortage of classroom space. In Iraq, one in every five children is at serious risk of death, injury, sexual violence and recruitment into armed groups, with many children being snatched from school. Peter Hawkins, a representative from UNICEF, says: The conflict is exposing children in Iraq to daily horrors. Unless addressed immediately, young minds, haunted by fear and hatred could slip into a spiral of despair, darkness and a sense of helplessness. Learning, playing and aspiring to a more prosperous future will be a thing of the past. Children in war-torn countries are growing up associating schools with death and destruction instead of safety, nurturing and education. The impact armed conflict has on a country and its opportunity to rebuild after the atrocities of war is significant. I call on the Australian government to endorse the Safe Schools Declaration and to attend the March conference in Buenos Aires in order to work with governments internationally to discourage the military use of schools and promote security and practices that better protect schools. It is in the interests of children around the world that they have the right to safety and the right to an education. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:1 4   Centrelink (Question No. 629) 174 629 Ms Templeman 181810 asked the Minister for Human Services, in writing, on 24 November 2016 In (a) the electoral division of Macquarie, and (b) New South Wales, how many people who are 55 years of age and over are (i) registered with Centrelink, and (ii) eligible for Medicare. Mr Tudge M2Y The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Centrelink Customer over 55yrs in receipt of a main income support payment (1) (1) Main Income Support payments (ISP) were utilised as a customer base to minimise the risk of potential over counting of customers. (2) Numbers have been rounded. Total Number of eligible Medicare Enrolment holders over 55yrs (3) (3) Eligible Medicare enrolment includes customers who are enrolled and have a current status.