
<hansard version="2.2" noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd">
  <session.header>
    <date>2018-08-22</date>
    <parliament.no>45</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>7</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;"></span>
            <a href="Chamber" type="">Wednesday, 22 August 2018</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The SPEAKER (</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Hon.</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Tony Smith</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 09:30, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Selection Committee</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present Report No. 29 of the Selection Committee relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and private members' business on Monday, 10 September 2018 and the consideration of bills. The report will be printed in the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> for today and the committee's determinations will appear on tomorrow's <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>. Copies of the report have been placed on the table.</para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">The report read as follows</inline>—</para>
<quote><para class="block">Report relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business; private Members' business and the consideration of bills introduced 20 August 2018</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. The committee met in private session on Tuesday, 21 August 2018.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2. The Committee deliberated on items of committee and delegation business that had been notified, private Members' business items listed on the Notice Paper and notices lodged on Tuesday, 21 August 2018, and determined the order of precedence and times on Monday, 10 September 2018, as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for House of Representatives Chamber (10.10 am to 12 noon)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">COMMITTEE AND DELEGATION BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Presentation and statements</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 Standing Committee on Tax and Revenue</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Taxpayer Engagement with the Tax System</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that statements on the report may be made — all statements to conclude by 10.20 am.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Falinski — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Next Member speaking — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 MR KATTER: To present a Bill for an Act to improve accountability in relation to the Inland Rail project, and for related purposes. (<inline font-style="italic">Inland Rail Project (Improving Accountability) Bill 2018</inline>)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(<inline font-style="italic">Notice given 25 June 2018.</inline>)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 Trade: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">26</inline><inline font-style="italic">February</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>) on the motion of Mr van Manen—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the importance of open trade and investment policies in growing the Australian economy and creating local jobs;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) commends the Government for leading efforts to conclude the Trans-Pacific Partnership 11 nation (TPP-11) agreement;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) welcomes the recent conclusion of this landmark deal which will eliminate more than 98 per cent of tariffs in a trade zone with a combined GDP of AUD $13.7 trillion;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) notes the significant opportunities offered by new trade agreements with Canada and Mexico and greater market access to Japan, Chile, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) recognises the importance of the agreement for Australia's farmers, manufacturers and service providers in increasing their competitiveness in overseas markets;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) notes indicative modelling by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, which found that the TPP-11 agreement would boost Australia's national income by 0.5 per cent and exports by 4 per cent; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) encourages the Parliament to work co-operatively to ratify the TPP-11 agreement so that Australian exporters can take advantage of the many benefits it delivers.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>50<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 10 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 MS PLIBERSEK: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) expresses concern that despite recent improvements in the gender pay gap, Australian women continue to experience sustained economic disadvantage, in particular women working in undervalued, traditionally female dominated industries;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that on 5 September, early childhood educators around the country staged industrial action to highlight the need for equal pay and proper recognition for the value of their work;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) acknowledges the important contribution these workers, along with workers in other undervalued care professions such as aged care, health and disability care make, not just to our nation's economy but to Australian society; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) calls on the Government to take action to support equal pay and recognition for women working in undervalued care professions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(<inline font-style="italic">Notice given 21 August 2018.</inline>)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — remaining private Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">'</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> business time prior to 12 noon.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms Plibersek — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for Federation Chamber (11 am to 1.30 pm)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> 1 Fair Work Amendment (Restoring Penalty Rates) Bill 2018 (<inline font-style="italic">Mr Shorten</inline>): Second reading—Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">20</inline><inline font-style="italic">August</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>30<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 Small businesses and Government Defence contracts: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">26</inline><inline font-style="italic">March</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>) on the motion of Mr Wallace—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Government's record $200 billion investment in the Australian Defence Force (ADF) capabilities represents a unique opportunity for Australian businesses;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) many Australian businesses who first supplied defence materials to the Australian Government go on to export these products overseas; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) Australia ranks thirteenth in the world for defence expenditure, but is only the twentieth largest exporter;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) congratulates the Government on its activities to date to encourage local small businesses to bid for Government defence contracts, including the 2016 Defence White Paper, the Integrated Investment Program, the Defence Industry Policy Statement and the Centre for Defence Industry Capability (CDIC);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) welcomes the Government's efforts to develop a Defence Export Strategy to plan, guide and measure defence export outcomes that will support our foreign and trade policies, defence industry, defence capability and national security objectives; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) encourages small and medium enterprises all over Australia to explore the opportunity to supply products and services for the ADF, and to contact the CDIC to learn more.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>40<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> 3 Live Sheep Long Haul Export Prohibition Bill 2018 (<inline font-style="italic">Ms Ley</inline>): Second reading—Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">20</inline><inline font-style="italic">August</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>20<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4 Mental health: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">21</inline><inline font-style="italic">May</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>) on the motion of Mr Wallace—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) according to Australian Bureau of Statistics figures one in five Australians report having a mental or behavioural condition, while the prevalence is highest among people aged 18 to 24; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare suggests that 54 per cent of people with a mental illness do not access treatment;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) congratulates the Government for its engagement with the mental health community and for its measures to support mental health in Australia including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) additional investment of $170 million in mental health programs in the 2017 budget including $80 million to maintain community psycho-social services for people with mental illness who are not eligible for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, $11.1 million to prevent suicide in specific locations where it is a frequent occurrence, $15 million to support mental health research initiatives such as the Thompson Institute on the Sunshine Coast and $50 million for mental illness prevention and support for serving Australian Defence Force members, veterans and their families; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) investment of:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) $9.5 million to expand mental health first aid training in 14 high risk communities; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) $9.1 million to support rural telehealth services for mental health and the appointment of the first National Rural Health Commissioner;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) encourages the Government to continue this focused work and to seek additional ways to support the mental health of Australians; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) further encourages anyone who believes that they might be suffering from a mental illness to seek immediate help from their General Practitioner or a qualified mental health practitioner.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>30<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 DR FREELANDER: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) increased immunisation of children, which is essential for protecting them against diseases including pneumonia, polio, rotavirus diarrhoea, meningococcal and measles now saves the lives of 2 to 3 million children per year but, nevertheless, 1.5 million children still die each year from vaccine-preventable diseases;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) in 2017, 85 per cent of children globally received the full course of the diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine, a key measure of vaccine coverage, however, this left nearly 20 million children not covered by this vaccine;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) globally, 85 per cent of children receive the polio vaccine, however, gaps in polio vaccine coverage allow some children to contract the disease, with 13 cases in 2018 so far;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, to which Australia has been a consistent contributor, has supported the vaccination of more than 640 million children, and saved an estimated 9 million lives; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) in December 2018, Gavi will hold a mid-term review to assess what changes to its strategy are needed to achieve increased and equitable access to vaccines;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia co-sponsored a resolution at the Seventieth World Health Assembly in 2017 to accelerate access to vaccines, calling for the extension of immunisation services beyond infancy, increasing domestic financing, and strengthening international cooperation to achieve global vaccination goals; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) current funding by the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI), to which Australia contributes, is due to decline significantly as polio nears eradication—this funding covers one fifth of the World Health Organisation's costs, and accounts for a high proportion of the health and vaccination workforce in several countries; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) participate in planning to accelerate progress in making vaccines available to all children, including through the Gavi mid-term review; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) work with countries now receiving polio support and with multilateral agencies to ensure that transition from GPEI funding results in increased resources for other health and vaccinations programs.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — remaining private Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">'</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> business time prior to 1.30 pm</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Dr Freelander — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for Federation Chamber (4.45 pm to 7.30 pm)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 MR GEORGANAS: To move—That this House notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) this Parliament condemns the exploitation of workers and communities by unscrupulous shipping and port operators;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) exploitive deals with unscrupulous dictatorships are not acceptable;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) contracts with unscrupulous dictatorships and dictators will not stand in the international shipping community; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) companies that are linked to harsh dictatorships, responsible for the suppression of democracy, are not welcome in the Australian shipping industry, and that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) such companies negotiating contracts with dictatorships are on notice; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) exploitative industrial behaviour will not be tolerated on our shores.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(<inline font-style="italic">Notice given 21 August 2018.</inline>)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>30<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Georganas — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">5 Infrastructure: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">21</inline><inline font-style="italic">May</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>) on the motion of Mrs Marino—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises the importance of infrastructure to the future prosperity of our nation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges the actions the Government is taking in delivering a record $75 billion investment in infrastructure and transport projects focused on building local communities, connecting the regions and our cities, busting congestion and boosting productivity, while creating local jobs;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) notes that for the first time, the Government has committed to a 10 year infrastructure investment pipeline with the recently announced significant infrastructure projects; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) congratulates the Government in working to deliver the infrastructure that will help secure Australia's prosperity into the future.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">—<inline font-style="italic">And on the amendment moved thereto by Mr Albanese, viz</inline>—That all words after paragraph (1) be omitted and the following be inserted:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) condemns the Government for cutting infrastructure investment from $8 billion in 2017-18 to $4.5 billion in 2021-22;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) notes research from the Parliamentary Budget Office which has found Commonwealth investment will fall from 0.4 to 0.2 per cent of GDP over the next decade;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) condemns the Government for its incompetence in underspending by $4.7 billion on its own infrastructure investment commitments in its first four budgets;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) notes that off budget financing of public transport projects is misleading; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) condemns the Government for failing to deliver investment to construct the Melbourne airport rail line, Western Sydney rail or Brisbane cross-river rail project.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>30<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3 MR HILL: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes Australia's proud legacy of working for peace and democracy in Cambodia, led by the work of the former Labor Foreign Minister the Hon. Gareth Evans QC in fostering the Paris Peace Accords in 1991;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) reiterates that as a longstanding friend of Cambodia and the Cambodian people, Australia must continue to urge the Cambodian Government to take steps to allow free and open political debate without violence and intimidation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) condemns the sham election in Cambodia last month and expresses grave concern that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the illegitimate election may sound the death knell of democracy, reversing more than 25 years of work to establish and strengthen democracy in Cambodia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) Prime Minister Hun Sen's 'victory' is a sham and cannot truly be said to represent the will of the Cambodian people because freedom of expression and association underpin democratic societies, yet in Cambodia the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(i) main opposition party, the Cambodian National Rescue Party, has been banned;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ii) opposition leader Kem Sokha remains in jail on politically motivated charges;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iii) media and civil society have been silenced and harassed, with Hun Sen publicly threatening a civil war if he lost the election;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(iv) National Election Committee is not credible nor independent; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(v) official 82 per cent turnout figures are not credible, noting the opposition boycotted the election and international media reported that election day was quiet in many places;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) calls on the Cambodian Government to immediately release Kem Sokha from jail and guarantee his safety;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) considers that Australia must now consider stronger measures and calls on the Australian Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) review Australia's international development assistance to Cambodia to ensure the program is focused on humanitarian and civil society support rather than broader cooperation with Hun Sen's regime;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) examine the introduction of targeted sanctions such as visa restrictions and asset freezes for members of Hun Sen's regime and their families, given the reported strong links between the regime's key officials and Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) lead and support multilateral efforts with other nations, starting with signatories of the 1991 Paris Peace Accords, to develop coordinated measures to increase pressure on Hun Sen's regime to allow free and open political debate without violence and intimidation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) fully investigate allegations of illicit activities, including money laundering, by members of the Cambodian People's Party in Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) guarantee the rights of Australians of Cambodian heritage to live safely and free from intimidation, and determine whether the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme may apply to expose community groups which may be operating covertly in Australia in support of Hun Sen's regime;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on the Australian Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) withdraw from the refugee resettlement deal; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) promise not to enter into any further such deals with Cambodia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) acknowledge the tireless advocacy of the Australian Cambodian community in support of democracy and human rights in Cambodia.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(<inline font-style="italic">Notice given 13 August 2018.</inline>)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>40<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Hill — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> Orders of the day – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">6 Energy: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">18</inline><inline font-style="italic">June</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>) on the motion of Mr C. Kelly—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises the need for households and small businesses to access affordable, reliable energy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that the Government's National Energy Guarantee is recommended by the independent Energy Security Board and that it:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) involves no taxes, subsidies or trading schemes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) creates a level playing field that ensures all types of energy are part of Australia's mix;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) provides certainty for investors in new and existing power plants; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) reduces price volatility; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) condemns the Opposition's plan to replicate South Australia's 50 per cent renewable energy target, which will mean more subsidies and therefore higher prices.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>30<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> 7 Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2018 (<inline font-style="italic">Dr Leigh</inline>): Second reading—Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">20</inline><inline font-style="italic">August</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — </inline>10<inline font-style="italic">minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">8 Farm Household Allowance: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from</inline><inline font-style="italic">25</inline><inline font-style="italic">June</inline><inline font-style="italic">2018</inline>) on the motion of Mr Gee—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that a significant part of rural Australia is currently drought declared;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) further notes that farming families and the agriculture sector more widely are a vital part of the Australian economy as well as the Australian psyche;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) recognises the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources for their efforts in touring drought declared areas in NSW and Queensland;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) congratulates the Government for deciding to extend the Farm Household Allowance from three years to four years; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) acknowledges that this assistance will help the nation's farmers.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — remaining private Members</inline> <inline font-style="italic">'</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> business time prior to 7.30 pm</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">All Members — </inline>5<inline font-style="italic"> minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 5 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration</inline>  <inline font-style="italic">of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3. The committee determined that the following referral of a bill to a committee be made—</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport:</para></quote>
<list><inline font-style="italic">Aged Care Amendment (Staffing Ratio Disclosure) Bill 2018</inline>.</list>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>6</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Foreign Media Ownership, Community Radio and Other Measures) Bill 2017</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <a href="s1105" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (Foreign Media Ownership, Community Radio and Other Measures) Bill 2017</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Returned from Senate</title>
            <page.no>6</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>My Health Records Amendment (Strengthening Privacy) Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <a href="r6169" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">My Health Records Amendment (Strengthening Privacy) Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>6</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>6</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I am pleased to introduce the My Health Records Amendment (Strengthening Privacy) Bill 2018. The Australian government takes seriously the security of health information. This bill will make amendments to the legislation underpinning the My Health Record system to strengthen its privacy protections.</para>
<para>A My Health Record puts consumers at the centre of their health care by enabling access to important health information, when and where it is needed, by consumers and their health care providers. Consumers can choose whether or not to have a My Health Record and can set their own access controls to limit access to their My Health Record or to particular documents within it.</para>
<para>The intent of the My Health Records Act has always been clear—to help improve the health care of all Australians.</para>
<para>The My Health Record system aims to address a fundamental problem with the Australian health system—consumers' health information is fragmented because it is spread across a vast number of locations and systems.</para>
<para>A My Health Record does not replace the detailed medical records held by healthcare providers; rather, it provides a summary of key health information such as information about allergies, medications, diagnoses and test results like blood tests.</para>
<para>The My Health Record system will improve health outcomes by providing important health information when and where it is needed so that the right treatment can be delivered safer and faster. It enables individual consumers to access all their own individual healthcare records privately and securely for the first time.</para>
<para>The My Health Record system has now been operating for more than six years. More than six million Australians, on the advice of the Australian Digital Health Agency, have a My Health Record and more than 13,000 healthcare provider organisations are participating in the system.</para>
<para>Almost seven million clinical documents, 22 million prescription documents and more than 745 million Medicare records have been uploaded, as at the latest information provided by the Australian Digital Health Agency.</para>
<para>In June 2012 the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Records Act, or PCEHR Act, took effect and the PCEHR system began operating in July 2012. This act contained the provisions around disclosure to third parties and the archiving of cancelled records that are being amended by this bill. It was passed unanimously by both houses of this parliament.</para>
<para>In November 2013 the coalition government announced a review into the PCEHR system that subsequently recommended a move to an opt-out system.</para>
<para>In November 2015 the Health Legislation Amendment (eHealth) Bill came into effect. This changed the name of the system from PCEHR to My Health Record and enabled the opt-out approach. The bill passed with unanimous support in both houses, and the comments at the time from the shadow minister at the table were that the changes were sensible.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Catherine King</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Are you still here, Greg? Are you still here?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will pause for a second. The member for Ballarat won't be here if she keeps interjecting. The minister has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On 24 March 2017 the COAG Health Council agreed to a national opt-out model for long-term participation arrangements in the My Health system. This support was reaffirmed this month, in Alice Springs, only a few weeks ago.</para>
<para>In May 2017 the government announced national implementation of opt-out as part of the 2017-18 budget.</para>
<para>On 30 November 2017 I made the My Health Records (National Application) Rules 2017 to apply the opt-out model of registration to all consumers in Australia, and to specify the period in which consumers could opt out. The opt-out period commenced on 16 July 2018 and will end on 15 November 2018.</para>
<para>As part of the 2017-18 budget, this government announced that, in order to achieve the benefits sooner, the My Health Record system would transition to an opt-out system whereby every Australian will receive a My Health Record by the end of this year, unless they've opted out.</para>
<para>The opt-out period started on 16 July this year, and the Australian Digital Health Agency, together with many partner organisations, has been working closely with the healthcare sector to inform consumers about the purpose and benefits of My Health Record, the privacy settings for restricting access and the right to opt out.</para>
<para>Soon after the opt-out period concerns were raised by some groups—specifically, that My Health Record information could be disclosed for law enforcement purposes, and that health information would continue to be retained in the system after a consumer has cancelled their My Health Record.</para>
<para>The system has operated for six years and no material has been released for law enforcement purposes, I am advised. In any event, the policy has been that there would be no release of information without a court order.</para>
<para>I think it's important to be very clear about this—the My Health Record system has its own dedicated privacy controls which are stronger in some cases than the protections afforded by the Commonwealth Privacy Act, on the advice I have. The operation and design of the My Health Record system was developed after consultation with consumers, privacy advocates and experts, health sector representatives, health software providers, medical indemnity insurers, and Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies. Further, the system has been operating without incident since July 2012.</para>
<para>Nonetheless, this government has listened to the recent concerns and, in order to provide additional reassurance, is moving quickly to address them through this bill. I appreciate the constructive consultations with the Australian Medical Association and the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners and I welcome the recently reaffirmed support from all state and territory governments for this important health reform, for the opt-out process and for the strengthened privacy provisions at the recent COAG Health Council meeting.</para>
<para>The bill will remove the ability of the system operator—that is, the Australian Digital Health Agency—to disclose health information to law enforcement agencies and other government bodies without a court order or the consumer's express consent. This is consistent with the system operator's current policy position, expressed clear and absolute, which has remained unchanged and has resulted in no My Health Records being disclosed in such circumstances.</para>
<para>The bill will also require the system operator to permanently delete health information it holds for any consumer who has cancelled their My Health Record. This makes it clear that the government will not retain any health information if a person chooses to cancel at any time. The record will be deleted forever.</para>
<para>In addition to these amendments, I have already extended the opt-out period by a further month, to end on 15 November. This will provide more time for consumers to make up their own mind about opting out of My Health Record. Even after this period a consumer can choose not to participate at any time and cancel their My Health Record. Their record will then be cancelled and permanently deleted.</para>
<para>These legislative changes reinforce the existing privacy controls that the system already gives each individual over their My Health Record. Once they have a My Health Record, individuals can set a range of access controls. For example, they can set up an access code so that only those organisations they elect can access their record, and they can be notified when their record is accessed. They can also elect if they don't want their Medicare or other information included in their My Health Record.</para>
<para>The My Health Record system has provided and will continue to provide significant health, social and economic benefits for all Australians through avoided hospital admissions, fewer adverse drug events, reduced duplication of tests, better coordination of care for people seeing multiple healthcare providers, and better informed treatment decisions.</para>
<para>The Australian government is committed to the My Health Record system because it is changing health care in Australia for the better. The Australian government is equally committed to the privacy of individual's health information. These measures are specifically designed and intended, through consultation with the AMA and the College of General Practitioners, amongst others, to strengthen the privacy protections and demonstrate this commitment.</para>
<para>I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <a href="r6163" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>8</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>8</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHESTER</name>
    <name.id>IPZ</name.id>
    <electorate>Gippsland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I introduce the Veterans' Entitlements Amendment Bill 2018<inline font-style="italic">.</inline>The importance of family cannot be underestimated in the support they provide both our serving personnel and our veterans. This government is committed to supporting veterans and their families and this bill will maintain the current practice for veterans' families when a beloved member dies.</para>
<para>The current entitlements to bereavement payments are not changing. This government recognises that these are important payments for our veterans' families during this difficult time. The payment is a one-off non-taxable payment of 98 days, or 14 weeks, of service pension paid to the surviving partner. It is designed to assist the surviving partner with the costs following the death of their partner and provide a period to adjust their finances following the cessation of their deceased partner's payments. The bereavement payment is paid automatically once the family notifies the Department of Veterans' Affairs.</para>
<para>Prior to their death, a veteran may have been receiving an income support pension under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986.</para>
<para>Generally, there is a small period of time after someone has died before the family notifies the Department of Veterans' Affairs and this may result in an overpayment of a pension, usually between $500 and $1,000. The practice is that, where an overpayment occurs, DVA adjusts this amount from the bereavement payment.</para>
<para>For example, a veteran dies on the 7 June 2017 and his pension continues to be paid at a rate of $622.80 per fortnight—including a final payment on 22 June for the period 6 to 19 June. DVA were advised of the death on 30 June 2017. Therefore, the veteran was not entitled to $578.31, or 13 days, of the final payment. A bereavement payment, as I said, is the equivalent of 98 days of the difference between the service pension rates payable to the surviving partner before and after the death of the deceased partner. Service pension is payable to the partner totalling $2,935.80. In this example, the amount of $578.31 is recovered from the bereavement payment, making a payment of $2,357.49 payable from DVA into the partner's account.</para>
<para>This ensures the adjustment is made in a single administrative process rather than through a number of more formal debt recovery processes.</para>
<para>This avoids the need to recover debts from the deceased estate and avoids disturbing the family during the grieving period. This is a compassionate, sympathetic and unobtrusive response.</para>
<para>The bill will provide legislative certainty for past and future recoveries of pension overpayments from bereavement payments and will maintain the current discreet practice to respect veterans' families mourning their loss. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DELEGATION REPORTS</title>
        <page.no>9</page.no>
        <type>DELEGATION REPORTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 138th Inter-Parliamentary Union Assembly</title>
          <page.no>9</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOSH WILSON</name>
    <name.id>265970</name.id>
    <electorate>Fremantle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the report of the Australian delegation to the 138th Inter-Parliamentary Union Assembly that was held in Geneva, Switzerland from 24 to 28 March 2018 and I ask leave of the House to make a short statement in connection with the report.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOSH WILSON</name>
    <name.id>265970</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm very pleased to make some remarks upon the tabling of the report in relation to the delegation from this parliament to the 138th Inter-Parliamentary Union, an assembly that took place earlier this year in March. The Australian delegation was ably led by Senator Ian Macdonald and also included my friend and colleague Senator Catryna Bilyk from the other place. Together we participated in and contributed to the IPU Assembly, whose general debate focus was on strengthening the global regime for migrants and refugees and the need for evidence based solutions. It was attended by 829 parliamentarians from 148 countries, which included 98 presiding or deputy-presiding members.</para>
<para>The Inter-Parliamentary Union is the international organisation constituted by the parliamentarians of sovereign states. Its focus is on promoting and supporting strong, effective and independent parliaments as a key feature of democratic governance. Of course, the IPU recognises that all parliaments and their members face challenges and so it works to build democratic capacity and the expertise of its members to encourage dialogue and to monitor and respond to circumstances that threaten the independence and good function of parliaments or that otherwise interfere with the ability of parliamentarians to undertake their work. The IPU is a healthy reminder of the significance of parliaments in their own right, separate from the executive within government. It's an opportunity at those assembly gatherings to hear firsthand from other parliamentarians whose circumstances and experience present both familiar and sometimes wildly different challenges to the ones we face here in Australia.</para>
<para>In addition to the work of the general assembly and the four standing committees, the IPU is an opportunity for Australian delegates to meet with delegations from other countries. The 138th assembly created the chance for us to meet on a bilateral basis with delegations from Ukraine, Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Israel. It has become customary for the Australian and New Zealand delegations to host a gathering of parliamentarians from Pacific Island nations, which on this occasion allowed us to meet with delegates from the Marshall Islands, Fiji, Vanuatu and the Federated States of Micronesia.</para>
<para>In the course of the assembly, there was also a session organised by the Mexico delegation through which delegates could consider the implications of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The session allowed a healthy canvassing of the merits and concerns related to the TPP, especially issues like investor-state dispute resolution mechanisms, the deregulation of temporary foreign labour arrangements and, if the US were ever to re-enter the TPP, the potential for costly extensions to the current length of monopoly rights on biological medicines.</para>
<para>I'd like to make particular mention of the work considered through the second committee, the standing Committee on Sustainable Development, Finance and Trade. Up to and including the most recent assembly, the member for Forrest, the Chief Government Whip, has been a much-respected member of that committee. It was a privilege to attend the meeting at this assembly in her stead. Through the process for determining a future resolution topic and with the support of my fellow delegates, I was successful in proposing that the standing committee consider in future the role of fair and free trade and investment in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, especially regarding economic equality, sustainable infrastructure, industrialisation and innovation.</para>
<para>Along with colleagues from Serbia and Ghana, I was appointed a co-rapporteur for the carriage of the resolution through the second committee in future. I'm looking forward to working with my fellow co-rapporteurs and parliamentary delegates in the standing committee at the next assembly to refine the details of the resolution. It's certainly a time when we need a sharpened focus on trade and infrastructure investment that can be the basis of shared inclusive wellbeing, rather than the means by which the imbalance of power between nations is translated into greater inequality, poorer health outcomes and environmental degradation.</para>
<para>I was also glad to attend side meetings on the urgent challenge of nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation and to contribute as a panel member on a workshop in relation to the nuclear weapon prohibition treaty. I support the purpose and objectives of that treaty. I was glad to see the work of ICAN, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, recognised in the course of that session, and it was recognised that their origins are here in Australia. The session focused on the important normative step that the NWPT represents towards peace and security.</para>
<para>The IPU continues to be a forum in which parliamentarians discuss and debate issues that affect us all within our sovereign nations and, most importantly, the issues that affect us in the form of global challenges—like conflict, climate change, the global displacement of people and related migration and other humanitarian crises. I want to acknowledge the work and camaraderie of my fellow IPU delegates from the other place, Senators Macdonald and Bilyk, both of whom made substantial contributions in the general debate in addition to their other work. We were very well supported by officers from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. I conclude by making special mention of Toni Matulick, the IPU delegation secretary, who kept us on schedule and ensured we were well briefed and well advised at all times.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to say thank you to the member for Fremantle for going to the conference, an important conference, on behalf of this House. I couldn't go because it was during a sitting week. It's important that both houses of our parliament are represented at the IPU. On behalf of the House, I just want to thank him for going and attending all of those important meetings.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>10</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Joint Standing Committee on Treaties</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>10</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROBERT</name>
    <name.id>HWT</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, I present the committee report incorporating a dissenting report entitled <inline font-style="italic">Report 181:</inline><inline font-style="italic">Comprehensive and progressive agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership</inline>.</para>
<para>Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROBERT</name>
    <name.id>HWT</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I rise to make a statement concerning <inline font-style="italic">Report 181:</inline><inline font-style="italic">Comprehensive and progressive agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership</inline> or TPP-11 for short. This is the revised Trans-Pacific Partnership and has been signed by all the original TPP parties except the United States. The active provisions of the TPP-11 are the same as those in the TPP, with the exception of a handful of provisions.</para>
<para>Even without the United States, this is one of the most significant international trade agreements since the completion of the World Trade Organization's Uruguay Round 20 years ago. It is quite an extraordinary agreement. In that light, Mr Speaker, it is wonderful to welcome to your gallery this morning His Excellency Mr Miguel Palomino de la Gala, the ambassador of Peru. Of course we had the Peru-Australia Free Trade Agreement tabled in this House to allow ratification last week. Sir, it is wonderful to see you. I welcome His Excellency Patricio Powell, the ambassador for Chile. Australia has a longstanding free trade agreement with Chile. It is wonderful to see that reaffirmed here in TPP-11. And I welcome His Excellency Eduardo Patricio Pena Haller, the ambassador for Mexico. It is superb to see Mexico, one of the world's great economies, the 10th largest country in the world, now involved in TPP-11.</para>
<para>So many of those countries are also involved in the Pacific Alliance Free Trade Agreement that we are currently working through. We're looking forward to bringing that completed trade agreement to the House. I think there will be a very strong association between Australia and Ibero-America going forward. I think there are great opportunities for us—for trade, commerce, education and cultural exchange in that part of the world. TPP-11 is a key plank in that area.</para>
<para>There are considerable opportunities for Australian businesses as well as for businesses of the other signatories to TPP-11. The TPP-11 will provide considerable opportunities for Australian businesses, such as providing preferential access to the Canadian and Mexican markets for the first time and reducing or eliminating tariffs on beef, sugar, cheese, wheat and seafood exported to Japan. Mechanisms to minimise the impact of non-tariff barriers will be key across all TPP-11 countries. There will be a framework to standardise technical barriers to trade across all countries and, of course, improved access for Australian technical expertise to all countries in areas such as minerals exploration and technology services by ensuring an easy movement of professionals, reducing barriers to transfer of software and reducing barriers to businesses wishing to establish a presence in the TPP-11 countries.</para>
<para>While we considered and did an extensive inquiry into the original TPP—which was report 165, which I tabled in this House—a number of factors warranted an extensive inquiry into TPP-11. These included: the withdrawal of the United States, which is disappointing; the additional research that has been conducted into potential impacts of the TPP-11 since TPP was tabled a number of years ago; and, of course, the impact of the suspended provisions.</para>
<para>One of the most interesting insights of the inquiry is that the withdrawal of the United States is likely to benefit the Australian economy. Who would have thought! That is because the United States's exports to Japan will still be subject to tariffs higher than those applying to Australian exports. It just goes to show that international trade and a country's GDP rise when we move to freer trade.</para>
<para>The committee's inquiry benefited from extensive research conducted by inquiry participants. This was particularly the case in relation to some contentious issues like investor-state dispute settlement, or ISDS, and economic modelling. The committee was presented with evidence drawn from over 500 examples of ISDS cases. To date, Australia has only been subject to one or two such cases.</para>
<para>The improved ISDS provisions in TPP-11 should prevent foreign investors from bringing ISDS cases against Australia in relation to income, social security, welfare, public education, public training, health, child care, public utilities, public transport, housing and the environment—key areas of public policy debated often in this place.</para>
<para>The TPP-11 also signals future improvements in ISDS processes, such as appellate mechanisms, a code of ethics for arbitrators and the introduction of the construct of precedent within those cases. The improved ISDS provisions mean that the Australian public can and should have great confidence that ISDS will not prevent the Australian government from regulating in the public interest when necessary in this place.</para>
<para>Participants in the inquiry engaged in lengthy debate about the outcomes of the economic modelling performed on the TPP and TPP-11. In summary, the debate about economic modelling was at times heated but not particularly illuminating. Economic modelling takes a series of assumptions about an economy based on previous evidence and casts that forward to predict outcomes in a limited range of fields. To quote—heaven forbid!—the previous member for Groom, Mr Macfarlane, he says that economists are there to make astrologists look good. I'm not saying he's being unkind; I'm simply pointing out that there are limits to modelling that we should all understand.</para>
<para>A consequence of this is that the outcomes from different types of modelling at times cannot usefully be compared. In addition, modelling a complex agreement like TPP-11 in a real-world environment across 11 different countries imposes necessary limitations on the accuracy of what are, at times, predictions.</para>
<para>We as a committee believe that economic modelling is useful as a tool but amongst a range of tools and is only useful to inform decision-making. However, the committee believes that there are enough benefits to be had, especially in the public perception of trade agreements, if the Australian government commissioned modelling as part of the national interest analysis for future trade agreements. Because of this, the committee has recommended that the government, as part of preparation of an NIA—a national interest analysis—should commission economic modelling of future trade agreements.</para>
<para>In relation to the TPP provisions suspended in TPP-11, the committee found that the suspensions relating to intellectual and copyright were widely, though not universally, supported as beneficial to Australia. The committee also took evidence that reimposing the suspended provisions may have an impact on some sectors of the Australian economy. We therefore recommend that any proposal to reimpose any of the suspended provisions should be considered a treaty amendment resulting in an inquiry by the committee. Oversight is always a good thing.</para>
<para>The tendency towards protectionism that we have seen over the last 18 months or so in international trade has certainly grown since we first identified it. Trade protectionism will have a significant impact on Australia's exports and, consequently, employment if it continues to develop and will have an impact on the other 10 TPP-11 countries, as we all progressively move towards more open trade for the benefit of all involved.</para>
<para>Against this, TPP-11 provides an important positive example of international cooperation, promoting rules based trade and investment liberalisation. Ratification would be an important contribution towards stabilising the trade environment, reinjecting momentum into cooperative trade liberalisation and rules based approaches to global trade. Therefore, the committee recommends the ratification of TPP-11. On behalf of the committee, I commend the report to the House. I thank the other TPP-11 countries for their cooperation, willingness and speed to which we can get this agreement done. To the ambassadors in the gallery: thank you, sirs, for all of your hard work ensuring this comes to fruition. It's with great pleasure that the committee tables its report.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DANBY</name>
    <name.id>WF6</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne Ports</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I welcome the tabling of this report and I join the member for Cowan in welcoming the excellencies from the Ibero-American bloc, who are so much a part of this proposed treaty. Negotiations on the original Trans-Pacific Partnership, as we know, began under Labor in 2010. As we're all aware, the United States withdrew from the agreement, which was signed in March this year. This is a new agreement and against the tide of opposition to free trade around the world. That's why it's so important.</para>
<para>There are modest economic benefits for Australia in this agreement, and it will remove 98 per cent of tariffs in the region. According to independent economic modelling, of which the member for Cowan spoke so fondly and which was commissioned by the Victorian government, Australia gains market access and eliminates tariffs on Australian goods, including nickel, iron ore, copper, steel, auto parts and machinery. Open markets lift people out of poverty and create higher-paid, more secure jobs. There is also a strategic benefit to Australia in being involved in this regional agreement after the US withdrawal. It just shows that all of the countries who participate in this do understand that democratic cooperation, including in economic areas, is very important. Multilateral agreements like the CPTPP or, as it's better known, the TPP-11 establish the rules of the road for trade within our region. Deeper engagement in our region is key to securing Australia's economic future. Tying the economies of the region together also makes us more secure in this country.</para>
<para>The opposition has long recognised that it is in Australia's national interest to engage more and play a bigger role in our region. That is why Labor has announced a suite of policies under the Future Asia banner in recognition that it is in Australia's economic and strategic interests to deepen engagement in the region. There are issues with the agreement that Labor members raised in our additional comments presented with this report, a particular focus on the investor-state dispute settlement arrangements and the waiver of labour-market testing, which I will come to in a minute. I also want to draw attention to the prospective benefits of this agreement for Australia's universities. As Gabriele Suder, a professorial fellow at Melbourne Business School, argued recently:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Free-trade agreements linking Australia to south-east Asia, Latin America and the European Union will help break our reliance on international students from China—</para></quote>
<para>and lead to prospective benefits of the treaty:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… greater access to overseas students and smoother facilitation of international research projects.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">On their own, the agreements won't necessarily lead to a shift in the number of international students studying in Australia, but they could dramatically change where they come from – alleviating … over-representation of Chinese students in local classrooms.</para></quote>
<para>Let me say something quickly about the investor-state dispute settlements. The opposition is reluctant, if it becomes government, to sign an agreement that includes ISDS provisions. We have already committed to negotiating to remove these clauses from existing agreements in government. This was a commitment made in the 2016 election and recommitted by the current shadow minister for trade in October 2017. If we look to New Zealand, we see that Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was able to remove this clause by signing side letters with four countries with whom the previous conservative government had negotiated ISDS clauses.</para>
<para>On labour market testing, the opposition agrees that the waiver of labour market testing in trade agreements does not make sense. We agree that, before any employer brings in a worker from overseas, the employer should be required to first check and see if an Australian can do the job. As with ISDS, Labor in government also does not want an agreement that waives labour market testing for contractual service suppliers. In addition, a Shorten Labor government—which seems more likely by the day—will strengthen existing labour-market-testing provisions. We've already been successful in forcing the government to adopt several of these measures.</para>
<para>The opposition is also committed to improving the way that trade agreements are negotiated, by commissioning independent economic modelling for each new free trade agreement before it's signed and after an agreement has been in operation for 10 years. Labor supports quality trade agreements that benefit Australia.</para>
<para>Although we're a large economy, we are—many Australians are too modest and forget this—the 12th largest economy in the G20. With a population of only 25 million, we are an economy larger than Russia, with 140 million. It's very important that we be involved in free trade because we are relatively small, and trade with the rest of the world helps benefit the people of this country and raises their standard of living.</para>
<para>I commend Japanese Prime Minister Abe on his initiative in reviving this treaty after it seemed sunk by the current President of the United States and the current US administration. I commend this report to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROBERT</name>
    <name.id>HWT</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the House take note of the report.</para></quote>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>13</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROBERT</name>
    <name.id>HWT</name.id>
    <electorate>Fadden</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>13</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Farm Household Support Amendment (Temporary Measures) Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>13</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <a href="r6162" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Farm Household Support Amendment (Temporary Measures) Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>13</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Hunter has moved as an amendment that all words after 'that' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question now is that the amendment be agreed to.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs SUDMALIS</name>
    <name.id>241586</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>First of all, the most important thing here is that our farmers be aware that they should be ringing the Rural Financial Counselling Service on 1800686175 or the family assistance hotline on 132316, and under no circumstances should they self-assess. There are many conditions that may allow them to get help when they absolutely need it, and they may not realise that the hand of the government is there for them. It's important that they don't rely on trying to assess their own assets and property. There's help available, and we have the resources to help them.</para>
<para>The Farm Household Support Amendment (Temporary Measures) Bill 2018 is a bill to help and to amend the Farm Household Support Act 2014. Under this bill, two temporary changes to the Farm Household Allowance program will happen. Firstly, it will increase the farm assets threshold to a net $5 million until 30 June 2019. Increasing the net farm asset threshold to this amount will give more farmers access to the allowance during times of hardship, which is what we're facing right now. It will help those farmers who have little or no cash flow to access assistance that provides them an allowance as well as breathing room to prepare for and adapt to change. It means these farmers won't have to sell their assets and risk taking away some or all of their future income-producing capacity from their farm. It also recognises that farm assets can be difficult to sell quickly and that during tough times these are often sold for less than they're worth.</para>
<para>Secondly, this bill proposes to pay a supplement to all eligible farm household recipients. That's in addition to their fortnightly income support payments. These temporary measures will help our farmers in need in the short term while we undertake an independent review of the program. The review, to be completed in the first half of 2019, will provide further guidance on the design elements of the farm household allowance well into the future. There will be some lump sum payments. This means that, if both members of a couple are receiving the allowance between September this year and June next year, they will receive 6,000 bucks each, or 12,000 per household. In all other circumstances, the maximum amount payable will be $7,200.</para>
<para>No farmer who lodges a claim for the farm household assistance on or before December will be disadvantaged. If they're eligible, they'll get back pay, right to the date of lodgement, and also receive the supplement. They will receive farm household assistance during the second payment, which is from December to June next year, and they will receive the maximum supplement.</para>
<para>The assistant supplement will give farming families much-needed cash to inject into their local economies. This will also help to put food on their tables and cover basic expenses such as their bills and school fees. As with the increases to the farm assets threshold, it will provide a safeguard for farm families who might be forced to liquidate farm assets to support themselves—and, heaven help us, that constricts their future. This assistance includes income support, independent financial assessment, individualised case management and an activity supplement that pays for advice and training. The safety net supports farmers in hardship while they take steps to improve their situation. And $5 million has been allocated to the Rural Financial Counselling Service so they can go out and talk to the farmers face-to-face and help them through these hard times.</para>
<para>We are working on ways to make the process simpler and quicker for farmers. I have already received email saying it is a little onerous, so we are working on that. We extended the Farm Household Allowance program from three years to four. All of these measures are immediate and on top of the $586 million in relief we have already announced, as well as concessional loans now available through the Regional Investment Corporation.</para>
<para>Many farmers find themselves in a difficult position. In my case, it is the dairy farmers. They don't want to put their hands out for a handout, so we are working to help raise awareness of the cost of milk. I recently wrote to the CEOs of Aldi, Coles, Woolworths and IGA and highlighted that just 20c a litre, 20c a dozen and 20c a kilogram from the profit margin would help our farmers. For the last eight years, the price of milk has been fixed at a dollar a litre. Nothing else on our shelves has remained constant during this time. In 2017 it was reported that the ACCC found the dairy pricing system to be outdated and skewed in favour of the large dominant supermarkets and processors, with farmers enjoying no real bargaining power and limited scope to rearrange their businesses and milk contracts to either accurately predict their current incomes or improve their selling options. The report made eight recommendations, including locking major processors into a mandatory code of conduct which would make milk pricing contracts more transparent, introducing more competition for farmers' milk and banning retrospective milk price cuts in mid-season, which has actually happened. Our local farmers in Gilmore want to have the ability to build their own resilience and futureproof themselves on their own merits as producers. This change in retail price specifically for milk will make a huge difference to them. I think the farm household assistance is just another part of the jigsaw puzzle and helping them get through these really tough times.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before I came to this place—and I still have interest in it—I was a farmer in a district called Buckleboo. Buckleboo is 100 kilometres north of Goyder's line. That may not mean a lot to many Australians, but it means a lot in South Australia. Goyder's line is seen as the line north of which one should not engage in agriculture. But my family has been there for over 90 years and we have prospered, and so has the community. It is a successful farming community. This means I bring the personal experience of drought to this place. Probably the longest period of drought is around four years—the millennium drought, of course. I think we had six very substandard years over eight years. It was quite testing. Over the years, some things have been done better in helping farmers get through tough times—and I will come to that in a little while.</para>
<para>In 2009, the rains came back—they came back with a vengeance in parts of Australia. Up until the last little while, we have enjoyed reasonably good seasons, particularly where I come from. I understand that the drought in New South Wales and Queensland is very problematic at the moment. In some places, it is entering its sixth year. Where I come from, it is less pronounced. I have communities, though, in my electorate that are now looking at the third failure in four years. So things are toughening up. And we have some considerable soil erosion issues that we haven't seen for many, many years—in fact, since the advent of no-till farming. I'm very encouraged that the government is showing it's listening and it's making changes to drought assistance as the drought unfolds, as I think governments should. I commend the minister, the Treasurer and the Prime Minister on listening and making those adjustments.</para>
<para>This bill goes to some temporary measures that are attached to the farm household assistance. For those who don't know—I'm sure everyone in this place will—farm household assistance is the equivalent of Newstart, except there are two differences: one being that the person does not have to seek work, so they are able to receive Newstart assistance and continue to operate their farm. It's a very important tool for basically putting food on the table and keeping families in a good frame of mind. I mean that in the widest possible terms—looking after mental health.</para>
<para>The other difference, and it's a recent change to farm household assistance, is that the government has decided that people can continue on this assistance for up to four years. Newstart allowance is worth not quite $25,000 a couple. This bill, and the announcement by the Prime Minister a few weeks ago, now makes available two $3,000 payments per person. For a couple, it's $6,000 over the next 12 months. That another $12,000 on top of the $25,000, as long as they lodge up to 1 December. I think that is recognition that this is a drought that's having a lot of impact.</para>
<para>We're also increasing the net assets of a farming operation to be eligible for payments from $2½ million up to $5 million. This is a considerable change. A lot of farms are worth a lot of money, and we often say farmers can be asset-rich and income poor. This addresses that issue. Someone who still has assets of over $5 million should be able to make sure they can put food on the table, quite frankly. I think that's a good and powerful move.</para>
<para>But there are a whole lot of other things that swing within farm household assistance, and some other measures in other portfolios assist farmers to stay on the land and prosper. I thought—considering there had been considerable discourse around Australia when the Prime Minister made these most recent announcements, which came to a $190 million uplift at the time—that government gave only $190 million for farmers, but, in fact, since that time, in another announcement, the total assistance to farmers is up around $1.8 billion.</para>
<para>There are some important things available. I held a drought forum in Arno Bay, going back about 2½ weeks ago. There was about three days notice and about 75 farmers and families rolled up. I had a Centrelink officer there and also some rural financial counsellors. I was very grateful for their assistance. One of the things that became quite clear is that farmers do not necessarily have a full grasp of all the things that are available to them and sometimes underestimate the complexity of applying for that assistance. The golden rule here is: we are supplying rural financial counsellors; do not self-assess. Get some help. That is what the rural financial counsellors are for. They are built into the package.</para>
<para>Other things are available within that package; for instance, $1,500 for a farm enterprise evaluation. In layman's terms: this is some money for your accountant to put together the numbers that you can put on your form so you can apply for the farm household assistance. There's $4,000 for a farming operation to assist with skills training. It might be some business studies or it might be getting your computer operations up to speed. There are all kinds of things that can help farmers. It's very important because, at the end of the day, farmers are businesses and they need to operate in that world.</para>
<para>There's been a whole raft of other measures, including the $20,000 instant tax write-off for capital purchases that all businesses enjoy. The instant write-off now, after the recent upgrade, is for water, fodder and fencing, and that is a huge change. There are parts of my electorate where rainfall is preciously thin and where there are no underground water supplies, including on my own farm. In many places, there is not even a reticulated water supply. That means farmers are dependent on what they can capture on their properties. I've been espousing for a long time that they should investigate the possibility of plastic water runs and plastic-lined dams with plastic lids on them, which basically gives rainwater-quality water on farm that runs at one millimetre.</para>
<para>The figures are quite astonishing, and I've given them to the House before. Eyre Peninsula, which is where my farm is situated, uses about 11 gigalitres of water a year out of the reticulated system. If we were to situate a dam and run-off in a 400-millimetre rainfall area—and that's not that hard to find on Eyre Peninsula—just 7,000 acres would harvest all of that water. It would do it. No-one would ever suggest that we build this super dam in one place, but the ability is there for farmers to put aside maybe a hectare of land and put plastic on it—use an existing dam if they have one, line it with plastic and get rid of the evaporation by putting a lid on it—to virtually waterproof their farms. That indirectly takes all that pressure off, at least on the Eyre Peninsula and in some cases the Murray River system. This is an investment with great integrity. I encourage farmers to do that. With the changes to the instant tax write-off, when they get a good year they will have the ability to invest in something that's going to drought-proof their property for the coming years.</para>
<para>I was speaking recently to some quite large farmers who do a lot of fodder conservation. They have a number of sheds. One said, 'I've stopped selling, and I've got to tell you that, sadly, fodder is running out in South Australia.' The recent decision by the New South Wales government—I bear them no malice—to provide a freight subsidy for NSW farmers has actually shortened the food supply in South Australia and lifted its price. This farmer produces a lot of hay and he said, 'We've stopped selling, though, because we've decided that what we've got left we need to have for ourselves. We've made very good money through this period by selling this hay, so what we will do when the drought breaks and when we grow a good hay crop again is build yet another shed, which will be fully tax-deductible in the year in which we build it, and we'll fill that up with hay so we've got more hay for the next drought.' That is more reserves, more fat on their farming system, and an ability to supply a very important commodity to other farmers who haven't got to that point. That's what those incentives do.</para>
<para>On top of that, we have the concessional loans—the drought assistance and business improvement loans. The government announced only last week, I think, that they made available a swag of extra money for those loans. To give people some idea, there is no requirement to repay the principal within five years, and they operate at a 3½ per cent interest rate. Interest rates are fairly low in the market, but that is still below what anyone could expect to get from their bank. Up to 50 per cent of their debt can be financed in that way.</para>
<para>We also have 2½ thousand dollars for benchmarking properties for access to multi-peril crop insurance. It was interesting that, at the drought forum I held in Arno Bay, a number of farmers said that they'd taken out multi-peril crop insurance this year. They were dealing with the sellers of that insurance about how those payouts might work. I'll put one note of caution in: there seems to be quite a variance between those particular policies. One particular farmer had sown his crop and said, 'Because it has been so dry and it never came up, we actually reached the default date, so it's not considered to be a crop,' even though he had expended all his money on seed, fertiliser and the chemicals that went with the sowing. That's a little note of caution. The point is the government is assisting farmers to get into this area to try and manage these income shortfalls for themselves.</para>
<para>The most important federal government policy equipping farmers to deal with drought is the farm management deposits scheme, which was brought in by the Howard government. In the 2016 budget, we doubled the amount which farmers can put into these farm household deposits. For the uninitiated, this means that, in a high-income year, farmers can put money in a bank account with any of the major banks, and that money will get the normal interest from the bank—which I have to say at the moment is not very much—and it will get treated in the same way as any other account. There is a full tax deduction for the year in which they lodge it, and when they bring it back onto their income books—it can earn that interest while it's parked to one side—it will be assessed at the top marginal rate at the time. Of course, if you've got a drought and you're not paying tax because you have zero income or less, that is the time to bring your FMDs back into action. Those limits now are $800,000 for an individual and $1.6 million for a farming couple. The reason it's had to go up is that farms have gotten bigger and bigger, and many of them will spend anything up to half a million or a million dollars getting a crop in the ground. So it's no good equipping farmers for half a season of input; we need to be able to make them resistant to multiseasonal droughts. That's why those limits have been lifted. I do think, as I said, it's the best policy that a government has ever given Australian farmers to equip themselves for drought.</para>
<para>I might say there is a knock-on effect here too for local businesses because it actually keeps cash flow more constant in our local towns, because farmers have actually got money to spend in the season when they didn't get an income. I recount a story of one of my suppliers some years ago, when I was still farming. I was talking about FMDs and he said: 'Why can't I get that as a supplier? Why can't I get an FMD?' I said: 'It's difficult because we come down to this definition of what is a rural business and what is not a rural business. Have you noticed any difference since the FMDs have come in?' He said, 'What do you mean?' I said, 'Well, for instance, when it got to about 20 June in the previous years, and I'd had a reasonable season, I used to come in and buy all my fertiliser for next year and most of my chemical.' He looked at me and he said, 'Yes, you used to offload your tax problems on to me.' I said, 'I know!' It was in good humour, of course, but he's right. Farmers used to come in and unload in June to buy up big for the coming months. I said, 'What happens now?' He said, 'It's not happening anymore.' I said, 'I'm not doing it anymore; I'm using my FMDs.' He said, 'Yes, actually, you're right; we are getting a steadier income.' That FMD actually has a knock-on benefit for the farm merchandising and the farm-dependent rural businesses. As I say, it's the best thing available.</para>
<para>That's a big round off on drought policy generally and where the government is. I think it's a very comprehensive package. I do applaud these most recent changes, which are the temporary measures to get people through the current tight spot.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This bill, the Farm Household Support Amendment (Temporary Measures) Bill 2018, demonstrates this government's responsiveness to the needs of farming communities and our commitment to rural and regional Australia. The Farm Household Allowance program provides support for all farmers and their partners facing hardship, including drought. It's a time limited program, and from 1 August 2018 the government increased the time on payment from three to four years accumulative.</para>
<para>This bill proposes two temporary changes to the Farm Household Allowance program. The first change is to increase the net farm assets threshold to $5 million to begin on a date to be prescribed by a minister's rule and ending on 30 June 2019. The second change provides a supplement to all eligible farm household allowance recipients in addition to their fortnightly payments. These temporary measures are designed to help our farmers in the short term while we undertake an independent review of the FHA which will provide further guidance on the design elements of the farm household allowance into the future.</para>
<para>The increase to the farm assets threshold was specifically raised by farmers on the listening tour this government undertook in June 2018, with harsh drought conditions impacting their ability to provide the basics for their families. In fact, many of these farmers have not yet been able or were unable to access the farm household allowance. I will be introducing a minister's rule that will allow farmers with net farm assets up to $5 million to lodge a claim for FHA from 1 September 2018. Implementation arrangements to allow the processing of these applications will be in place from 1 October. People who are granted FHA under the temporary farm asset increase can continue to receive their payment after 30 June 2019 as long as they continue to meet all other eligibility requirements.</para>
<para>The bill also pays a supplement, called the FHA supplement, of up to $12,000 to a couple where both are recipients of the farm household allowance and up to $7,200 for single recipients. This additional support will benefit not only our farmers but the regional communities they live in. The allowance is not about paying for feed and fodder. It's about putting food on the table, paying household bills or putting diesel in the ute. But the farm household allowance is more than a social security payment. Recipients are supported to undertake a farm financial assessment and a financial improvement agreement, which is a plan to work towards improving their self-reliance. Recipients identify goals and undertake activities designed to move them towards a more sustainable future. These features of the program continue unchanged.</para>
<para>FHA also provides access to activity supplements of up to $4,000. This money can be used for eligible professional support, advice or training. This support affords farmers and their partners an opportunity to earn an off-farm income. Recipients will also continue to receive support through dedicated farm household case officers who work with recipients to assess their individual situation and to identify activities to improve their long-term situation. While on payments, farmers and their partners also have access to a healthcare card, pharmaceutical allowance, rent assistance, telephone allowance, energy supplement and remote area allowance. If it is not possible for recipients to achieve financial sustainability, notwithstanding the support offered through the farm household program, the program also supports recipients to consider alternative employment or transitioning away from farming with dignity.</para>
<para>This bill demonstrates the government's continued responsiveness to the needs of our farming communities. By amending the legislation, more farmers and their partners will be able to access the farm household allowance program, and eligible recipients will be paid a supplement in addition to their fortnightly income support payments. The bill increases the net farm assets test to $5 million until 30 June 2019, with the start date to be determined by ministerial rule. It pays a supplement of up to $12,000 for a couple where both are recipients of farm household allowance and up to $7,200 for single recipients. It helps farmers and their partners recover from the hardship. This bill benefits current and future farm household allowance recipients and the communities they live in. I thank the members for their contributions and commend the bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Hunter has moved as an amendment that all words after 'that' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment moved by the member for Hunter be agreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [10:36]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>69</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, AN</name>
                  <name>Aly, A</name>
                  <name>Bandt, AP</name>
                  <name>Bird, SL</name>
                  <name>Bowen, CE</name>
                  <name>Brodtmann, G</name>
                  <name>Burke, AS</name>
                  <name>Burney, LJ</name>
                  <name>Butler, MC</name>
                  <name>Butler, TM</name>
                  <name>Byrne, AM</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, JE</name>
                  <name>Champion, ND</name>
                  <name>Chesters, LM</name>
                  <name>Clare, JD</name>
                  <name>Claydon, SC</name>
                  <name>Collins, JM</name>
                  <name>Conroy, PM</name>
                  <name>Danby, M</name>
                  <name>Dick, MD</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, MA</name>
                  <name>Elliot, MJ</name>
                  <name>Ellis, KM</name>
                  <name>Fitzgibbon, JA</name>
                  <name>Freelander, MR</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S</name>
                  <name>Giles, AJ</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P</name>
                  <name>Gosling, LJ</name>
                  <name>Hart, RA</name>
                  <name>Hayes, CP</name>
                  <name>Husic, EN</name>
                  <name>Jones, SP</name>
                  <name>Kearney, GM</name>
                  <name>Keay, JT</name>
                  <name>Kelly, MJ</name>
                  <name>Keogh, MJ</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P</name>
                  <name>King, CF</name>
                  <name>King, MMH</name>
                  <name>Lamb, S</name>
                  <name>Leigh, AK</name>
                  <name>Macklin, JL</name>
                  <name>Marles, RD</name>
                  <name>McBride, EM</name>
                  <name>McGowan, C</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, BK</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, RG</name>
                  <name>Neumann, SK</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, CE</name>
                  <name>O'Toole, C</name>
                  <name>Owens, JA</name>
                  <name>Perrett, GD (teller)</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, TJ</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, AL</name>
                  <name>Rowland, MA</name>
                  <name>Ryan, JC (teller)</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, RCC</name>
                  <name>Snowdon, WE</name>
                  <name>Stanley, AM</name>
                  <name>Swan, WM</name>
                  <name>Swanson, MJ</name>
                  <name>Templeman, SR</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, MJ</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M</name>
                  <name>Watts, TG</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, AD</name>
                  <name>Wilson, JH</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>72</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Abbott, AJ</name>
                  <name>Alexander, JG</name>
                  <name>Andrews, KL</name>
                  <name>Banks, J</name>
                  <name>Broad, AJ</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, RE</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S</name>
                  <name>Chester, D</name>
                  <name>Christensen, GR</name>
                  <name>Ciobo, SM</name>
                  <name>Coleman, DB</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M</name>
                  <name>Crewther, CJ</name>
                  <name>Drum, DK</name>
                  <name>Dutton, PC</name>
                  <name>Entsch, WG</name>
                  <name>Evans, TM</name>
                  <name>Falinski, J</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, PW</name>
                  <name>Flint, NJ</name>
                  <name>Frydenberg, JA</name>
                  <name>Gee, AR</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, DA</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, IR</name>
                  <name>Hartsuyker, L</name>
                  <name>Hastie, AW</name>
                  <name>Hawke, AG</name>
                  <name>Henderson, SM</name>
                  <name>Hogan, KJ</name>
                  <name>Howarth, LR</name>
                  <name>Hunt, GA</name>
                  <name>Irons, SJ</name>
                  <name>Joyce, BT</name>
                  <name>Keenan, M</name>
                  <name>Kelly, C</name>
                  <name>Landry, ML (teller)</name>
                  <name>Laundy, C</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J</name>
                  <name>Ley, SP</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D</name>
                  <name>Marino, NB</name>
                  <name>McCormack, MF</name>
                  <name>McVeigh, JJ</name>
                  <name>Morrison, SJ</name>
                  <name>Morton, B</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, LS</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, T</name>
                  <name>O'Dowd, KD</name>
                  <name>O'Dwyer, KM</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A</name>
                  <name>Pitt, KJ</name>
                  <name>Porter, CC</name>
                  <name>Prentice, J</name>
                  <name>Price, ML</name>
                  <name>Pyne, CM</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, RE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, SR</name>
                  <name>Sudmalis, AE</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, MS</name>
                  <name>Taylor, AJ</name>
                  <name>Tehan, DT</name>
                  <name>Tudge, AE</name>
                  <name>Turnbull, MB</name>
                  <name>Van Manen, AJ</name>
                  <name>Vasta, RX</name>
                  <name>Wallace, AB</name>
                  <name>Wicks, LE</name>
                  <name>Wilson, RJ</name>
                  <name>Wilson, TR</name>
                  <name>Wood, JP</name>
                  <name>Wyatt, KG</name>
                  <name>Zimmerman, T</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names></names>
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question negatived.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The question now is that this bill be read a second time.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
<para>Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation for the bill and proposed amendments announced.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>18</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill. I move the government amendment as circulated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (line 13), omit "1 November 2018", substitute "the day prescribed by the Minister’s rules".</para></quote>
<para>The Farm Household Support Amendment (Temporary Measures) Bill 2018 amends the Farm Household Support Act 2014 to provide up to two lump sum payments and gives a temporary increase to the farm assets threshold to $5 million. This increase was originally planned to take effect from 1 November 2018. However, the government will bring the implementation forward to 1 September 2018.</para>
<para>I'll be introducing a minister's rule to allow people with net farm assets of up to $5 million to lodge an application with the Department of Human Services on or after 1 September 2018. This is a substantial increase from the current limit of $2.6 million. By 1 October the changes to support the implementation will be finalised. As long as all eligibility is met, payments will be backdated to the date of lodgement.</para>
<para>Increasing the net farm assets limit to $5 million enables more farmers to access farm household allowance, remembering that this isn't just income support; it's a complete package of assistance. Bringing the changes forward means that people in need can access the assistance at the time when they need it most and provides benefits not only to our farmers but also to the communities in which they live. I commend the amendment to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The opposition has supported every proposition the government has put forward in this place in order to assist our drought affected farmers in this most difficult time. I refer members to my second reading contribution where I outlined what I believe are the deficiencies in the government's approach and what Labor's alternative approaches would be. Suffice to say that I believe that the government has been a little late to the party on drought assistance and has been somewhat less strategic in its response.</para>
<para>In the second reading amendment just defeated by the government members, including members of the National Party, I did two things. The second proposition was just a general criticism of the government's approach to drought assistance, but the first was an invitation to the government to allow eligible farmers to secure the up-to-$12,000 payment in the first tranche. That is, rather than having the payment happen in two tranches, over the last quarter of this year and the first quarter of next year, we don't see any reason why drought affected farmers facing dramatic cash flow problems and growing debt shouldn't be able to access the full payment up front.</para>
<para>A number of things have made me somewhat curious about these changes to the farm household allowance. They remain a little bit of a mystery to members of the opposition. The first is the very amount. How were the $12,000, $6,000 and $3,000 amounts arrived at? What assessments did the government undertake to determine they are the most appropriate amounts to go to farmers? More important is the logic behind the split. Why is it $6,000 over two tranches rather than $12,000 up front? Then there is the timing of the applications. I would ask the minister, if he can, to provide responses to those questions. I would also ask him how many farmers are currently the recipients of farm household allowance. I understand it's in order of 1,700 or so farmers. More particularly, what is the fiscal impact of the amendment that he's moved this morning? We have another example now of the government moving amendments to its own legislation, five minutes after that legislation was introduced. I further ask him: what is the actual impact of the amendment that has been put forward today in terms of the recipients securing the payment?</para>
<para>There are those who will be now able to apply because of the increase in assets test. The original application date—the date the application opened—was 1 November. The first question to the minister is: why was it 1 November in the first place? Why will it now be 1 September? The opposition has no difficulty in allowing farmers easier access to the payments. In fact, that has been our criticism for four years: the difficulties farmers face in securing income support. But why is it now 1 September when it was originally 1 December? Why was it 1 December? Are there any impediments, notwithstanding the new application date, in delivering those payments to farmers? In other words, will the move from 1 December to 1 September ensure farmers get the payment any earlier?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Bringing the date forward was on the advice of the Department of Human Services. In essence, we now believe we can get these payments sorted. There are two elements to it. The increase in the threshold is from $2.6 million to $5 million, and we believe now, after advice from the Department of Human Services, that we can get this done sooner. We feel it's important that we're able to get this money into farmers' pockets as quickly as we possibly can and get the money flowing through to take the pressure off the wholesale expenses for them so they're able to have a dignified approach to the way they deal with this drought. Couple that with those rural financial counsellors that we've invested an extra $8.4 million in to be able to put more people, more rural financial counsellors, around farmers' kitchen tables. They will help them make strategic decisions about their businesses: how they get out of this drought and where they go after this drought.</para>
<para>This is really about the here and now, and we're doing it in a responsible way and bringing it forward. We're doing it because we believe that we won't cause any impediment to the flow of this money. We're doing it in a responsible way to ensure that farmers can get through this drought with dignity and respect.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I can assure the minister that I'm not trying to be cute or political about the question, but the opposition is being asked to support an amendment put forward by the government to the government's own bill. If we're being asked to do so, I believe it's appropriate to ask if the minister might be able to enlighten us on any fiscal impact that this change might have.</para>
<para>The minister was indicating, possibly, that this means people are only getting money earlier; that may be the case. Given that it appears to be happening in the same fiscal year, that doesn't raise any real concern for us in terms of impact on the forward estimates. But surely the government hasn't put forward the changes without considering the fiscal impact?</para>
<para>And I should correct myself, Mr Deputy Speaker Mitchell: in my opening remarks I was talking about 1 December as the original application date for those who will possibly now become eligible under the assets change. That date is actually 1 November, which will now be 1 September. But my understanding is that the DHS system will not be capable of processing applications for those who, potentially, are now securing eligibility because of the change in the assets test. The process won't allow DHS to process them until 1 October. The question then becomes: why 1 September? And is the ongoing delay, which is system based, posing any threat to the capacity of those who are coming in as a result of the assets test change to secure the first $6,000 payment or $3,000 payment, whatever it might be, depending on their circumstances?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The payment will accumulate from 1 September. The department has advised us that the October date is allowing for that threshold increase to be achieved and delivered with the assessment process that's in place.</para>
<para>In terms of any fiscal constraints, there are none. The government has, prudently, undertaken these measures, along with the other suite of measures that we are putting in place, because there is not just one fix of support in helping drought affected farmers. It's about farmer welfare and it's about preparedness, so the measures that we're putting in place are ones that this government has thought through with a prudent fiscal aspect in mind, and to ensure that they're sustainable and achievable.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The big missing answer, of course, is the logic and rationale behind the split in the payment. Again, we did afford the government the opportunity to change that, or invited them to do so, by way of my second reading amendment, which the government members voted down. So they must feel quite strongly that the payment should be phased in over two periods. That still remains a mystery to me.</para>
<para>If the government believes that farmers aren't sufficiently fiscally responsible to be trusted with the $6,000 to $12,000 payment up-front, well, that's a reasonable argument to put; I invite them to do so. If they have an alternative rationale behind splitting the payment, then I also invite the minister to put that forward. Labor is of the view that farmers need cash and they need it now. The government has acknowledged that, both by changing the assets test and by putting in place this supplementary payment. Many of those farm households have large credit card debts accruing relatively large amounts of interest, and that is happening right now. And so the opposition is still struggling to understand, given that there seems to be minimal fiscal impact and given that it's all happening in one fiscal year, why the government wouldn't give the worst-affected farmers, the farmers who are struggling now, the opportunity to secure that $12,000 payment up-front.</para>
<para>I remind the House that it was the Prime Minister who responded to this question on national radio, saying that March is not too far away. Well, March is a long, long way away if you've been subject to one of the most severe droughts in our history and if you are struggling to put food on your table. The minister has acknowledged that this payment is not for feed, fodder and like farming needs; it is about putting food on the table and about paying the bills. I trust farmers to spend that money responsibly. They hardly have an option if they are unable at the moment to meet their basic cost-of-living needs. So it remains a mystery to us still why the government hasn't accepted our invitation to make that change. It's not too late. The minister could do that today. We'd be happy to adjourn the debate so the paperwork could be done. If he's not prepared to do so, he might at least share with the Australian farming community why he's not prepared to do so.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, the member for Hunter. This payment is to go towards household expenses. As you would know and all Australians would know, household expenses are constant, and splitting this into two payments in essence six months apart means that we're able to give that extra payment at two different times of the year. But it also needs to be acknowledged that the fortnightly payment will continue in between so there is continuity of payment as we continue to move through this. This is about making sure that we are able to address the household expenses. The government's responsibility through the intergovernmental agreement on drought with the states is around human welfare. It's not around animal welfare. It's not about fodder and freight. This is about the daily expenses of our farmers, and they are spread out across the year. So in that essence, the government made the decision that there should be two lump sums paid over a different period, that will complement the up to $538.80 a fortnight a family could receive in one payment. So this is about making sure that we understand that these are constant expenses, not one single expense.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I apologise to Channel Seven's David Koch because the Prime Minister's remarks about March not being too far away were in an interview with him, not on national radio as I suggested. I'm bringing this to a close now. I assume that part of the changes in timing are about the capacity of those who are coming into farm household allowance for the first time because of the change to the asset test threshold enabling them to secure the first $6,000 payment. I ask the minister what risks still remain other than their capacity to get their own paperwork in order. What risks remain to them being denied the first $6,000 payment? In other words, we have people coming in, possibly for the first time, because of a more generous assets test, and their application is now allowed to be lodged on 1 September. I still understand there are some processing difficulties, which will delay the processing of those applications. The opposition remains concerned that those people might still be denied the $6,000 payment—that is, the first tranche of the supplementary payment—through no fault of their own.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The reality is that we understand that there has been an uplift in applications, and that's a good thing. I would say to every Australian farmer not to self-assess. The fact that we are putting more rural financial counsellors on the ground to assist you in terms of undertaking the application is an important step. We're also reviewing the application itself to try to streamline it. The reality is that that does take time. We're working through that as quickly as we can and we're working as practically as we can with the Department of Human Services to make sure that we can expedite as many applications, and resources within the Department of Human Services, as I understand, have been deployed to ensure that this increase in demand of application is able to be assessed in the appropriate time. It is also worth remembering that any person that falls outside the criteria for the farm household allowance can still apply under hardship provisions, and it's important that farmers understand that as well. That is why engaging a rural financial counsellor is so important in this process. They can guide and assist you through the whole application. If for some reason you fall outside one of the guidelines, there are still hardship provisions within the FHA to enable you to apply. This is about making sure the accessibility is there. We are doing it in a responsible way. This amendment is about providing an opportunity, where we have seen that we can deploy extra resources in the application process, to get that money out quicker and in a responsible and methodical way.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister is now creating new questions for me. The minister made reference to a take-up in demand. Can he enlighten the House about any changes in the volume of applications since these announcements were made?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I don't have those numbers to hand, but I am more than happy to share them with the parliament and the member for Hunter. And that is something that we will continue to be prepared to make public. I think it is important that we all have a responsibility to share with the farming community that it is okay to ask for help—not to self-assess—and come forward. Your government, and this parliament, will support you through these times of hardship. I give an undertaking that I will provide those numbers.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FITZGIBBON</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I will close by acknowledging the minister's cooperative approach on these issues and the briefings his office has provided to me through the course of this debate.</para>
<para>Bill, as amended, agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>21</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>21</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <a href="s1109" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>21</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Family violence is an issue that, thankfully, no longer hides in the shadows. In the last five years or so, thanks to the tireless advocacy of campaigners like Rosie Batty, it has become an issue that can no longer be ignored. There has been welcome bipartisanship on this issue, both at state and federal levels. It is good that both Labor and the coalition have agreed that such an issue is beyond politics, that this is a national crisis that we cannot waste time bickering about. I am proud that Labor has played a role in making a difference on the issue of family violence. At the 2016 election, for example, Labor pledged to end the cross-examination of family violence survivors by perpetrators and committed $43 million in additional funding to legal aid to facilitate that change. I note that a government bill to impose this same ban will be debated in this place at a later time this week—although without the pledge of any additional funding, which is of course a grave concern that Labor will highlight.</para>
<para>One of the most significant steps forward has been in my home state of Victoria, with the landmark Royal Commission into Family Violence. The 13-month inquiry, led by Marcia Neave, made landmark recommendations that were all adopted by the Victorian government. Last year's Victorian state budget contained $1.9 billion in funding dedicated to the prevention of family violence and, in March this year, the government announced the creation of a standalone agency, Respect Victoria, dedicated to the cause.</para>
<para>We have also had a television advertising campaign from the federal government, which had as its aim the early prevention of negative attitudes towards women, and funding of a domestic violence package at the federal level.</para>
<para>All such measures are welcome. We have made a lot of progress in a short time. However, on an issue like this, of the most grave importance and which affects so many families, we must constantly be checking on ourselves as to whether we are doing enough. Recently there have been indications that the answer to that question is no. Last month, readers of <inline font-style="italic">The Age</inline> woke up to a confronting front page. There were the faces of four smiling women, one on a beach in sunglasses, others dressed up for a party. All had been or are alleged to have been killed by domestic partners. One of them, 26-year-old Snezana Stojanovska, was three months pregnant when she died. There are, of course, hundreds of other women whose faces and names we will never know who are affected every day by domestic violence.</para>
<para>Every domestic violence case that ends in a death is another reminder that we as a political collective have failed. A report issued by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare in February 2018 sent the strong message that not enough progress is being made. That report found that, on average, one woman a week and one man a month were killed by a current or former partner. It found intimate partner violence was the single greatest health risk factor for women aged 25 to 44. It found Indigenous women are more than 32 times as likely to be hospitalised due to family violence than their non-Indigenous sisters. With all of this in mind, Labor welcomes the intent of this bill, which makes a number of changes to how the family law system operates in this country in relation to family violence.</para>
<para>This bill contains measures that are designed to simplify the jurisdictions in which family matters are dealt with. It expands the powers of some state and territory courts, such as children's courts, so that those courts gain some family law parenting jurisdiction. It will also increase the property value threshold under which state and territory courts can hear contested family law property matters without both parties' consent. In practice, this should mean that related matters, such as child protection and custody matters, can be decided at the same time and in the same place, with both parties present.</para>
<para>The government has informed Labor that it intends to trial these matters in selected locations with cooperation from state and territory governments. The terms of each pilot will be put to parliament at a later date through regulation. In principle, Labor supports this measure, at least in its pilot form. It is vital, of course, that if state and territory courts are asked to do additional work they are delivered commensurate additional funding by the federal government. Again, the government has said that additional funding will be part of the negotiations with the states and territories.</para>
<para>There are several factors for the government to take into account as it progresses with these pilot schemes. The first, as I highlighted just now, is the funding gap that currently exists in our court system, which has contributed to extensive delays in many matters coming to trial. This is closely related to inadequate funding for legal services, including legal aid and community legal centres, and a consequent increase in unrepresented litigants. This can be particularly difficult and damaging in family law cases. All of this must be taken into account as the government considers how much funding to deliver to the state and territory courts as part of this trial. Funding cannot be an afterthought in these pilots; it has to be a first-order consideration.</para>
<para>The second factor is evidence given by the Law Council during the committee process that many courts are not currently exercising the family law jurisdiction that they have already. The Law Council said that the problem was due to lack of training, competence and expertise. I quote from the Law Council's submission:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Many judicial officers in state and territory local courts do not have experience or knowledge of the family law jurisdiction, or have only limited knowledge and experience, and are reluctant to exercise their powers as a result.</para></quote>
<para>Proper training for state and territory magistrates is vital if these pilots are to work. It certainly seems that there has not been enough training to date. The evidence shows there is a lot more to be done. If improvements for families are achieved through this trial—and it seems like this may be the case, if done properly—then that can only be a welcome thing. Labor will closely monitor the pilot schemes as they progress.</para>
<para>The bill also makes a number of sensible changes, including: allowing for short-form judgements in interim matters before state and territory courts; removing the 21-day time limit which applies to a family law order that is revived, varied or suspended by a state or territory court when making an interim family violence order; and removing the requirement that a court must explain certain matters to a child when such an explanation would not be in the child's best interests.</para>
<para>The bill would also strengthen the power of the family law courts to summarily dismiss unmeritorious cases and vexatious claims. There was some concern raised during the committee process that this could disadvantage victims who perhaps made procedural errors leading to their claims being labelled as 'vexatious'. The Attorney-General's Department has attempted to assure those critical of this measure in the bill that there are appropriate safeguards. But Labor calls on the government to commit to a two-year review of this measure to ensure that it is indeed the case in practice.</para>
<para>This bill also removes shockingly outdated wording in the act that suggests that conjugal rights and an obligation to perform marital services still exist in Australian law—something that many in this place will be surprised to hear has been in the law until now. It's anomalies like this which remind us just how far we have come in gender relations in a relatively short time.</para>
<para>The original bill, introduced by the government into the Senate, also contained a measure that would criminalise the breach of personal protection injunctions, or PPIs, which was cut from the bill following negotiations with Labor. I want to explain why this decision has been made. Make no mistake: Labor support taking a tough approach to the prevention of domestic violence. We want injunctions and intervention orders to be properly enforced. However, the proposal for criminalisation contained in the government's original bill contained some serious flaws which we believed could have made the measure counterproductive. In particular, criminal penalties would have applied to breaches of PPIs that were already in place. This added a retrospective element to the bill which was unacceptable to Labor. The terms of existing PPIs, which are often reached by agreement and negotiation between the two parties, would have changed after they were made. This is unacceptable. Labor believe it would be an abrogation of the rights of both parties to PPIs arrived at by consent if criminal liability were to all of a sudden apply to a breach without any opportunity to renegotiate that PPI.</para>
<para>However, this was not the only problem with this particular measure. The new criminal offence for the breach of a PPI would be a Commonwealth criminal offence, but the whole idea behind the provision is to enable state and territory police to enforce the orders. This is a serious problem. As the Tasmanian police said during the Senate committee hearings:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For your information, state and territory police—this may not be something of which the committee is aware—do not routinely enforce the Commonwealth criminal law.</para></quote>
<para>So the very problem which this measure is trying to fix—the lack of enforcement of breaches—may be made worse due to the difficulties inherent in asking state and territory police to enforce Commonwealth law. The Attorney-General's Department acknowledged this was a problem to which it had not yet found a solution, telling the Senate committee that:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the practical implementation issues with the enforcement of criminalisation of personal protection injunctions need to be worked through.</para></quote>
<para>The other consideration is the major Australian Law Reform Commission report into the Family Law Act and the family law system, which is due in March next year. This report will inevitably address how family violence matters are dealt with through the family law system, including measures like personal protection injunctions. Labor has called for the government to wait until that report is published to consider how best to make the significant change of criminalising the breaching of PPIs and to take action to legislate immediately thereafter. This would not impose a time delay on this change being made. Under the original bill, the criminalisation of PPI breaches would not have come into force until 12 months after royal assent—that is, after the publication of the Australian Law Reform Commission report at the end of March next year. So the only difference that excising this measure from the bill will make is that it will be done better and in a more informed way, immediately after the publication of the ALRC review. In fact, it could happen even earlier.</para>
<para>Labor supports in principle the criminalisation of breaches of PPIs. The system at present, where victims must bring a civil action in the family law courts to enforce the civil penalty for a breach, puts too much onus on victims to be the ones upholding the integrity of the system. That's not a fair responsibility for traumatised and often fearful people to have. It's something that we want to fix. But let's make sure that, if this change is made, it is done properly. The areas of family law and family violence are too important to tinker with unthinkingly, and, in general, criminalising an act that previously had only civil penalties is always a significant change that should be carefully examined.</para>
<para>I urge the government to use the time between now and the publication of the ALRC report on 31 March next year to work through the implementation issues that have been highlighted through this process. There are currently a number of significant changes planned for the family law system which, if all successful, would remake the current system as we know it. Undoubtedly, family law is an area of our legal system that needs scrutiny and needs change. It is failing many families, often at their most vulnerable points. But, in the rush to get changes made, we have to ensure that we are doing these changes well and doing them properly. The family law system, more than any other part of the legal system, touches people's everyday lives. The consequences for getting things wrong are very grave. In particular, we must make sure that any changes that are made have a strong evidence base and that they are the outcome of extensive consultation with the sector. Making change any other way would be poor practice indeed.</para>
<para>This bill is a good example of the benefits of proper process, with a significant change being made as an outcome of consultation and public hearings, which is to the benefit of all. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018. I welcome the intent of this bill to strengthen the power of the courts to protect victims of family violence and facilitate the resolution of family law matters by state and territory courts in certain situations. Obviously this is important work of any parliament and any government. I acknowledge the importance of acting to prevent family violence and to assist victims to safely leave such households. Tragically, one Australian woman a week is murdered by a current or former partner. We must do all we can as lawmakers to make our laws stronger and access to our laws and their protections easier. So I welcome this bill and the intent of the measures in it.</para>
<para>The measures include providing that a court can give short-form judgements for a decision in relation to an interim parenting order; strengthening the court's powers to dismiss proceedings; allowing a judge to dispense with the requirements to explain an order that is inconsistent with an existing family violence order where it would not be in the child's best interests; and removing the 21-day time limit for variations to family law orders by state courts. These are sensible measures. The bill also provides that specialist children's courts have power to make parenting orders pursuant to the Family Law Act and extends the jurisdiction of state and territory courts to make orders in family law property matters to include disputes above the current monetary limit of $20,000.</para>
<para>The intent of these measures is good. Families who are already in the state courts should be able to finalise their less complex family law matters without having to go to another court. It will make their experience of the family law system easier and less confusing. State and territory courts already have a limited family law jurisdiction, but the measures in this bill will enlarge their family law jurisdiction. For instance, currently family law property matters in the state courts are limited to a monetary limit of $20,000. This bill allows a higher monetary amount to be prescribed by regulation.</para>
<para>I'm pleased to see that the explanatory memorandum to this bill explains:</para>
<quote><para class="block">State and territory courts are not intended to become the primary fora for resolving family law disputes …</para></quote>
<para>This measure is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… intended to provide state and territory judicial officers with additional tools to resolve matters involving family violence holistically, and prevent further violence by reducing the sometimes complicated legal processes.</para></quote>
<para>However, I am concerned. If state and territory courts are given additional jurisdiction by regulation then it must be accompanied by additional funding. This is crucial. State and territory courts are at a breaking point now dealing with their own jurisdictions, including family violence orders. Their resources are already overstretched, and many judicial officers in state and territory courts are not trained or experienced in family law and would be reluctant to exercise their powers in family law matters. Without adequate additional funding and training, this measure will be futile.</para>
<para>I will talk for a moment about what is no longer in this bill. The original bill contained a measure that would see breaches of personal protection orders made in the Family Court or Federal Circuit Court become criminal offences. On the face of it, this seems like a good idea. It would provide victims of family violence with a more effective way to enforce breaches of those orders. Currently, as the orders are purely civil, that is a private legal action—a person is required to make an application to the court to enforce a breach of a personal protection order. I should point out that, even as the law now stands, state and territory police have the power to arrest a person who has breached a personal protection order made in the Family Court or Federal Circuit Court. This very rarely occurs for reasons I will come to in a minute. As the states enforce criminal law, making the breach of a personal protection order a criminal offence would mean the state would bring such prosecutions. It would take the onus of bringing an application off the victim, acknowledging that family violence is more of a public concern—that is, not a private affair between two people.</para>
<para>There were, however, several problems with this measure. Firstly, the bill provided that this measure would apply to future breaches of existing personal protection orders, thus imposing some measure of retrospectivity to this provision. Let me explain how this might happen in practice. Many family law disputes are settled without a judge ever making a decision. When love sadly turns to hate, people can still be rational. Most people are rational and sort it out, normally by thinking about their children. This can occur before going to trial. At the doors of the court, as the trial commences or even during the trial, people work out a way forward. Once the parties come to an agreement to settle, the agreement is drawn up as a consent order which is then presented to the judge, who formally makes the order that the parties have agreed to. Many considerations are taken into account by each party before they agree to settle. For instance, there may be a bit of concern from one party that the other party will harass or abuse them in the future. Those allegations have not been tested or proven in court, but the alleged perpetrator may agree to an order that provides some comfort to the alleged victim just so that their affairs can be finalised. This happens every day. If the allegations have no substance then the alleged perpetrator would not be concerned about agreeing to not do something that they never intended to do. Some of these orders have been in place for many years.</para>
<para>As time goes on, the children get older, emotions settle down and the nerve endings are not raw, but the orders remain in place. It is easy to see how a protection order, such as an order restraining a person from entering the residence of the other person, could inadvertently be breached many years later. That person would then be committing a criminal offence. It would be unfair to both parties for a consent order that was freely entered into some time ago to become subject to criminality upon the breach of one of its terms. That is not what was contemplated by the parties at the time they made the consent order.</para>
<para>The other serious concern with this proposed measure lies in the practical enforcement of a criminal breach. As the provisions are contained in a federal act, the Family Law Act, a breach of that provision would therefore be a Commonwealth criminal offence. State and territory police generally enforce state and territory criminal offences. Although they are empowered to enforce Commonwealth criminal offences, the procedure involved to enforce Commonwealth offences is very different from the procedure for state and territory offences. Many state and territory police would actually be unfamiliar with the procedures necessary to enforce a Commonwealth offence. Modern police services are excellent, and the Queensland Police Service do great work, but they are under pressure and under the pump enforcing their own laws.</para>
<para>As I mentioned earlier, the Family Law Act currently provides state and territory police with the power to arrest a person for a breach of the Commonwealth personal protection order, but this rarely happens. In Queensland, the Operational Procedures Manual for the Queensland Police Service outlines the procedure to be followed when a complaint is received about a breach of a personal protection order. The manual states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Officers receiving complaints of breaches of injunctions made under the Family Law Act (Cwlth), should take appropriate action under any relevant Queensland law, e.g. prosecution for assault, wilful damage or stalking (s. 112AM of the Family Law Act (Cwlth) refers).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If the application of Queensland law is not appropriate or the complainant seeks the enforcement of rights conferred by an injunction, officers should advise the complainant to seek legal advice with a view to enforcing the injunction through the Family Law Court.</para></quote>
<para>This is the actual manual. So Queensland police currently have the power to arrest someone under the Family Law Act when a personal protection order has been breached, but their own manual tells them not to. As a member of Tasmania Police said, when he gave evidence to the Senate inquiry into this bill:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… responding to incidents of family violence or complaints that people's safety might be in jeopardy is done by general duties police. In this state at least, they would be the police members with the least understanding of the Commonwealth criminal procedure …</para></quote>
<para>It is not very comforting that state police do not use the powers they already have been given under the Commonwealth Family Law Act.</para>
<para>Before we criminalise personal protection orders under the Commonwealth Family Law Act, we need to be sure that state and territory police will enforce breaches of those orders. The intent of the proposed measure is to make victims of family violence safer. It would be horrendous if new provisions were enacted that gave victims of family violence a false sense of security and, inadvertently, actually made them less safe. The Attorney-General's Department acknowledged at the Senate hearing:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… that the practical implementation issues with the enforcement of criminalisation of personal protection injunctions need to be worked through.</para></quote>
<para>How can parliament be asked to pass a law when the government does not know how it will be enforced? That is not good government. It is irresponsible government.</para>
<para>That is why, negotiating with the Labor Party, this measure was excised from the bill. Labor suggested that the intent of this measure be brought forward after the Australian Law Reform Commission has reported on its review of the family law system, which is due in March next year. That will also give the department time to work through the practical implementation issues. There will be no real delay in taking this course of action, as the measure that has been excised was only due to come into effect 12 months after royal assent. In fact, the measure may be operational sooner than was intended, by the government, originally. Labor will always welcome sensible family law reform. There is no doubt that the family law system is in crisis. Every MP and every senator would have had someone come to their office with concerns. Families are waiting years to have their disputes resolved, and this could be half a lifetime for a child at risk or under pressure.</para>
<para>This situation has been going on for far too long and it is, sadly, worsened under the Turnbull government's watch. Judges have not been replaced in a timely manner, even though these positions are funded in budgets. It took 560 days for a judge in the Sydney registry of the Family Court to be replaced. It took 12 months for Justice Bell to be replaced in the Brisbane registry, even though the Attorney-General knew he was going to retire—40 years out. These delays cause backlogs of work in industries, backlogs that are never caught up. The new judge starts behind the starting line on their first day.</para>
<para>The bulk of the blame for the crisis in the family law courts falls squarely at the feet of this Turnbull government. In 15 days, the coalition start their sixth year of government. They have had ample time to fix this system, which is in dire straits and is their mess. A former Chief Justice of the Family Court called for more resources for the family law system in March 2016, 2½ years ago. She asked for an extra $20 million for family consultants and registrars to help judges manage cases. Sadly, this measured call for resources from the chief justice fell on deaf ears. Nothing was done. No extra resources were given to the courts. There were just further delays in replacing the judges of an already overburdened court.</para>
<para>The mismanagement by this government has caused the current crisis in the family law system. Nevertheless, the measures remaining in this bill are sensible and supported by Labor. The government has announced other reform proposals for the family law system. They have a proposal to protect victims of family violence from direct cross-examination.</para>
<para>Labor took a policy to protect victims of family violence from direct cross-examination to the last election, more than two years ago. It was my policy proposal; I remember announcing it with the member for Griffith at the Women's Legal Service in Annerley. Our policy was accompanied by funding of $43 million to provide representation for unrepresented parties so that direct cross-examination could be avoided. The government's proposal contains no funding.</para>
<para>The Leader of the Opposition has written to the Prime Minister, imploring him to provide funding for this proposal so that it will actually do what it promises. Without funding, the legislation will be impotent. The bipartisan Senate committee that reported on this bill recommended that the bill not be debated until funding of the measures were made public. That is a Senate committee that is full of Liberals. This is a measure that is overdue for implementation. I hope the government does the right thing and provides the necessary funding to make this measure effective in protecting victims of family violence from being re-traumatised in the court system. I see that it will be debated this week or in September, but I'm yet to hear that funding announcement.</para>
<para>The government has also proposed, effectively, to abolish the Family Court of Australia. The government has done no stakeholder consultation on this radical proposal at all. Legal practitioners, family violence groups, community legal centres and even judges have been ignored. And how have they responded? With strong criticism and concerns. Labor has not yet seen the proposed legislation, but such a radical change to the family law system needs to be undertaken only with proper and thorough consultation—especially by talking to judges and practitioners. This has not yet happened.</para>
<para>A strong family law system is important for all Australians. More than any of our courts, the courts that deal with family breakdown need to be well resourced. They need to be structured so that families can have their disputes resolved in a timely manner and they need to have specialised judicial officers who are experienced in the complex issues that accompany family law, such as family violence, mental health issues and drug and alcohol dependency and abuse. Australian families deserve a government that will properly manage the family law system.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAYES</name>
    <name.id>ECV</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I too would like to make a contribution in this debate on the Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018. I should make clear from the outset that we on this side will be supporting this bill. This is something, by the way, that has been part of Labor Party policy for some time. The reforms captured in the bill are issues that we on this side of the House have been demanding over the last two years. As a matter of fact, we took the measure that's included in this bill to the last election, in 2016. I was with the Leader of the Opposition in November 2016 when he reaffirmed his support for this measure at a White Ribbon Day function.</para>
<para>What the bill does, in essence, is put an outright ban on the direct cross-examination of both victims and perpetrators in family law hearings where there is evidence or allegations of family violence. The explanatory memorandum to the Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Cross-examination of Parties) Bill 2018 says the prohibition will be administered through the process of the court, which will make a request or a direction that the party engage a lawyer, either privately or through legal aid, for the purpose of cross-examination where either party is not represented by a solicitor.</para>
<para>The significance of these reforms was certainly captured by the Queensland Law Society in their submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee when they stated:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It is well recognised that direct cross-examination of victims of family violence not only perpetuates the abuse but can result in the court receiving incomplete or poor quality evidence. Victims of family violence are likely to find court processes stressful and traumatic, which will impede their capacity to properly present their case and effectively cross-examine the other party.</para></quote>
<para>Like many in this House, I am an ambassador for White Ribbon and have participated in various events organised either here, around the parliamentary precincts, or in our electorates. I have taken a very strong view when it comes to family violence. That is why we should all have a direct interest in this matter that is before us today.</para>
<para>But the point I want to stress is that the ongoing cross-examination of domestic abuse survivors by the perpetrators of the abuse is an absolutely shameful practice and has been allowed to go on for too long. We have heard from many women that, in various family court proceedings, they have settled for imperfect outcomes in order to avoid being cross-examined by the person who perpetrated the violence against them. In other words, they took the line of least resistance: they were prepared to accept an inadequate outcome that would bind themselves and their families for quite some time—simply to not have the perpetrator of the violence cross-examine them in court.</para>
<para>That is a shocking practice and it must end. Subjecting victims to hostile questioning by the perpetrator of the domestic violence in court inflicts a fresh trauma; it often makes the victim reluctant to even take a case to court. It perpetrates the cycle of violence by reasserting the perpetrator's power over the victim—in this case, in a courtroom. This is unacceptable, it is disrespectful, and anyone in this place who stands against domestic violence should say it must end.</para>
<para>When the Labor Party introduced its policy of preventing the cross-examination of victims of domestic violence in Federal Court proceedings by the perpetrator of that violence, we committed $43 million for legal aid. For the courts to decide to either request or direct an unrepresented party to have a lawyer undertake the cross-examination means the person must either fund the lawyer themselves, if they have the capacity to do so, or, alternatively, rely on legal aid. That is the basis for the Labor Party's commitment of $43 million for legal aid to facilitate the representation of litigants.</para>
<para>The bill before us today does not have any funding commitment with it. It says the right things about not having victims of domestic violence being cross-examined by the perpetrator of violence. It says the right things about the courts having a power to direct or request the litigant to have representation. But it does not give legal aid any additional funds to be able to facilitate this. In highlighting the importance of legal representation in matters of family violence and the need for adequate funding, the Australian Human Rights Commission, in its submission to the Senate inquiry, emphasised 'the need for full legal representation for each party to ensure procedural fairness' and suggested that 'the administration of the appointment of lawyers could be managed by the legal aid commission'. They went on to say that 'this could not be accomplished under existing legal aid funding levels'. In other words, the Legal Aid Commission doesn't have the additional money to facilitate this. If they were to respond to the direction of a judge to provide representation to the litigant—if they put a lawyer in charge of the cross-examination—it might be that they have to take funding away from other matters which are before the Legal Aid Commission. Matters that ordinarily would have been funded would be redirected to facilitate the judge's request in this regard.</para>
<para>That's not the way that you run legislation, particularly on such a sensitive issue as this. It's not the way that you make laws in this country that have bipartisan support. Say the government are serious about implementing these measures—and I hope they are, because we might have our differences with our colleagues on the other side, but, when it comes to family violence, I think we are all prepared to stand up as one and call out family violence wherever it occurs. If we are serious about making these changes and supporting the victims of domestic violence, and if we are serious about ensuring that we don't facilitate the continuation of violence even in another form, such as being attacked in cross-examination in the courts, surely the government would fund these measures? It cannot introduce legislation in this place making powers for the courts to unilaterally make directions but, when they do, there is no funding capacity for people who do not have the financial ability to engage their own lawyer. There is no additional funding capacity for Legal Aid to make good on the directions given by the court in this regard.</para>
<para>Governments make decisions on many things. We will argue to and fro, particularly when it comes to budgets. We will have our priorities that we believe in on our side of the parliament, and clearly those on the government benches will seek to fund the priorities that they think are most appropriate to them and the constituents they purport to represent. But, when you produce a piece of legislation that is supported by both sides—a piece of legislation that is designed to make a difference for the better in our community—and you bring it to the parliament with no funding attached to it, it's almost dooming it to failure. Either the legal aid commission can find efficiencies in other areas or the legal aid commission can give priority to one matter over another matter. That means injustice might be done to other people as a consequence. It just shows that this is very poorly thought out.</para>
<para>In June this year it was reported that the Attorney-General said the government was working closely with National Legal Aid on the implementation of the new law. However, he said there would be no extra legal funding as a result. If that were going to be the case and you'd gone to the national legal aid commission and told them there was to be no extra funding, why would you bother bringing the legislation into this place? This is not just to get a tick off for the purpose of politics to make yourself look good—and possibly go into an election shortly, if the pundits are right. I think that, on something that has the support of both sides of the House, we all have a vested interest in making sure we protect the victims of domestic violence. We all have a vested interest in ensuring that we don't perpetuate the trauma of victims of domestic violence. Surely we can make this work, not simply go to Legal Aid and tell them there's no extra money and they can work it out the best they can to facilitate directions of the courts.</para>
<para>The Australian Law Council has certainly explored much of this. It hasn't held back with its warnings that there could be significant unintended complications in the delivery of justice as a result of not attaching funding to this piece of legislation. The Law Council of Australia notes that it cannot envisage a process in which the family courts would be able to oversee parties acquiring legal representation without additional and further procedural requirements for the case management before trial, thereby adding additional costs to the cost of representing litigants. It also can result in delays of proceedings. The Law Council went on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It is foreseeable that the Bill will have the consequence of trials being adjourned or trial listings being vacated so that legal representation can be obtained. The new provisions may also give parties the opportunity to delay for strategic reasons.</para></quote>
<para>In other words, if one party is of wealth they could actually frustrate these trials for a party which relying solely on legal aid for their representation.</para>
<para>The government must give certainty on how it intends to meet the funding question, and it can't be by putting its head in the sand and saying, 'It's all up to National Legal Aid.' On our side, Labor have always maintained a commitment to an Australia free from domestic violence. We renew that commitment. We support the bill before the House but reiterate that our policy position is to appropriately fund National Legal Aid to be able to facilitate the outcomes envisaged in this bill.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAMB</name>
    <name.id>265975</name.id>
    <electorate>Longman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak on the Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018. It's a bill that seeks to change how the family law system operates when it comes to cases involving family violence. I've stood up in this chamber a number of times to speak out against family violence and to call for greater action by this government in this space. I recognise that the government has listened to Labor's representations and introduced a bill, for all intents and purposes, with good intentions.</para>
<para>This bill comes as a suite of changes to Australia's family law system are being worked on and debated currently. I must say that this is truly welcomed, particularly in my electorate of Longman. I've been doing a lot of work in this space in my electorate alongside a number of parents, my community and groups and organisations. I welcome and thank the shadow minister for human services, Linda Burney, on her support in working with my electorate in this space. From this consultative work that I have done, it's become very apparent that there is a significant amount of work that still needs to be done. Whilst this bill is a small step forward, it's a step forward nonetheless. As I mentioned, it is a very welcome piece of legislation.</para>
<para>I also commend the government for removing certain measures from this bill following the negotiations with Labor. When government and opposition work together in a bipartisan manner, Australia benefits from stronger legislation. I recognise the government for hearing the concerns that Labor raised with the bill as it had initially been drafted by this government. I recognise that that work has been done. As I said, we all benefit when the government and opposition can work together in a bipartisan manner. This issue of family and domestic violence is a space where we must work, where we can, in that manner.</para>
<para>But a number of concerns with this bill do remain. I call on the government to join with Labor to ensure that the bill achieves what it is intended to as effectively as possible. For example, the bill seeks to extend the jurisdiction of state and territory courts in family law matters. While this might very well make it easier for families to navigate a system that is often described as confusing at the best of times, it puts additional pressures on state and territory systems. These are systems that are already overburdened at their current funding levels, let alone picking up additional responsibilities. We need to be very, very careful not to push struggling court systems too far and ensure that they have the capacity for the extra workload that these changes would bring.</para>
<para>I'll highlight some remarks made recently in the Senate inquiry that looked into this bill. The Chief Magistrate of the Local Court of New South Wales recognised these changes and the extra workload that these changes would bring when they presented to the Senate inquiry. They noted:</para>
<quote><para class="block">…if there is an increase in the Local Court's case load … it is essential that enough resources be made available to the Court to respond to the increase in matters before its magistrates. This would include an increase in the number of magistrates appointed to the Court.</para></quote>
<para>Further, due to judicial officers in state and territory courts not regularly exercising their existing Family Law Act jurisdiction, as recognised by the Law Council of Australia in their submission to this inquiry, an expansion of their responsibilities would require that ongoing judicial training accompany amendments. Naturally this isn't free, so I urge the government to take the time to seriously consider the funding implications that arise from the implementation of this family law amendment bill.</para>
<para>I urge the government to work co-operatively with the state and territory systems to ensure that any changes can be made without having an adverse effect or impact on the system, the court officials and, most importantly, the families that are involved. We need to take every step we can to ensure that acts of parliament do not cause more harm than good.</para>
<para>I noted earlier that the government had taken on board the concerns that Labor had raised. The original bill previously contained a measure that would criminalise the breach of personal protection injunctions, PPIs. Following representations from Labor, this has now been removed. In principle, I have to say, Labor does support criminalising breaches of PPI. We support a tough-line approach to preventing domestic and family violence. By making victims bring a civil action in the family law courts to enforce a civil penalty for a breach, the system, in its current state, is putting too much onus on the victims. Victims have often been through deeply damaging and traumatising experiences. I'd like to raise the fact that, in particular, women of culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds are often those who suffer most with an experience of domestic or family violence. The damage and traumatisation of these women can be much more significant and can affect them for the rest of their lives.</para>
<para>The government's proposal for criminalisation of PPI breaches contained in this bill, contains serious flaws. More specifically, the changes that would have been applied would have been retrospective. It is democratically unjust to change the law on people who could not possibly have known the potential consequences of their decisions. Further, the bill sought to instate this as a Commonwealth criminal offence whilst having the provision enforced by the state or territory police. Maybe this would be ideal on a theoretical level but, practically, it leaves a lot to be desired. Unfortunately, I have to say that this is typical of government policy—thought bubbles never delve deep enough and never consider implementation.</para>
<para>I'd like to go back to some evidence presented by Senior Sergeant Luke Manhood of Tasmania Police:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… we are supportive of the principles proposed by the bill, we do see some practical issues with the proposal ... For your information, state and territory police … do not routinely enforce the Commonwealth criminal law. In fact, ensuring that the Commonwealth criminal law is routinely enforced is a primary reason for the existence of the Australian Federal Police.</para></quote>
<para>The evidence continues to recognise that, while state and territory police are empowered to address Commonwealth criminal law, there are a number of procedural discrepancies that can often impede this from being put into practice. Tasmania Police ultimately recognise that these issues prevent the measure in this bill from achieving what it sets out to do: enforce breaches. The parliament simply cannot pass a law that just can't be implemented—at least, it cannot be passed until the government has done its job and worked out how to implement it as effectively and as practically as possible.</para>
<para>I will take the opportunity to thank the government for taking Labor's advice and waiting, because, in just a few months, a major Australian Law Reform Commission report into the Family Law Act and the family law system will be released. This report will address how family violence matters are dealt with through the family law system and will likely make some recommendations that more suitably address issues like criminalisation of personal protection injunction breaches. Labor has asked that the government hold off on the measures that I have just explained until the report has been released. As I said, it won't be long before that's released. It makes sense to wait until the report's released and the recommendations are in front of us and we've had some time to look through them. This wouldn't impose a time delay on a change being made, as the criminalisation of PPI breaches in the original bill would not have taken place until long after the release of this report. There's no time delay in waiting at all. Effectively, all Labor has called on the government to do is to take a more considered approach, not to rush things and wait for the evidence. When the report's released early next year, I look forward to working cooperatively with those opposite to ensure the best possible outcomes for victims and all other affected stakeholders.</para>
<para>I've heard some truly heartbreaking stories while consulting with my community on matters of family law and family violence. Many of these people have truly suffered, and I feel it's our duty as parliamentarians to ensure that each and every one of them is afforded the support they deserve. Support can come in many ways. It can come by providing community services, and the funding and resources that those services require, to help people through difficult times—services like CADA, in Caboolture. It can come by legislating a system that provides fairness, equity and protection for victims. As I said earlier, this is just a small step in the significant reforms to the family law system that need to take place.</para>
<para>It's also important to acknowledge the work that the Palaszczuk government and the Queensland police are undertaking, under the leadership of the police minister, Mark Ryan, and Moreton District Superintendent Michael Brady. In my local community, Superintendent Michael Brady has been instrumental in the development of community based programs, in particular the PRADO and It's Your Choice programs, that address domestic violence for all of the Moreton Bay region.</para>
<para>But, as I keep reiterating, still more needs to be done. I'd like to pick up one step in particular, and that is providing paid domestic violence leave as a national employment standard. This is a step that is important in particular to women. The ABS estimates that two out of every three women who experience domestic violence are in the workforce. For those who have experienced domestic violence, this leave would provide for those impacted to have some time to attend their court appearances, to go and seek the legal advice that they need and to make relocation arrangements. That's not easy to do if you've got children at school and you need to pack up and move home, get children resettled and attend medical appointments. These are really important parts of recovering from domestic and family violence, and access to paid domestic violence leave would provide that very much needed financial support for those women in the workplace.</para>
<para>I'd like to take this opportunity to ask the government as a matter of urgency to join with Labor and legislate 10 days paid domestic violence and family leave to reduce that fear that many victims experience of losing their job and the financial disadvantage of going without pay during this time when they're attending court, getting legal advice, taking care of their children and going to medical appointments. I ask the government as a matter of urgency to legislate 10 days paid domestic violence leave for victims immediately.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for Longman and welcome her back to parliament.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ALY</name>
    <name.id>13050</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018 is a really important piece of legislation. I'm very pleased to stand up here today and contribute to the discussion on this bill, particularly as a survivor of domestic violence. I often say that, though my experiences happened many, many years ago and I've come a very, very long way since then, when you have survived domestic violence, there is always a little part of you that remains broken and that you carry with you throughout your life, no matter how far you come. And while this bill is important—and I know that my colleagues who have spoken before me have spoken on the specifics of the bill and what the bill legislates, so I won't go too deeply into that—I just point out to the House here that we still have a very long way to go.</para>
<para>Current estimates of the extent of domestic violence suggest that one in six women will have experienced physical and/or sexual violence by a current or previous partner from the age of 15, and one in four women has experienced emotional abuse by a current or previous partner. I'd like to just ask the House here to take time to think about what that looks like. What that looks like is that, if you can imagine walking through a shopping centre, one in every four women that you see walking past you as you walk through that shopping centre will have experienced some form of violence in her life. That's a pretty staggering statistic. So far today, police in Australia would have dealt with, on average, around 300 domestic violence incidents, and that will increase every two minutes. So, while I'm speaking here, over the next 15 minutes or so, that means another seven cases will have been dealt with by police in Australia.</para>
<para>As well meaning as our Prime Minister's words are about respect for women, they don't go far enough, because this is not just about respect for women; this is about taking actual action to improve the lives of domestic violence survivors and also to stop the scourge of family and domestic violence. As long as we only talk about respect for women, those words become empty platitudes that have no real meaning and no real significance to the lives of people who are currently suffering family and domestic violence or who have suffered and survived family and domestic violence—because, as I said, it is not just about respect.</para>
<para>Colleagues who have spoken before me have spoken about resourcing our courts. Labor, of course, has a very strong position on that and has made some very strong statements about the need to adequately resource our courts, particularly in our states, not only in order to meet the requirements of this legislation practically but also to ensure that those who are suffering family and domestic violence have a fair and expedited process through which they can go.</para>
<para>I also want to mention access to family and domestic violence leave, which the previous member also spoke about. About six months ago, the Western Australia government legislated family and domestic violence leave. Since that regime was instituted by the WA Labor government six months ago, WA public servants have taken 150 days of family and domestic violence leave. That is certainly a very surprising statistic for many of us in Western Australia.</para>
<para>I also think we need to take more action on financial abuse—the hidden side of domestic violence. Speaking of my own experiences, when I finally had the will—as opposed to the means or, indeed, the courage—to leave a domestic violence situation, I found myself in a situation of abject poverty, with huge debts to meet and no way of actually meeting them. So, if we are going to back up our words with actions, we need to look more holistically at the range of issues that arise in family and domestic violence situations. One of them, of course, is financial abuse and the financial situation that many victims of family and domestic violence find themselves in when they finally leave an abusive relationship.</para>
<para>Importantly, we need to break the culture of silence and acceptance of family and domestic violence that exists within some communities. We need to start by educating police officers and service providers to not misjudge family violence, where, in some cases, they leave victims in a situation of family violence or, in some cases, issue notices against victims. I would like to tell a story here, Several years ago, I became aware, through community contacts, of two young girls who were being violently abused by their father. Over a period of a number of weeks they had been subjected to physical abuse by their father. I had a community meeting and at that community meeting we decided that we should go to the authorities. So I took it upon myself to notify the authorities of this information that I had received. The authorities then went in and removed those two young girls—I think they were 15 and 16 years old—from their family situation.</para>
<para>A couple of weeks later, I got called in to a meeting. Present at that meeting that I attended were representatives from the service providers and two self-appointed representatives from that particular culturally and linguistically diverse community. Those two representatives from that community proceeded to chastise the service providers for removing the girls from their family. A number of weeks later I found out that the service providers had caved in to the community representatives and had returned those two young girls to the violent situation within their family. As much as I tried to find information about what happened to those young girls, I'm sorry to say that I don't know. To this day, I remain concerned about what happened to those two young girls and their wellbeing. We need to break this culture of silence and to have an open discussion about family and domestic violence, particularly within some culturally and linguistically diverse communities, without fear and without being reprimanded, basically, by some members of those communities who wish to sweep these issues under the carpet.</para>
<para>We also need to look at accessible support services for those who are in a situation of family and domestic violence—when and where those support services are needed. Several years ago, when I was a mum—I'm still a mum, but this was when I was a mum of young boys and doing the school run—I remember being stopped by another mum after dropping off my sons at school. She knew that I worked in government and that I worked in the community sector. She pulled me aside and proceeded to tell me about her sister who was in a family-violence situation. She asked me how I could help and what she could do to help her sister get out of that situation.</para>
<para>It struck my mind, then, that these kinds of support services need to be reaching out to women who perhaps don't have the capacity, the knowledge or the ability to go to those support services when they need to. They need to be able to resource support services adequately so that these services can do that kind of work, so that they can get out into communities, so that they can reach some of the most vulnerable in our society who may not be able to access those services. It is one way of taking action on our words about respect and on our words about ending family and domestic violence.</para>
<para>I've noticed a very worrying trend in our society—and a growing trend, I have to say. It is a trend in the development of a very toxic discourse around domestic violence. It is a discourse that blames the victim and that paints men who perpetrate violence as victims—and women who suffer from domestic violence as somehow deserving of it, as somehow bringing it upon themselves. This is something particularly close to my heart. I know I didn't deserve to be slapped. I didn't deserve to be kicked. I didn't deserve to be punched. No matter what I did, I didn't deserve that. No woman, no child, no man—no person—deserves to be hit, to be slapped, to be punched or to be abused. I must speak out against this trend. I must speak out against this trend that I've seen on social media, that I've seen in some parts of media discourse, that seeks to turn the blame onto the victims—as if, somehow, it is their fault that they are in a situation of family and domestic violence. There is never any blame to be laid on the victims, because never do victims deserve to be abused and hit and punched and slapped and kicked and humiliated in the ways that I was when I was in a violent relationship.</para>
<para>So, yes, this legislation is important. All legislation that we take and all measures that we take to end family violence, to ease the process of justice for victims of family violence, to assist our courts in dealing with family violence, to assist our police in dealing with the calls they have to attend domestic-violence situations—one every two minutes—are really important. But I do reiterate that they are not enough. We're simply not doing enough. The fact that we are here in 2018 and that family and domestic violence statistics clearly show this is a situation that is not getting any better, speaks volumes and should be a wake-up call to all of us here in the House that we are not doing enough, that we need to do more than just talk about respect for women. Respect may be where it starts, but it certainly isn't where it ends. It's not enough to say that we respect women; it's not enough just to offer those words. As a survivor myself, I know that those words have empty meaning when they're not backed up by action.</para>
<para>So I appreciate the opportunity today to speak on this legislation. And I end where I started: it is an important piece of legislation but it's certainly not enough. Unless we back it up with actions, unless we provide more support services, unless we resource our courts better, unless we have a program of educating our police and our service providers about domestic violence—about the impacts that it has—and unless we take a concerted effort to break this culture of silence, to break the stigma of domestic violence in our society, this situation is not going to get any better.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BURNEY</name>
    <name.id>8GH</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I pay tribute to the member for Cowan for her extraordinarily brave words and the honesty with which she has spoken to the Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018. I think that the really important point the member for Cowan was making was that, when it comes to this issue of family violence, it does not discriminate. Family violence is an entrenched problem within the Australian community, and the member for Cowan's call for action, not just words, is something we must hear—and not just hear but actually move on. So I thank her very much for sharing her personal story, which is not an easy thing to do in this situation.</para>
<para>We've listened to the member for Cowan and we've heard other members, including the member for Lindsay, talk about their personal experiences. That really is a brave and important thing to do, because other women and other people who have been affected by family violence, be it physical, psychological, financial, sexual or the various other forms of violence that are perpetrated, will be able to see that this does affect all rungs of society—that this does affect all people. They will take heart and will take an enormous amount of bravery from the words of the member for Cowan, so thank you.</para>
<para>I think what we've also heard is of the picture that's been painted of what it means, not just for individuals but what it actually means for the families who live in households where violence is a factor. I know personally that the intergenerational trauma and effect of violence is substantial. I note that the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources is in the House today. I'm sure that some of the stories he's hearing from families who are stressed and have things happening that they're not used to would be that they're experiencing similar things.</para>
<para>The tentacles of family violence are long, insidious and far-reaching. It is absolutely the business of all of us—it's our responsibility as lawmakers—to turn words into action. We know from the fear, the anxiety and the urgency—not only for personal safety but for the safety of children—that this is such an important piece of legislation. I rise, as have my colleagues, to support this piece of legislation.</para>
<para>Unfortunately for many, there is the added anxiety of managing legal proceedings through the family law system. I've just had a meeting with a woman who talks and works with victims of domestic and family violence. She works in the court system. She was sharing with me some of the enormous challenges, particularly for people who are going through these horrors and who then, somehow, have to try and pull themselves together to actually deal with the legal side of it. That is not just about the head but about the heart as well. Unfortunately for many, there is that added anxiety. It should be easier, simpler and less confusing. It should function to protect victims of domestic violence.</para>
<para>The Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018 will do a number of things. It will reduce interactions with multiple courts through a number of jurisdictional reforms and streamlining federally and among the states and territories. It will allow parties to resolve related matters to reduce the need for litigation, which is so important. It will increase the property value threshold under which state and territory courts can hear contested family law property matters without both parties' consent. Courts will no longer be required to explain details of family violence to children when it is not in their best interest. For me, that is one of the most important functions of this bill. It will also remove the 21-day time limit on reviving, varying or suspending family violence orders. That is important because putting a mandatory 21-day time frame on that is extraordinarily difficult for people who are going through trauma and incredible upheaval. It will also abolish outdated text that potentially condones marital rape—and I don't have to speak to this House about how important abolishing that outdated, offensive part of the legislation is.</para>
<para>On the whole, Labor supports this bill because it will strengthen the powers of the courts to protect victims of family violence. It will also foster the resolution of family law disputes by state and territory courts. We know how daunting legal proceedings and resolving family related matters in the courts can be. It can be a particularly anxious time when it involves threats of harm and when it involves children. The fear and anxiety is compounded by the fact that parties must navigate different jurisdictions. It can be confusing and it can be time-consuming. It can take not only a financial toll but also an extraordinarily huge emotional and, often, physical toll.</para>
<para>Under this bill, specialist children's courts will have the power to make parenting orders pursuant to the Family Law Act. The bill will also extend the jurisdiction of state and territory courts to make orders in family law property matters by including disputes above the current monetary limit of $20,000. Labor supports extending the jurisdiction of state and territory courts in family law matters to make it easier and less confusing for families navigating the system at a time when there is enormous upheaval, trauma and distress. It will reduce the need to have to navigate both the state and federal court systems.</para>
<para>However, we are concerned that already overburdened state and territory courts will not have the capacity for the extended workload without a significant increase to their resources. That is a really important point that Labor is stressing: an increase in resources to make these reforms work is absolutely crucial. This is a concern that has been expressed by many stakeholders in the family violence prevention space. Women's Legal Services Australia, for example, in their submission on this bill, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The experience of WLSA member lawyers in state and territory courts is that there is already a pressing demand for court services and a lack of resources for these courts to hear matters in a timely and effective manner.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Our further experience is that as state and territory courts exercise their limited family law jurisdiction infrequently, few have the requisite expertise to properly hear and determine family law property and parenting matters.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">State and territory courts also lack access to the services and systems currently available to assist decision-makers in family courts.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It is for all of the above reasons that we posit, alongside the Family Law Council, that state and territory courts will require a significant injection of resources.</para></quote>
<para>The government cannot take credit for these reforms unless there are resources that go along with them.</para>
<para>The Law Council states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It is clear that there will be financial implications for state and territory courts arising from any increase in the family law work consequent upon these amendments.</para></quote>
<para>The last thing we want is for parties to family law disputes being caught in bureaucrat bottlenecks on top of an already difficult circumstance. If we want to properly realise the intent of these amendments then appropriate resources, including increased funding and ongoing judicial training, must accompany these amendments.</para>
<para>We recognise, as Women's Legal Services Australia does, the need to reduce the abuse of the family law system by perpetrators through providing for the summary dismissal of frivolous, vexatious or unmeritorious claims. The proposed amendment would set a test for applications to the court to have a reasonable prospect of success. The Family Law Act already contains powers to summarily dismiss claims. The Law Council therefore says that it cannot envisage how the reasonable-prospect-of-success test would change the current power vested in the court to dismiss a claim. Women's Legal Services Australia is also concerned about these costs. Women's Legal Services Australia said it could potentially be used as a threat to deter real and legitimate family court orders or applications.</para>
<para>As I have said, the important thing is that there is proper resourcing and that victims are properly listened to and their circumstances considered in these cases. To this end, Labor is concerned that these provisions may have unintended consequences and potentially work to the disadvantage of disempowered victims. Labor believes that this provision should be reviewed after a two-year period, and the provision is very much set out in the texts that I have in front of me.</para>
<para>Finally, Labor recognise the need to ensure compliance with injunctions and court orders, in particular, those relating to personal protection. In principle, we support the criminalisation of breaches of personal protection injunctions. However, we also recognise the concerns around the practical implementation of criminal penalties underpinning such court interventions. Under the measure, as proposed, the criminal penalties could apply retrospectively—not in the sense that it would apply to past breaches, but in the sense that it could apply to orders issued prior to the commencement of these measures. As we have heard from the Law Council of Australia, it is often the case that personal protection orders are entered into by consent. It is often the case that many parties informally vary or discharge such protection orders, so it is foreseeable that unintended consequences could arise from this measure. I note that the Australian Law Reform Commission will be reporting on this issue in 12 months time. Again, Labor recognise the need for such protection orders and for the people they seek to protect to be treated with the utmost importance and seriousness. We must ensure that we do so appropriately and that we get this right.</para>
<para>In conclusion, Labor supports this bill. It will make it easier for victims of family violence to seek stronger protection under the family law framework, and it will make it easier for victims to seek that protection. In order for the aspirations of this bill to be realised, we must ensure these measures receive the necessary resources—as I have outlined in my speech today on this bill—and that they are calibrated to optimally protect the interests of the vulnerable and avoid the two unintended consequences that I have also outlined.</para>
<para>This is an issue, as I stated at the very beginning, that is fundamental to the way in which we see ourselves as a society. It is fundamental to all of us in this place, as law makers, that we make this not just words but very strong action. It is the responsibility of all of us. Once again, I recognise the member for Cowan's speech and the fact that family violence does not discriminate. I say to the people who are affected by this dreadful aspect of our society to take heart from the sentiments being expressed in this debate, to be brave and to know that you have the support of this parliament.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'TOOLE</name>
    <name.id>249908</name.id>
    <electorate>Herbert</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to acknowledge the member for Barton and her wonderful words, and the member for Cowan who spoke of her own personal experience with great courage and bravery. Not now, not ever. That is what all Australians must say to family and domestic violence. Family and domestic violence does not discriminate, it does not choose where it goes and it can happen in any strata of society. And although there have been numerous campaigns to end the scourge of family violence, the sad fact is it is still continuing and at alarming rates.</para>
<para>The facts and statistics regarding family violence are truly devastating for a nation such as Australia. These figures remind us that this issue is real and, unfortunately, rife across the nation. It is a national shame that, on average, one woman a week and one man a month are killed by a current or former partner. It is a national shame that one in three Australian women have experienced physical violence since the age of 15. It is a national shame that intimate-partner violence was the single greatest health risk for women aged between 25 and 44. It is a national shame that domestic and family violence is the principal cause of homelessness for women and their children. It is a national shame that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and girls are 35 times more likely than the wider female population to be hospitalised due to family violence. And it is a national shame that one in four children is exposed to domestic violence.</para>
<para>It is an atrocity that in my electorate of Herbert we have the second-highest number of domestic violence reports in the state per capita, according to police statistics. It is a devastating shame that this is an issue that has come down to statistics, but in reality that is exactly what seems to be happening. These statistics need to ring loudly and clearly, to all elected members, so that we act on this issue. And the time to act is now.</para>
<para>There are many organisations in the electorate of Herbert that are working hard and collaborating to address this issue. There is the work of the Women's Centre, often the only and last hope of a number of women experiencing domestic violence every day. There is the work of Sera's Women's Shelter that provides women and children seeking urgent shelter support and a roof over their heads at their most vulnerable time. Those organisations in my electorate are working hard to tackle family and domestic violence. It is essential that we in this place do so as well.</para>
<para>With those sobering statistics in mind, I welcome the intent of this bill, which aims to make a number of changes to how the family law system operates in this country in relation to family and domestic violence. It's main aim is to simplify the jurisdictions in which family matters can be heard and dealt with. To summarise its main provisions, the bill: would expand the powers of some state and territory courts, such as children's courts, so that these courts gain some family law parenting jurisdiction; would increase the property value threshold under which the state and territory courts can hear contested family law matters without both parties' consent; would allow for short-term judgements in interim matters before the state and territory courts; would remove the 21-day time limit that applies to a family law order that is revived, varied or suspended by a state or territory court when making an interim family violence order; would strengthen the power of the family law courts to summarily dismiss unmeritorious cases and vexatious claims; would remove the requirement that the court must explain certain matters to a child when that explanation would not be in the child's best interests; and would remove vastly outdated wording in the act that suggests marital rape and an obligation to perform marital services still exists in Australian law.</para>
<para>The other consideration is the major Australian Law Reform Commission's report into the Family Law Act and the family law system, which is due in March next year. This report will inevitably address how family violence matters are dealt with through the family law system. Labor has called for the government to wait until that report is published to consider how to best make the significant change to criminalise the breach of parenting protection injunctions and take action to legalise immediately thereafter. This would not impose a time delay in making this change. Under the original bill, the criminalisation of PPI breaches would not have come into force until 12 months after the royal assent—that is, after the publication of the Australian Law Reform Commission's report at the end of March. So the only difference excising this measure from the bill will make, in fact, will be to make it better in a more informed way, immediately after the publication of the Australian Reform Commission review. In fact, it could happen even earlier.</para>
<para>A contentious part of this bill is the expansion of some of the family law parenting jurisdiction to relevant state and territory magistrates courts. In principle, Labor supports this measure. If relatively simple parenting matters can be adjudicated in the same jurisdiction as other family law matters, that is a good thing for all parties involved. However, it is well known, and evidence provided at the Senate inquiry revealed, that state and territory magistrates courts are already incredibly under-resourced for the workloads that they have now. It is partly due to an increase in unrepresented litigants, thanks to cuts to legal aid and community legal centres' funding and inadequate funding for the judicial system in general.</para>
<para>Giving certain courts expanded jurisdiction with no extra funding is simply and completely unworkable. It is impossible to expect overstretched systems to take on more responsibility without more resources. It is just that simple. Moreover, the Law Council gave evidence during the relevant Senate inquiry that many state and territory courts do not actually exercise the family law jurisdiction that they already have, due to a lack of training and expertise. I provide a direct quote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Many judicial officers in state and territory local courts do not have experience or knowledge of the family law jurisdiction, or have only limited knowledge and experience, and are reluctant to exercise their powers as a result.</para></quote>
<para>The government has sought to allay these concerns by arguing that the expanded jurisdiction will first be tested through a series of pilots in different states and territories in conjunction with the governments. But once again I'm going to bring this back to funding, urging the government to put funding concerns first and foremost when considering the design of these pilots and to work cooperatively with state and territory governments and the court systems. It's imperative that these already struggling court systems are not pushed beyond the brink.</para>
<para>The government has expressed an intention to merge the Federal Circuit Court and the Family Court and gradually phase out the Family Court as a specialist division. It also wants to abolish the appeals division of the Family Court and have that responsibility instead become part of the Federal Court. There has been huge debate and discussion about this issue.</para>
<para>Although my sister is a family law barrister, I am not a lawyer. I have never been through or experienced the family law court system. However, in preparation for debates like this one here today, I wanted to be educated and aware of the issues on the ground. As such, at the invitation of Judge Coker, I spent a full day listening to and hearing the matters before the family law court. I witnessed a very professional and caring approach to what is in fact a very complex and distressing environment. I was surprised at the number of people who present to the court unrepresented. As such, this takes time from the judge and the court to ensure that procedural fairness is delivered to all parties. I also witnessed a strong focus on the needs of children, who are, sadly, caught up in these complicated cases.</para>
<para>Although Labor is yet to see any legislation in this space, I want to make my view very clear today on this matter. The combining of the Federal Court and the Family Court is in effect the downgrading of the importance of the Family Court. It is also a clear indication of just how out of touch the Turnbull government really are, as the family law court deals with the most complex cases. It is where the most traumatised and dysfunctional families' cases are heard. This change shows just how out of touch the government really are. They are seeking to put commercial matters ahead of complex family matters, a clear indication of the government's attitude towards understanding the complexities in the breakdown of families and the distress that it causes.</para>
<para>The Family Court deals with families where millions of dollars are involved in settlements, and matters before the court often take days or weeks before the judge. Currently the Family Court is on the same level as the Federal Court, but the suggested changes by this government will downgrade the Family Court, which would result in no more appointments of family law judges. Any changes to the Family Court must be done with the utmost care, as family law touches people's lives at a time when they are at their most vulnerable and distressed. It will be absolutely critical that the family law community be consulted in any of the change processes. Labor will ensure that we diligently scrutinise any and all of the changes that the government puts forward to our family law system.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SNOWDON</name>
    <name.id>IJ4</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am pleased to be able to speak on the Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018. As we know, family violence continues to be a scourge on Australian society. I want to talk about family violence in the Northern Territory and, in particular, its impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities across the general population.</para>
<para>The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report <inline font-style="italic">Family, domestic and sexual violence in Australia 2018</inline> had a number of key findings. Family violence occurs at higher rates in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities than in the general population. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians have increased risk factors of family violence, such as social stresses like poor housing and overcrowding, financial difficulties and unemployment. One in seven, or 14 per cent, of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women had experienced physical violence in the previous year. Of those, one in four, or 28 per cent, reported their most recent incident was perpetrated by a cohabiting partner. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women were 32 times and Indigenous men were 23 times as likely to be hospitalised due to family violence as non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Two in five Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander homicide victims—41 per cent, or 32 victims—were killed by a current or previous partner compared with one in five for the rest of the population. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were about seven times as likely as other children to be the subject of substantiated child abuse or neglect. In the Northern Territory, a third of police time is spent dealing with family violence, and Aboriginal women are victims in 72 per cent of all cases.</para>
<para>This demonstrates the significance and the importance of this issue in my electorate of Lingiari and in the Northern Territory generally, and it is a sad indictment. The Northern Territory's <inline font-style="italic">Domestic, family and sexual violence reduction framework</inline><inline font-style="italic"> 2018-2028</inline>, which was released in December 2017 by the Minister for Territory Families, Dale Wakefield, revealed that there were 61 incidents relating to domestic and family violence on a typical day in the Northern Territory. The victimisation rate in the Northern Territory, according to this framework, is three times higher than anywhere else in the country, with 1,730 victims per 100,000 people. This report also revealed that Aboriginal girls were most likely to be the victims of sexual assault and that 91 per cent of sexual assault victims were Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander. Over half of those—51 per cent—were under the age of 19. The report also showed the shocking demand being placed, in this instance, on the Alice Springs Women's Shelter. During the 12 months to March 2017, 531 women and 438 children sought safety at the shelter. Of the women who sought shelter at the refuge in Alice Springs, 96 per cent were Aboriginal women.</para>
<para>The framework introduced in December 2017 builds on the achievements of the previous Domestic and Family Violence Strategy of the Northern Territory government and continues the support of the Family Safety Framework across the regions—that is, across the Northern Territory. It provides: intensive intervention support for high-risk victims of domestic and family violence; additional resources for prevention programs; money for the integrated and specialist domestic, family and sexual violence hub model for Tennant Creek, in particular, to support women and their children in the Barkly region; and it ensures that the NT Public Service leads the way for Territory employers on domestic and family violence, including paid leave.</para>
<para>These are shocking statistics. Sadly, they lead some to conclusions which are inappropriate. There has not been sufficient discussion about issues of causation and measures for prevention of family violence across Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities throughout this country. We know a number of things. We know this data, and how horrific it is. Whilst it's easy to criminalise behaviour—and it should be—what we need to do is look at the stories of these perpetrators, the history of the family and the community that people are living within, and the issues that are confronting. We know that one issue, for example, is alcohol and other drug abuse—that's not news to anyone. I want to commend the Northern Territory government, unlike other governments across this country, for taking the issue of alcohol abuse very seriously, introducing a floor price for alcohol and looking at opening times for alcohol outlets and their prevalence.</para>
<para>These are important measures in addressing the issue of alcohol harm. Sadly, because of the protests of the alcohol industry by and large, there's been less than fulsome support for the idea of changing the taxation arrangements for alcohol across this country. If we were serious in this country about seeing alcohol abuse as a public health issue—which it is—then we would be saying to the community that it is important that we look at the taxation issues relating to alcohol, address those issues so that we impact upon the demand for alcohol across the country, and know—because the research demonstrates it—that, if we use these price mechanisms as a result of increasing taxation, a volumetric tax and floor price, we will have a significant impact on the demand for alcohol. We know that that will mean fewer presentations at hospitals by people suffering violence as a result of alcohol abuse and fewer presentations to the police.</para>
<para>That's just one issue. There are many other issues that have not been properly addressed thus far. Recently we've seen the Royal Commission into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory. We've seen a suite of recommendations made. We remind ourselves that this royal commission was called jointly by the former CLP Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, Mr Giles, and Malcolm Turnbull as the Prime Minister of this country.</para>
<para>The horrendous nature of the abuse which this concentrated on was there in the evidence, and the treatment of Aboriginal kids in the Northern Territory was observed by the national community. The report made significant recommendations, which involve significant cost. I know that the Northern Territory government has committed $50 million to address those recommendations but, to date, we've seen not one dollar—not one dollar!—come from the Turnbull government, the co-sponsors of this royal commission, to address the recommendations of that royal commission report.</para>
<para>They can't say, on the one hand: 'We think this is a fantastic idea and we, the Commonwealth, will have a role, because we think this is really so important. We'll help you fund this royal commission,' and, on the other, walk away and abrogate their responsibility for funding the recommendations of that royal commission. That is precisely what the Turnbull government have done. There's no excuse for that.</para>
<para>In addition, we saw recently some very sad and horrific events around Tennant Creek. They were well publicised. The Prime Minister visited Tennant Creek in what was really a political stunt. He had conversations with people about having a regional plan for the Barkly, but failed to involve key Aboriginal representatives from the communities around Tennant Creek—for whom this plan will be so important—in those discussions. They didn't have a voice in this discussion.</para>
<para>In the context of other issues, we know that there is not sufficient knowledge about the impacts of intergenerational trauma on the mental health and associated emotional wellbeing of Aboriginal people—not only in the Northern Territory but elsewhere in this country. There is not sufficient knowledge about the impact of mental health issues in families and, particularly, in relation to fetal alcohol disorders and the impacts they have not just on the children but in the results of those children themselves having children. All of these complicated factors are involved in discussing family violence.</para>
<para>The other issue is the issue of overcrowding. We know that there's a significant shortfall in housing in the Northern Territory and, indeed, across many parts of remote Australia, not just in the Northern Territory. We know that the Northern Territory government has committed $1.1 billion over a decade for this—in fact, closer to $1.6 billion if we include the money for servicing of land for housing. The Commonwealth has only committed to half that amount. There used to be a long-term—a decadal—commitment to the supply of Aboriginal housing across the Northern Territory. This government have said that they're not prepared to renew that agreement and that housing is a Northern Territory government responsibility.</para>
<para>I kid you not, Mr Deputy Speaker Vasta: if we don't address the horrendous issues of overcrowding, which involve communities, and families in particular, and which go to issues of child abuse and of alcohol and family violence, then we will not address the problem. Yet this government, for whatever reason, feels that it's okay to put in just enough to seed the process but not to commit long term to addressing the housing shortages across the remote Northern Territory.</para>
<para>Family violence is awful. We've got to treat the problem, address the people who are victims and provide them with freedom and the capacity to deal with the plight they're in, but it will not be easy unless there are a number of complementary measures which go to addressing the root causes behind the family violence in the first instance.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms HENDERSON</name>
    <name.id>ZN4</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's my great pleasure to rise to speak on the Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018. There's absolutely no doubt that, as we've heard in this debate, family violence is one of the most insidious and horrific issues in our community. It is a scourge across Australia. I want to commend the government, the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General for the very strong support and leadership they have shown in bringing forward these measures. Let's not forget that the very first thing Prime Minister Turnbull did when he became Prime Minister was to announce a $100 million women's safety package to combat family violence on the front line. So this has been an absolute mission for our government from the get-go.</para>
<para>I also draw on the work of the Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee and the inquiry into family violence law reform we conducted last year when I was the chair of that committee. I certainly want to make the point that many of the measures that have been introduced in this bill have been supported by the recommendations of that committee. I'm really proud of the work that committee did.</para>
<para>One of the biggest complexities in this horrific situation when people get caught up in family violence is dealing with a multitude of different jurisdictions, the complexity of the laws and the sense: 'Where do I go next? How can I afford it? How do I get urgent help? How do I feel safe? How do I ensure my children are safe?' One of the big issues that we identified in our inquiry was the complexity of the legal system, which in many respects puts the safety of men, women—principally women—and children second in so many cases. There's no one reason for that other than the fact that this is a very complex jurisdiction coupled with the fact that many of the remedies through intervention orders or apprehended violence orders are obviously available through state and territory courts. Of course, the children's court also plays a very strong role. So we certainly identified the need to make this system less complex and made some recommendations in relation to single courts which could deal with all issues relating to parenting, family violence and even property matters, meaning all particular issues that might come before various courts in the family law sphere.</para>
<para>This bill enhances the capacity of the family law system to provide effective outcomes for people who are experiencing family violence. In particular, it aims to reduce the need for families to interact with multiple courts across the federal, family law and state or territory family violence and child protection systems. As I said, the Attorney-General and the government are to be commended for this very important response.</para>
<para>I reflect on the member for Lingiari. I've never been more horrified than when our committee visited Alice Springs and took evidence in Alice Springs. We visited the Alice Springs Women's Shelter, which is, in reality, a homicide prevention centre. It is unbelievable that in our nation women go into this centre. There are two lots of fences. There's an inner wall and then there's a very high outer wall. It's like a prison, but women—principally women, Aboriginal women—go there to seek refuge to literally stop themselves from being seriously injured or killed. When this centre is overflowing, there are women who can't get in, and at night-time you can hear them in the bushes outside being raped or attacked—and this is happening in our own country.</para>
<para>The Alice Springs Women's Shelter are seeking a lot more funding. They certainly need a lot more funding. They need a major upgrade of their facility to better protect women and children. I heard the shocking story of a woman who was inside the shelter with her baby. Such was the pressure, the coercion and the threats that she was subjected to from her husband, or her partner, who was standing outside the facility—on the other side of the very high wall—that she threw her baby over the wall at the insistence of her partner. The baby was okay, but you can only imagine what women are subjected to if they do those sorts of things to try to alleviate the threats that they face in those horrific circumstances.</para>
<para>This is a real crisis, and that crisis is playing out every single day, in every street in every community across this nation, but it is on full display in communities like Alice Springs and other parts of the Territory. I take exception to the derogatory comments that the member for Lingiari made in relation to the Prime Minister's visit. The Prime Minister's visit was very significant and very important. The Prime Minister is on the ground, out in our communities, understanding these issues and taking the appropriate action—and this bill is part of that.</para>
<para>The bill has a range of very important protections, including that Children's Courts will be able to make appropriate orders under the Family Law Act to resolve matters in the best interests of the child. So the Court of Summary Jurisdiction will be able to hear contested family law property matters up to a higher value without requiring both parties' consent to the court exercising the jurisdiction. A lot of those jurisdictional barriers have been lifted. I want to applaud the government for this action. As I say, this is a very complex area of the law, and much more reform is required.</para>
<para>When allegations of family violence are made in a family law court or in a family law situation, one of the very strong recommendations of our committee is that those allegations must be heard at the earliest possible opportunity. We can't have a situation where allegations of family violence and family law proceedings are dragged on for one, two and perhaps three years. This often means that inappropriate orders are made, because these allegations haven't been tested, which puts the safety of parents and children at risk. Of course, when there are false allegations made, it also leads to terrible injustice to those against whom those false allegations are made. I want to note more broadly that the Attorney-General has commissioned the Australian Law Reform Commission to conduct an inquiry into the family law system, and many of the matters that we've raised in our inquiry recommendations are being examined in that broader context. So, again, I commend the government and I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAWKE</name>
    <name.id>HWO</name.id>
    <electorate>Mitchell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank members for their contributions to the debate on this bill. The government is pleased to support the passage of the Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2018. The bill will enhance the capacity of the justice system to provide effective outcomes for vulnerable Australians who experience family violence. It will implement a number of expert recommendations, including those from the Family Law Council, Victoria's 2016 Royal Commission into Family Violence, the Australian and New South Wales Law Commissions' report and the coronial inquest into the death of Luke Geoffrey Batty.</para>
<para>The bill will facilitate the resolution of family law matters by state and territory courts in appropriate cases. This will reduce the need for vulnerable families to interact with multiple courts across family law, family violence and child protection systems to address their legal needs.</para>
<para>This bill will increase protections for victims of family violence by reducing the potential for inconsistent family violence orders and family law parenting orders. It will facilitate the expeditious resolution of family law matters and enable courts to better protect victims from perpetrators who attempt to use the family law system as a tool of continued victimisation. It will do this by strengthening and codifying the summary dismissal powers of the family law courts to ensure this provision is operating as intended and providing better protection to victims. The government will review this provision after two years.</para>
<para>The bill will also enforce the principle of equality within relationships by removing a redundant provision in the Family Law Act that suggests that conjugal rights and an obligation to perform marital services still exist in Australia.</para>
<para>The government has delayed introducing criminal offences for breaches of family law injunctions made for personal protection. This government takes the safety of family violence victims seriously and remains committed to the policy intention of the proposed offences. The government will continue to work on implementation issues with policing agencies and other stakeholders, and will further consider the proposed offences once the Australian Law Reform Commission has completed its comprehensive review of the family law system. The measures in the bill will deliver immediate benefits for families and courts dealing with complex issues involving family violence across multiple jurisdictions.</para>
<para>I thank members for their contributions and commend this bill to the House.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>39</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAWKE</name>
    <name.id>HWO</name.id>
    <electorate>Mitchell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018, Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>39</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <p>
              <a href="r6153" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r6154" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>39</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018.</para>
<para>These two bills are supported by Labor. Can I say at the start that these two bills amend the Customs Act 1901 and the Customs Tariff Act 1995 respectively and implement the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus. This is known as PACER Plus. It's a comprehensive free trade agreement covering goods, services and investment.</para>
<para>Negotiations on PACER Plus commenced in 2009 under the former Labor government and negotiations concluded in Brisbane on 20 April 2017, with 14 members of the Pacific Islands Forum. They include, of course, Australia, the Cook Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tonga and other countries. The majority of these countries signed the agreement in Tonga on 14 June 2017, and Vanuatu signed it on 7 September 2017.</para>
<para>Labor will support the bills, as I said, because we support the agreement, including the good it does for our region and how it will support our neighbours in the Pacific. The amendments contained in the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill will enable goods that satisfy the new rules of origin to be imported into Australia with preferential rates of customs duty. These amendments implement the provisions of chapter 3 of PACER Plus and apply to all parties to the agreement.</para>
<para>There are complementary amendments being made, of course, to the Customs Tariff Amendment Bill, to give effect to the preferential rates of customs duty in accordance with the agreement, and the customs tariff bill provides free rates of customs duty. It inserts a new division—division 1GA—into the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018. When enacted, the new schedule will provide for excise equivalent rates of duty on certain alcohol, tobacco and fuel products in accordance with the agreement and amend certain concessional items in schedule 4 of the Customs Tariff Act to maintain customs duty rates in line with the applicable concessional items in accordance with the agreement.</para>
<para>The Department of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade website lists the schedule of commitments on tariffs for each country under PACER Plus in explicit detail. These apply to an immense number of products from the 14 member nations, including everything from unworked cultured pearls to potatoes. In return, Pacific Island countries have committed to liberalising their own tariffs. PACER Plus will provide more predictable and secure market access for Australian exporters. This will aid many sectors, including agriculture, industry, plastics, chemicals, metal, metal products, specialised machinery and mineral fuels, just to name a few. I note there are negligible financial impacts of both bills before the House, with the impact on the forward estimates rounded to zero.</para>
<para>Labor believes that commissioning economic modelling on trade agreements is just plain common sense. The Turnbull government has repeatedly refused to conduct independent economic analysis, despite public and industry support. Even the government controlled Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommended independent economic analysis of all new free trade agreements. In assessing PACER Plus, in May 2018, JSCOT recommended:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… that the Government commission independent economic analysis of all trade agreements to improve the transparency and quality of their assessment.</para></quote>
<para>In January 2018 the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It’s also important that the Government does something that the Parliament has recommended and that is subject the deal to a full and proper independent economic analysis so we can be absolutely sure about where the benefits lie.</para></quote>
<para>Even the Treasurer's own Harper review in 2015 recommended the analysis stating:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Trade negotiations should be informed by an independent and transparent analysis of the costs and benefits to Australia of any proposed IP provisions.</para></quote>
<para>The government is arrogant and out of touch. For example, the Prime Minister has repeatedly dismissed calls from the public, industry and his own party to implement Labor's policy. He should think again. Even the former Prime Minister, the member for Warringah, commissioned independent economic modelling in Australia's trade agreement with Korea.</para>
<para>In government, Labor will commission independent economic modelling on trade agreements. We will urge the current government to listen to the recommendations of JSCOT and industry alike. Australia must be a leader in the South Pacific and Labor strongly supports moves to engage more closely with our neighbours in the region. PACER Plus includes an aid component to help the development of the region. Australia is providing up to $4 million of official development assistance for Pacific Island countries to prepare to ratify and implement the agreement and $19 million once the agreement comes into force.</para>
<para>Australia's also committed an aid-for-trade funding target of 20 per cent of Pacific ODA to help address supply-side constraints and build Pacific Island countries' capacity to trade. Another pressing need in the Pacific is infrastructure development. Australia must assist its close neighbours in their development needs. Unfortunately, under the Abbott and Turnbull governments, we haven't and our leadership role has been eroded and compromised. The out-of-touch conservatives have waged savage cuts, repeatedly, across foreign aid—up to $12 billion to take it to the lowest in history, just 22 cents for every $100 of our national income. Pacific Island states have felt the impact of these cuts, leading them to seek other countries to help fill the infrastructure gap, and the gap generally.</para>
<para>Labor has committed that in government it will rebuild Australia's international development assistance beyond the government's current levels. We believe Australia needs to be proactive in the region, as it helps support security and stability amongst its Pacific neighbours. As I said earlier, Labor will support these bills because we support the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus. I commend the work of the shadow minister for trade and the Labor members of JSCOT for their work and holding this out-of-touch government to account. I urge the Turnbull government to continue to engage with our Pacific neighbours, to build international aid and development and to ensure shared stability of the region. I commend the bills to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to make a contribution to this debate on the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018. It represents the key legislative change required to give effect to new rules of origin for an agreement that we often refer to as PACER Plus, the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus. PACER Plus is part of Australia's trade agenda. It is a development-focused trade agreement signed by Australia, New Zealand and nine Pacific Island countries and aimed at driving economic prosperity and raising living standards in our region.</para>
<para>The bill to which we refer today builds upon one of the most important networks of strategic and economic relationships that Australia has: our relationships with our closest neighbours, the nations and people of the South Pacific. Australia's <inline font-style="italic">2017 foreign policy white paper</inline> highlighted that the stability and economic progress of the Pacific island countries are indeed of great importance to Australia. Our Pacific neighbours are almost exclusively relatively small nations, at least in terms of population and land area, especially when compared with the vast tracts of the great ocean that surrounds them. In fact, the world's entire landmass could fit within the Pacific basin alone.</para>
<para>For the most part, opportunities for Pacific island communities have been both rare and limited, facing, as they do, critical challenges of small markets, narrow production bases and limited infrastructure, with consequent high costs and structural impediments to business and to trade. Subsistence farming and a sprinkling of cash crops plus the sale of fishing rights, in some places tourism and, commonly, remittances from workers who spend time in one or another of the larger, more developed countries on the Pacific Rim are all mainstays of what, by our standards—indeed, by any standards—are small, remote economies with rather limited options. In almost every way, it is a remarkable set of circumstances that they have to deal with on a daily basis—a set of circumstances that we, together with our South Pacific neighbours, are now responding to, in part through the instrument of this bill.</para>
<para>Let's take a quick look at some of these island nations. The 270,000 or so people of Vanuatu, for example, are spread across an 83-island archipelago that's 1,000 kilometres long. Meanwhile, Samoa has a population of about 196,000 people and, compared to many of its neighbours, enjoys one of the healthiest export economies in the region. We imported around $31 million worth of goods from Tonga in 2017, but even there only about 22 per cent of their population are enjoying any form of employment. The relationship that these small Pacific nations have with larger countries of the Pacific Rim is enormously important to them and, indeed, important to Australia, along with New Zealand—and also, I must say, the United States—as crucial paths of that network of supportive relationships.</para>
<para>Notwithstanding the constraints such as limited economies of scale and the tyranny of distance being such, Australia's relationship with our South Pacific neighbours is strong, trusting and invariably warm, and to a great extent it is shared, with 76,000 Australians having Samoan heritage, for example. There are similar communities of Pacific Islander heritage right across the wider Australian community, including approximately 26,000 Australians with Tongan ancestry. Australia has become a strong education, employment and opportunity magnet for many countries across the South Pacific. These are people who seek to live more expansively, wishing to overcome some of the limitations of their own home economies and services, and who, in many cases, directly support wider families still living in isolated island communities. Increasingly, in recent decades, education has become a key part of that interaction, and it is becoming ever more important as an opportunity builder. The Australia Awards Pacific program, for example, is a subset of the larger Australia Awards program, and both are offering opportunities for scholarships, fellowships and short courses for Pacific islanders in formats that are specifically designed to both widen and deepen their national skills base. The Pacific element of the program even specifically requires graduates to return home for a minimum of two years after their studies to ensure a reliable, local benefit to their home economies.</para>
<para>Direct employment opportunities are also vitally important, especially for individuals and their families. The Seasonal Workers Program we run has provided 17,000 jobs across the Pacific islands and has been strongly endorsed by the World Bank for the positive impacts that it is having. It found that the average amount of cash taken home by seasonal workers since 2012, after about six months work, has been $9,000. This is clearly a big deal, and a significant source of income, for island communities, where per capita GDP is typically far less than that. It means a lot in relation to educational opportunities for young islanders, who often invest that capital to start small businesses and to develop local infrastructure, including housing.</para>
<para>The implementation of PACER Plus, made possible in part by the passing of this bill, will also deliver modest economic and commercial benefits to Australia commensurate with the size of participating Pacific islander country economies. In particular, Australian producers of goods, suppliers of services and investors will benefit from more liberal and secure market access in the Pacific. By promoting growth and development and strengthening reform processes in the Pacific, PACER Plus will expand commercial opportunities for Australian companies in the region.</para>
<para>Pacific island countries will have eliminated tariffs on the vast majority, 91.5 per cent, of their tariff lines covering the bulk, 88.5 per cent, of Australia's exports—a total value of $360 million based on 2016 data—when PACER Plus is fully implemented. PACER Plus will deliver early gains for Australian exporters. For example, Cook Islands, Samoa and Tonga will provide early tariff reductions or tariff-free access for a range of Australian exports, including beef, sheepmeat, poultry meat and dairy products. Over time, all Pacific island countries will provide more liberal market access to all major product groups over time.</para>
<para>Australia's largest services exports to the Pacific are tourism and travel services, transport services and financial services, including insurance. Pacific island countries that are signatories to this agreement have made commitments in each of these sectors, many for the first time. Australian service suppliers will benefit for the first time from commitments provided by non-WTO members, such as the Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru and Tuvalu. The most-favoured-nation, MFN, provisions in the agreement will help safeguard market access for Australian producers of goods, suppliers of services and investors in the event that Pacific island parties apply more favourable treatment for the producers, suppliers and investors of nonparties, such as under free trade agreements.</para>
<para>The measures the government is adopting in this bill and the related bill on the customs tariff amendment provide duty-free access according to new rules of origin, inserted into the Customs Act 1901, on imports from South Pacific nations who are parties to the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus. This was tabled in this parliament on 29 November last year and has recently been recommended for ratification by the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties. This initiative not only reflects Australia's wider commitment to global free trade, and the aforementioned imperative of helping to drive opportunity and sustainability among our Pacific neighbours, but will also create additional growth opportunities for Australian businesses.</para>
<para>The mechanics of this bill are straightforward and will no doubt appropriately have bipartisan support. Under PACER Plus, signed by Australia, the Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu, preferential tariff treatment is available based on declarations regarding the origin of goods based on information provided by the importer, the exporter, the producer or the authorised representative.</para>
<para>Further, the second bill, the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018, seeks to comprehensively update the Customs Tariff Act 1995 to ensure that only goods directly subject to excise equivalent customs duties are specified in the new schedule of preferential customs duty rates. This will ensure that imported goods originating from South Pacific countries that are parties to PACER Plus are treated consistently with equivalent goods produced in Australia.</para>
<para>Collectively, these measures will help to drive economic growth, jobs and opportunity not only by reducing tariffs but also by reducing the amount of red tape for importers of goods from PACER Plus signatory countries. That's why these bills are so important. It is for these reasons—supporting Australia's ongoing commitment to our Pacific neighbours, and to drive greater opportunity for Australian businesses that create jobs in this country—that I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOSH WILSON</name>
    <name.id>265970</name.id>
    <electorate>Fremantle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm glad for the opportunity to speak on these two bills, the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018. They put in place some relatively minor changes that nevertheless facilitate the implementation of the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations, also known as PACER or PACER Plus. What I'm going to say is really about PACER Plus because that's the foundation on which these two bills are brought before us.</para>
<para>PACER Plus is a trade and investment agreement between Australia and New Zealand and a number of Pacific island nations. As the former speaker mentioned, those Pacific island nations are important to us. They're our regional neighbours, they're our brothers and sisters in the Pacific, and we have a special relationship with those nations. It's not a relationship that ought to be governed just by economic interests and certainly not by Australia's economic self-interest; it's a relationship that should always take into account the imbalance between Australia and those nations and our responsibility to the people who live in the Pacific and the small Pacific islands. We do have a historic and contemporary responsibility for their wellbeing. I'm not sure exactly how much the PACER Plus agreement has focused on that responsibility. I will outline some thoughts on that.</para>
<para>It's important to notice that, in addition to the standard focus on the tariff reduction within PACER Plus, it does include two less-than-treaty-status agreements on an implementing arrangement for development and economic cooperation and a labour mobility arrangement. It's the labour mobility arrangement that really represents the part of the whole package that the Pacific island nations have a strong interest in. I will come to that a bit later.</para>
<para>In relation to tariffs, PACER Plus will eliminate tariffs on 91.5 per cent of export lines from Australia and New Zealand—what become imports into Pacific island nations. That means that 88.5 per cent of Australian exports will be tariff free into those nations. That's a pretty significant change. On the tariff front, vis-a-vis the Pacific island nations, there's not much change. The Pacific island nations trade amongst themselves on a tariff-free basis, and we don't apply tariffs to their goods. On the tariff front, there's no doubt that this agreement is all about tariff reduction for Australia and certainly not for Pacific island nations.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, when the member for Fremantle can seek continuation.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>43</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>India: Floods</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Over the last few weeks we have seen devastating images coming out of Kerala, India, with millions of locals being affected by torrential flooding in the south. August rainfall in the state so far has been 2½ times the normal rainfall for the period. The Peermade weather station, in Idukki, broke over 100 years of records for 24-hour rainfall. The floods have taken the lives of over 350 people and a further 33,000 people have been rescued from the hundreds of affected communities. Hundreds of homes have been destroyed as a result of these monsoonal rains. Indian emergency services and international organisations have opened around 4,000 relief camps, which are currently sheltering over one million people who have been displaced in this tragic event.</para>
<para>In McEwen, we have a much-cherished Indian community. On behalf of all McEwen residents, I send to the Indian people our sincerest thoughts, condolences and support in this difficult time. Our thoughts are with the millions of people who have been displaced and those whose families and friends have been affected by these devastating floods. We hope India can rebuild quickly, and we would like to see them recover with the support of all Australian aid programs and our partners around the world. We ourselves know the devastation that natural disasters can have on our communities, and that is why we are always behind those in need when they need our help. To all our Indian friends, we wish you all the very best. We hope and pray that everything works out quickly and well for you.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>North Sydney Electorate: Drought Fundraising</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZIMMERMAN</name>
    <name.id>203092</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Like all Australians, residents of my electorate have been moved by the plight of farmers affected by the drought. Our connection with those living and working on the land runs deep, even in the heart of our great cities. That concern is manifesting itself in action, and today I want to congratulate the thousands of students who are raising funds for our drought affected farmers. Their efforts were first brought to my attention when young Chloe Batchelor, from Cammeray Public School, rang ABC Radio Sydney to let their listeners know of her own school's participation in that great initiative Fiver for a Farmer. I visited Chloe at school that day to congratulate her and her fellow students on their initiative and help kick off their fundraising campaign.</para>
<para>Cammeray Public School's efforts are being shared by schools across my electorate. The list of schools raising funds for our farmers—and these are just the ones I am aware of—includes Artarmon, Chatswood, Greenwich, Hunters Hill, Lane Cove West, Northbridge and Willoughby public schools; Hunters Hill, Willoughby and Riverside high schools; Wenona, Currambena, Shore, Glenaeon Rudolf Steiner, Loreto Kirribilli, Monte Sant' Angelo, St Ignatius' and St Joseph's colleges; and St Mary's, St Philip Neri and St Thomas's primary schools. I particularly want to mention the efforts of St Michael's Primary School, which is holding its own fundraising event and opening its grounds for a major drought-relief afternoon tea on Saturday, 8 September for the Lane Cove community.</para>
<para>Our students are to be congratulated for their incredible generosity. I know it has touched our farming communities, and they can be exceptionally proud of their efforts.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>India: Floods</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I, too, wish to reflect on the terrible situation in the southern Indian state of Kerala, where almost 800,000 people have been displaced and over 350 lives lost in a rising death toll as a result of the extensive flooding in the region. There has, sadly, been massive destruction as a result of this unprecedented natural disaster in Kerala. Relief in the form of clean water, food and urgent medical supplies has begun to arrive to help the hundreds of thousands of people who have been affected. Much more help will be required. I urge the government to offer whatever assistance Australia can muster and continue the great Australian tradition of humanitarian aid to those in need.</para>
<para>Australia and India share many things in common: a colonial past, with its accompanying brutality; a shared experience in the First World War, with 15,000 Indian soldiers fighting alongside the Anzacs at Gallipoli; and the famous bravery of the Ghurka regiments in the Second World War. And, of course, we share the more civilised enterprises of cricket and the great game of hockey. There is great rivalry in the tests played between the two countries in these great and beautiful games.</para>
<para>My father lived in Kerala for three years. He ran a rubber plantation for a few years in the late fifties. He held a vast affection for India and its people. I grew up hearing an awful lot about Kerala, and I really hope to visit it one day. We have a large Indian diaspora in Australia that contributes so much to Australia, to WA and to my community of Rockingham and Kwinana and Wellard and Bertram. My thoughts are with the Indian community across Australia who are worried for their families. In particular, we wish the best for the people of Kerala.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Parliamentary Behaviour</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALEXANDER</name>
    <name.id>M3M</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>King Solomon was brought a baby and asked to judge which one of the two women was its mother. He suggested cutting the baby in half. One woman was happy to see it divided, out of spite, at the cost of its life, while the other, true mother begged for the baby's life, even if it meant giving it to her rival.</para>
<para>This parliament is in a time of conflict—no-one can deny that. We are rife with division that is splitting this room irrevocably, and the baby is divided in two. I'm not talking here today to advocate for one side or the other, but this room seems to be full of people happy with division, happy with confrontation and ambivalent on the cutting up of this country into antagonistic groups.</para>
<para>Yesterday in question time, we saw some of the most inappropriate and uncivilised behaviour that I've been a party to. Our friends opposite were jeering and, I'm sad to say, we rose to the bait. Leaders who foster division will lead to further division in this room and across the nation. Our leader must be a peacemaker. United we will stand, divided we will fall and our country will suffer. We all have to go back to our electorates on Friday. We all have to face our constituents. Let's think about those who voted for us here before we resume this brawl.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Solomon Electorate: Sport</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On the wisdom of King Solomon, I associate myself with the comments of the member opposite. Australia deserves better than this mob and what we're currently getting—but I digress.</para>
<para>On Sunday I was very proud to take part in the Top End Gran Fondo in my electorate in Darwin and Palmerston in the Top End of Australia. It's a 150 kilometre bicycle event. However, I did the Half Fondo of 75 kilometres, because I was very proud to take up Darwin Family Law's pollie challenge. It meant that, on the successful completion of that ride, $500 went to the charity of my choice, which was the St Vincent de Paul Society, Vinnies. I'm proud to say that I completed the event and Vinnies has got 500 bucks to continue to do the important work that they do.</para>
<para>I also attended the last home game for the Northern Territory Thunder, the Territory's AFL team. It wasn't a great day on the paddock for the men and women of the NT Thunder. However, we did send off a Territory Thunder legend, Darren 'Boof' Ewing, and Smithy. To Boof, in particular, congratulations on 10 years as the champion goal-kicker for the mighty NT Thunder. Well done, Boof!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Drought</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr O'DOWD</name>
    <name.id>139441</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para> () (): When drought hits, as widespread and severe as it is in New South Wales and Queensland, there are repercussions. When production goes down, costs go up. We export 75 per cent of what we produce and there are contracts in place in a lot of the cases. Drought also impacts on these exports and that is another side issue. The real issue is looking out for the farmers who exist now and who have toiled the land for many, many years. Farmers are slugged now with the drought and with huge freight costs. Barley is up around $320 a tonne and moving upwards, lupins are $400 a tonne, and hay is $300 a tonne. This all impacts on freight cost and road networks, as trucks come from the south, fortunately, to help their brothers in the north. Australia's biggest domestic demand has not been like this for the last 10 years. Exports are essential to our growth. I cannot understand the state government in cutting the water from the Boyne River to the farmer along there. They can get that water out of Wivenhoe Dam, but they choose to cut the water from the farmers. I can't understand why they do it. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Victoria: Rural Community Leadership</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CHESTERS</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
    <electorate>Bendigo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of everybody here, can I welcome the Loddon-Mallee-Murray community leaders that have joined us today. Last night we had a great discussion about: if they were Prime Minister of this country, what would be on their priority list? We did confess we didn't quite know, at the time of dinner, who the Prime Minister was. I think, standing here right now, we still don't know who the Prime Minister is. We did have a discussion about what the key issues were for the leaders of my electorate and of the region and what they would like to see this government or any government focus on. We discussed the importance of increasing funding for our schools and the need for all schools, in particular public schools, to receive their fair share of funding. We discussed the importance of tackling loneliness, particularly in regional Australia, and the need for there to be an integrated community network to help people who are in need and to help people who are experiencing loneliness. We talked about the need for real action on climate change and to not keep shelving it every time it gets a little bit hot in the party room—to actually tackle this issue, to work with communities, to address this issue for now and into the future. We also spoke about the need for a compassionate and inclusive approach when it comes to those seeking asylum and when it comes to our immigration policy. These are the views and the values of the leaders in my electorate. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Chisholm Electorate: Huntingtower School</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BANKS</name>
    <name.id>18661</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Friday, together with our foreign minister, the Hon. Julie Bishop, I had the honour of officially opening the Performing Arts Centre at Huntingtower School in Mount Waverley. This was a true honour, not simply because this is a fantastic milestone for the school but, importantly, also because Huntingtower is a truly wonderful school—because of the people of Huntingtower—under the superb leadership of the principal, Mr Sholto Bowen. The school board; the school board president, Mr David Weil; students; school architects, Baldasso Cortese; the PAC's builders, SJ Higgins; and recipients of the Chisholm Volunteer Awards were all present to bear witness to this exciting and momentous time in history for Huntingtower. The music and song achievements were all celebrated as part of the event and the music and song contributions were absolutely brilliant and so enjoyed by all. Congratulations to all, including the students and parents who contributed to this magnificent facility. The event was superbly organised and proceeded with professionalism, pride and joy, thanks to the leadership of all the students.</para>
<para>The students of Huntingtower are so fortunate to have the opportunity to attend a school that provides them with a quality holistic education which embraces the holistic benefits of integrating the arts as part of the school curriculum. Undoubtedly, current and future students—and their families and the broader community of Huntingtower—will make many wonderful memories with theatre, dance, song and music in this magnificent centre.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Indi Electorate</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McGOWAN</name>
    <name.id>123674</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Colleagues, I would like to introduce you to some of the members of Benalla P-12 College in the gallery. Thank you and welcome. I've had the delightful experience today of having lunch with Alex, Cameron, Sam, Jess and her dad, Wayne, and year 12 coordinator, James. Over lunch, we talked about leadership, we talked about loyalty and we talked about courage. We talked about walking the Kokoda Track, managing whole-school assemblies and representing students on school councils.</para>
<para>Right across my electorate, young people are taking leadership roles. I am so delighted to be able to call them out and say thank you. Wodonga Senior Secondary College, Borinya Wangaratta Community Partnership, Galen Catholic College in Wangaratta and Beechworth Secondary College are all coming up to visit me during this fortnight. A special call-out to Edi Upper Primary School. Every single one of the students came and visited me last week, and all of them were farmers. I was so proud.</para>
<para>I call out to the young people: you are the future. We care about you and what you have to say. We want to hear from you. Have your say. Be active. Be courageous. Come and meet your members of parliament. I say to the young people in the audience: take really good lessons about being courageous, speaking your truth as you know you should, working with your teachers, working with me and working with your senators. But my real message today is: if you haven't enrolled to vote, do it. There might be an election in the air real soon.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Victoria: Rural Community Leadership</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROAD</name>
    <name.id>30379</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The 90-second statements theme seems to be about leadership, and there's a reason for that. In the gallery today are people from the Northern Mallee Leaders and the Loddon Murray Community Leadership Program. You can tell which ones are from Mallee, because they're the good-looking ones! The leadership program is all about bringing people together. It's all about building their capacity. They've been in Canberra for a week. They've had exposure to the Australian War Memorial, exposure to the Australian Labor Party, exposure to the member for Indi as an independent and also exposure to the Greens. One thing I do want to make clear is that, currently, there is no forward funding for the leadership programs that are run in Victoria by the Victorian government, so it is due to expire shortly.</para>
<para>If there's one thing I want to drive home, it is: this is a really good program. The people who are testament to that are in this chamber. The Nationals and the Liberals in Victoria have committed to having this program funded, but Jaala Pulford, in the Australian Labor Party in Victoria, hasn't got any money. I ask the Victorian members of parliament who are here to put pressure on Jaala. It is a good program. Essentially, if we build capacity in people who live in regional areas, that builds growth, that builds prosperity and it builds community in regional areas. So we need to put the pressure on the state Labor government. They need to fund this. It's a great program. Thank you for being in the chamber here today.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Turnbull Government, Payday Loans</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DICK</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate>Oxley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are three words to describe the Turnbull government: chaos, division and dysfunction. Time and again we're seeing this government ripping itself apart while ordinary working Australians are left behind in its wake. This includes more than 650,000 Australians who are being ripped off every day by payday loan sharks, whilst the Prime Minister fights for his survival against the hunger games that the member of Dickson has now unleashed in this parliament—and the member for Deakin as well, the only member of this parliament trying to escape from the ministry of the current Turnbull government.</para>
<para>It is 1,111 days since those opposite acknowledged there was a problem with the out-of-control payday loans sector and initiated a review. What's happened in the meantime? The Minister for Revenue and Financial Services has been rolled by the hard Right. The Deputy Prime Minister has now been rolled by the hard Right of the National Party. And now we see the member for Deakin trying to roll the Prime Minister. They are only interested in themselves.</para>
<para>To the Abbott-Turnbull-Dutton government: take a note. Stop fighting amongst yourselves and start fighting for Australians. Time and time again you've been shown that the people of Australia are sick and tired of this behaviour. As a result, there is no policy, no direction, no idea and no future for this country under a Turnbull-Dutton government.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Bushfires</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>McMillan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A dry autumn and a dry spring were precursors to Ash Wednesday and Black Saturday. I'll repeat that: a dry autumn and a dry spring were precursors to Ash Wednesday and Black Saturday and the massive losses that this nation suffered through those tragedies. We have now had a dry autumn and are expecting a dry spring. My CFAs across Victoria and the fire services across Australia are preparing themselves to protect the people of Australia against the scourge of bushfires.</para>
<para>It's my understanding as a former firey myself that this could be a very, very difficult summer for us. My farmers have expected rain in south and west Gippsland. In parts we have and in parts we haven't. I'd just like to get in front of the story to give out a shout-out to those fire services, those fire men and women who will be protecting us this summer against a most difficult enemy, that enemy being nature itself. So, to every one of you who is preparing for us, from the Western District all the way to the border in Victoria and right across the eastern states, here's the best to you for this fire season.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Turnbull Government, Payday Loans</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We all were gripped by our television screens as we watched the final fizzle of this fizzer government, not half an hour ago. Prime Minister Turnbull dumped his signature tax cuts policy. On this side of the House we're torn—torn between joy that he's seen sense and disbelief because we don't believe it. We don't believe it. Why would we not believe it? We note too that, after months and months of it being called out on this side, he's going to leave the pensioners with their energy supplement. Again, should we celebrate? Do we believe it? We don't believe it.</para>
<para>Do you know why we don't believe them? It is because we have had assistant minister and minister after minister say they're going to do something about payday lending sharks, only for it to be 1,100 days in with nothing happening. We've got a Prime Minister writing letters to members of parliament, saying: 'It'll be in the chamber. We're going to do this.'</para>
<para>The member for Deakin needs to come in here and explain to us. Is his action on the payday lenders the same as his resignation? Is it real or isn't it real? We don't believe the government, because their actions belie them as truth tellers. The member for Deakin should bring that legislation in now before we get to the G-G.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wright Electorate: Canungra Show</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BUCHHOLZ</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
    <electorate>Wright</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the drought. This weekend we will be celebrating in my electorate the 80th anniversary of the Canungra Show. Competitors and office bearers at this year's show include some of the district's most well known names: the Corcoran family, the Finches, the Caswells, the Lawlers, the Moriartys, the Bensteads and the Mahoneys. All make a contribution to ensure that the show is one of the highlights on the calendar. So I invite all the members in this place to get on a plane, rock yourself up to the Gold Coast, make your way over Tambourine Mountain and come to the quintessential country show. There are stud events, show jumping, historical vehicles and chainsaw carving. I'm sure it'll be spectacular for everyone.</para>
<para>Recently I was pleased to announce, under the Building Better Regions Fund, $259,000 in grants to Canungra Sports and Recreation Ground, where the show takes place, for significant upgrades. That will allow them to add adequate sewerage systems to their facilities and groundwater tanks to capture water for the next year. With more and more people coming to the show each year, this funding for these upgrades really benefits the community.</para>
<para>I'd also like to acknowledge and applaud the president, Airlie Worrall; the vice-presidents, Darrel Bliss and Roly Ethell; and the treasurer, Chris Ward, for the amazing work that they do.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Liberal Party Leadership</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEPHEN JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The coalition parties are focused on the wrong jobs. We've got the former Minister for Border Protection, who we discover has been double-jobbing, after the Prime Minister's job. We've got the Minister for Health, who wants the deputy leader's job. We've got the Treasurer, who can't do his own job and wants to determine who has the Prime Minister's job. We've got the former Deputy Prime Minister, who wants the new Deputy Prime Minister's job. We've got the former Prime Minister, who wants a better job. We've got the Minister for Human Services, the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment, the Minister for Law Enforcement and Cyber Security, the Minister for Law Enforcement, the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, the Minister for International Development and the Pacific and the Assistant Minister for Science, Jobs and Innovation, who don't want to do their own jobs. Then we've got the Assistant Minister for Social Services and Disability, who does a good job but, because of the inaction of the Prime Minister, is about to lose her job.</para>
<para>It's absolutely true that over the last week it's been clear that nobody is doing their job and it's time for this Prime Minister to go to the Governor-General and let the Australian people do their job, because we've got real problems in this country, but it's quite clear this government is focusing on none of them. Changing the Prime Minister is going to do nothing about it. We're still going to have a dodgy NBN. We're still going to have a chronic problem with long-term youth unemployment. We're still going to have kids who can't get into TAFE and universities. We're still going to have people who can't pay their power bills, with no action from this government. It's time for them to step up and do their job. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Dawson Electorate: Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHRISTENSEN</name>
    <name.id>230485</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Back in the real world, when the Labor government was booted out of office in 2013, the Bruce Highway was ranked the 22nd most dangerous highway in the world, based on the World Health Organization's <inline font-style="italic">Global status report on world safety: time for action</inline>. That's why the Liberal-National government committed a record Bruce Highway infrastructure investment at the 2013 election and subsequently included it in the 2014 budget.</para>
<para>The highest priority for North Queenslanders was the Horton River Bridge in the Burdekin. It is a very high and narrow crossing with no side rails. I'm pleased to say that this Liberal-National government signed off a few months ago on more than $410 million in funding not only to replace the Horton River Bridge but to improve flood immunity along a 13.5-kilometre stretch of the highway. I understand geotech work is about to start ahead of a major work later this year. I've been pushing for this dangerous bridge to be fixed since 2012, when we were still in opposition, and I've previously been told that the work couldn't begin until 2019, so I'm delighted that the time frame for construction has been brought forward and we're going to see a safer Bruce Highway sooner.</para>
<para>On a sadder note, I want to say that three lives were lost in a tragic accident north of Bowen yesterday and another life was lost south of Bloomsbury, all on the Bruce Highway. My electorate includes 400 kilometres of the 1,700-kilometre-long highway, which is why I have placed and will continue to place a high priority on safety upgrades for the Bruce.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Road Safety</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>People must despair when they look at what's going on here with all the rubbish and the leadership speculation, because we do things here that matter to people. We make laws that matter. They affect people's lives. I had the great privilege this morning of attending a breakfast here in the parliament with the Transport Workers Union, one of the most moving breakfasts I have attended. A number of my Labor colleagues attended with me. I was very sad to see no coalition members were there, because we heard very personal stories about how the dismantling of the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal and the government's attitude to road safety are killing truck drivers and killing members of the community.</para>
<para>We heard a very harrowing personal story of a family that was personally affected and of the things that happen to truck drivers and their families. These are owner-drivers. These are small-business people. These should be the coalition's people. A family was affected when the driver husband worked for a 12-hour shift and then was made by his employer company to work a second 12-hour shift on pain of losing his job. On pain of losing his job, he was made to work a second 12-hour shift. He killed somebody by following that, and now he's in jail, but there's no jail for the employer who made him do the job. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Diabetes</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CREWTHER</name>
    <name.id>248969</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Recently I met with Chelsea Mather and her daughter, Scarlett, two constituents of mine in Dunkley who have type 1 diabetes. Chelsea and Scarlett are on multiple injections of insulin every day. Some days they need to prick their finger eight to 10 times. Now continual glucose monitoring, or CGM, is an option thanks to the federal government. It has improved their lives by helping to lessen things like finger pricks. As a mother of a four-year-old, Chelsea is grateful for the CGM, as it helps manage Scarlett's type 1 diabetes more efficiently. Of course, as she is a very active young girl, they still face a number of challenges even with CGM, much as I do with my own very active three-year-old daughter. Chelsea and Scarlett are this week representing the 817 people living with type 1 diabetes in Dunkley at the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation's Kids in the House campaign.</para>
<para>Following conversations with Chelsea and Scarlett in my electorate, I spoke to Minister Hunt as well about funding for diabetes research. The government will provide $125 million over nine years for the Medical Research Future Fund to establish a targeted translation research accelerator in chronic conditions, focusing on diabetes and heart disease. The fund will also support early-stage health and medical research discoveries to reach proof of concept and progress to human clinical trials. This is exciting news. I hope that together we can turn type 1 into type none.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Turnbull Government</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>What do the government stand for? I have to ask that question. What do the government stand for? They have junked four energy policies in two years. Today we saw a another surrender: they reversed their decision on the energy supplement and they've supposedly reversed their decision on company tax cuts. Their one policy from the 2016 election is supposedly gone. Why? It's because they will do everything they can to stay in power. They will junk every policy they have to stay in power.</para>
<para>This is an attitude that pervades the entire coalition government. You see it in the actions of the ministers for health and trade—those lions who voted for the member for Dickson in the party room but didn't have the courage, the intestinal fortitude, to resign or even own up to it. I will say this about the former Minister for International Development and the Pacific: at least she had the guts to go to the back bench, unlike the ministers for trade and health, who didn't have the guts to go to the back bench with their little mate the member for Dickson.</para>
<para>The truth is that the government stand for one thing: keeping Labor out of power, because they know that our positive policies will improve the lives of every Australian. The sooner they call an election and get out of the way, instead of their desperate attempt to hold onto power, the better for the Australian people.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Committee for Greater Shepparton</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DRUM</name>
    <name.id>56430</name.id>
    <electorate>Murray</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>When I first stood for the seat of Murray I came up with a saying to explain what it meant to represent the area where I grew up. That saying was: 'I'm proud. I'm proud to come from Congupna, proud to have gone to school in Shepparton and proud to have called the Goulburn Valley my home.' Today I'm joined in this parliament by the Committee for Greater Shepparton. I've been joined by Sam Birrell, the CEO, and the chair, Rob Priestly. I've been joined by the mayor of Shepparton, Kim O'Keeffe, and also the CEO, Peter Harriott. I've been joined by professors of universities and TAFEs, Indigenous leaders, agriculture leaders, food processors, business leaders and, of course, the wonderful Lisa McKenzie, with her Lighthouse project. We've been fortunate to have a string of ministers who have made themselves available, including the Prime Minister, to talk to these leaders from Shepparton and to listen to the needs of this great regional city.</para>
<para>The Committee for Greater Shepparton is, of course, advocating for a fairer allocation of train services, having been frozen out of the state Labor Party's train services spend. Shepparton has 3½ services a day; Bendigo has over 20. We have projects with freight benefits, both road and rail. We have sporting precincts to build. We have regional centres for excellence and we have universities and health developments that need to be built. We'll take this city to another level.</para>
<para>All the ministers who have left these meetings know that the investments in Shepparton are going to make sure that they produce amazing benefits for these amazing people of the Goulburn Valley. I need to thank my staff for making sure that today has been such a success.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for member's statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER</title>
        <page.no>49</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Parliament House</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have a very short statement for the information of honourable members, who would recall that on 9 May this year—budget day—we marked the 30th anniversary of the opening of Parliament House by Her Majesty the Queen. Of course, provisional Parliament House, or Old Parliament House, was the home to our parliament for some 61 years. The last sitting there was on 3 June 1988. I just thought that members would be interested that today marks the 30th anniversary of the first sitting in this House, the permanent home of our national parliament.</para>
<para>There are a number of activities being held throughout the year—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Snowdon</name>
    <name.id>IJ4</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Let's make it a good one!</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I warn the member for Lingiari! It would be a bad thing to be thrown out on, whether you were here or not! There are a number of activities being held throughout the year to mark the 30th anniversary. In particular, I note the Australian Parliament House Open Day, which is on Saturday, 6 October. I can't think of a better way for the public to celebrate the 30th anniversary than an event that offers people the opportunity to come in and explore the building.</para>
<para>For the information of honourable members, the spring program, including the 30th anniversary events, is available on the Australian Parliament House website. I thank the House.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>49</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. When talking about the government's handout to big business yesterday, the finance minister promised, 'The moment will come when this parliament will have to revisit this proposal.' Isn't it the case that, no matter what this panicked government does or whoever leads it, the Australian people know that handouts are in the DNA of this government? Given that the Prime Minister is pretending to dump his signature policy to hang onto his job, when are they going to dump him?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TURNBULL</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for his question about DNA. Clearly, he must share some of that DNA as well, because only a few years ago he said that cutting the company income tax rate increases domestic productivity and domestic investment. More capital, he said, means higher productivity and economic growth, and leads to more jobs and higher wages. Well, despite our political differences, it may be that there's a little bit of DNA shared between us.</para>
<para>The reality is that we took our Enterprise Tax Plan to the election. We won the election. We were able, despite many naysayers, to legislate that part of it that delivers lower taxes for small and medium companies—overwhelmingly. Australian owned family companies. That is already driving record jobs growth in our country. It's driving strong economic growth, stronger than any of the biggest economies, with 3.1 per cent GDP growth. And last year we saw over 400,000 jobs created.</para>
<para>Now, that is delivering. But the reality is that the iron laws of arithmetic, which everyone pays attention to here, they are—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TURNBULL</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm glad you woke up! You were half asleep! The iron laws of arithmetic dictate that we have not been able to get the rest of the tax plan through the Senate. We do not foresee any change in public sentiment on this matter and, accordingly, we will not be taking the larger company tax cuts policy to the next election.</para>
<para>Australia needs to have competitive taxes. There is no question about that, and the time will come, no doubt, when people on the other side of the House will go back to reading the member for McMahon's book on that very subject. But the reality is that in this place we have to live with what we can work through the Senate and this is something we have not been able to achieve.</para>
<para>In terms of tax, it's very clear where the line is between us and Labor. Labor wants higher taxes; we're for lower taxes and we're delivering lower taxes. Labor wants to go after the savings of retirees; we are defending them. Labor wants higher energy prices; we're delivering lower energy prices. Labor wants to have less investment; we want to have more investment. What that means is that Labor's economic policies mean less investment, fewer jobs and lower wages. That is why Labor is such a threat to the Australian economy and why thousands of Australian businesses and millions of Australian families are threatened by Labor's absolute, reckless disregard for looking after the workers it claims to represent.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Turnbull Government</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr EVANS</name>
    <name.id>61378</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister outline to the House how this government is backing families with lower taxes and cheaper energy, including in my electorate of Brisbane?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TURNBULL</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for his question. The honourable member for Brisbane represents a metropolitan electorate with thousands of small and medium businesses and family owned businesses. His electorate, like every electorate in this House, is full of enterprising Australians for whom aspiration is not a mystery, as it is to the Deputy Leader of the Labor Party.</para>
<para>We have been able to reduce taxes for millions of Australian businesses—for 3.3 million small and medium businesses which collectively employ over half of the Australian private sector workforce. While we believe in lower taxes, we also believe that paying tax is not optional; it's compulsory. We've introduced and passed through this parliament, in the teeth of opposition from the Labor Party, the toughest multinational tax avoidance laws in the OECD. We've taken on that challenge and we've delivered it, and it has returned over $7 billion of revenue to the Commonwealth's tax net as a result. It is a signal achievement of the Treasurer to be able to get that through the parliament, and it's one of the reasons our revenues are stronger. It's one of the reasons we're able to afford personal income tax for millions of Australians. Over four million Australians will get $530 back this current financial year. Over the whole period to 2024-25, we'll see a reform that will eliminate bracket creep for 94 per cent of Australians.</para>
<para>We're also taking action to ensure that families have less burden of expense in respect of child care. One million Australian families will be better off by up to $1,300 per year per child as a result of our reforms. It's why we've been able to fully fund the NDIS, it's why we're able to spend record amounts on health and schools and it's why we're able to bring 1,700 new lifesaving drugs onto the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme—because we have a strong economy and the revenues to pay for it. What did Labor do? They deferred the listing of lifesaving drugs on the PBS because they didn't have the money. They lost control of the budget and, as a consequence, essential services were put at risk.</para>
<para>We're spending record amounts on all of those vital areas of health, education and infrastructure. On top of that, we are starting to see our energy policies deliver lower energy prices. We're looking after Australian families. The Labor Party has long abandoned them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Member for Dickson</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to Prime Minister: I refer to the <inline font-style="italic">Cabinet Handbook</inline> and to reports that the childcare centres owned by the member for Dickson's trust received over $5 million in public money. Given the member for Dickson has confirmed that he excused himself from Howard government discussions on child care, and given that Peta Credlin has confirmed that he excused himself from Abbott government discussions on child care, did the former minister excuse himself from Turnbull government discussions on child care?</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House, on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pyne</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker—</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Champion interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Wakefield!</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TURNBULL</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I will take that question on notice. I will get advice from the cabinet secretary and I will report back to the House as soon as I have it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on the powers the government will impose to ensure big electricity companies reduce electricity prices for everyday Australians, households and businesses, and what would be the consequences for families and businesses of not implementing such measures?</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Champion interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Before I call the Treasurer, I will say again to the member for Wakefield that his constant conversations are preventing me from hearing the questions. I have tried to perform an educational role. I accept it's failed, but I'm not going to put up with it anymore. If he can't sit here quietly for the rest of question time, he'd better go watch it in his office. The Treasurer has the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. Electricity prices from 1 July have begun coming down. In the June quarter the CPI data showed that they fell by 1.3 per cent. That was the first time we had seen that for some time—the first time we'd seen a real change in electricity prices since the coalition got rid of the carbon tax which they said would never be in place. But, going forward, this is how you get electricity prices down. You put a safety net on price, as we are working and now acting to do, which removes the confusion for pensioners, for householders. It means, when they go to a standard offer, big companies can't keep it up there; it has to fall to the default price. And that means we will see savings from $183 to $416 for households and $561 to $1,475 for small and medium businesses, which on this side of the House we still believe in. On that side of the House they want to tax them out of business, every single opportunity they get.</para>
<para>But it's not just about putting a safety net on price. It is about the big stick. It is absolutely about the big stick. This government knows how to take a big stick to power companies, and gas companies and companies that aren't going to do the right thing by their customers or by other businesses. It was this government that changed section 46 of the competition act in favour of small business. And it's this government that has the guts to go forward and use that big stick to keep the big energy companies in line and to make sure they do what they are doing.</para>
<para>Those opposite don't want to do that. The shadow Treasurer does not want to have a power, if he were Treasurer, to divest companies that do the wrong thing. The Labor Party rejects the idea of having that power as a Treasurer, as a government, for where companies do the wrong thing and rip off consumers and use their vertically integrated power to actually rip off customers. This shadow Treasurer wants to sit as dormant as he did when he was minister for immigration and the boats came rolling in, one after the other, and the costs went up and the children went into detention. He will be as useless as a Treasurer as he was as the minister for immigration. There is no greater failure—but I'm sure the Leader of the Opposition will give it a go—than the shadow Treasurer was as a minister of the government. But there's a lot to compete with. There are plenty of people who sat on that side of the House who gave failure a whole new meaning, in terms of how they worked in a government that we knew was an absolute train wreck and the Australian people knew was a train wreck. And they never, ever want to go back to you.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Member for Dickson</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to reports that the childcare centres owned by the member for Dickson's trust received over $5 million in public money. Given that having a financial interest with the Commonwealth potentially disqualifies the member for Dickson from sitting in the parliament, under section 44 of the Constitution, when did the Prime Minister seek advice from the Solicitor-General on whether the member is legally qualified to sit in this parliament, and will he now release that advice?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TURNBULL</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Again, you'll understand on matters of this kind I take particular care. I will take that on notice and respond later in question time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>51</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to inform the House that we have joining us in the gallery this afternoon three former members of parliament: the Hon. Bob Baldwin, Mr Peter King and Mr Sandy MacKenzie. On behalf of the House, I extend a very warm welcome.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
</debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>52</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cystic Fibrosis</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Members on my left will cease interjecting. The member for Mayo has the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Minister for Health. In a welcome move, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee recommended—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Mayo will pause. Members on my left will cease interjecting. The member for Mayo is entitled to be heard.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you. My question is to the health minister. In a welcome move, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee recommended that cystic fibrosis medication Orkambi be added to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Minister, as you know, cystic fibrosis is a life-limiting condition. For eight-year-old Will Grue, in my electorate, it means different medications every day and several weeks each year in hospital. Orkambi increases the life expectancy of children and young people, but currently the medication is prohibitively expensive. Minister, would you please provide an update on when Orkambi will likely be listed on the PBS and therefore become available to children like Will?</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank the member for Mayo for this question. She's been very sincere and longstanding in her advocacy for patients with cystic fibrosis, in particular for the listing of Orkambi. This is something which has been done across this chamber. I know that, amongst many others, the members for Moreton and Lilley have also made representations, but it's not confined to them. On this side of the chamber, I've had representations from the member for Boothby, the member for Higgins and the member for Forrest in particular, who has been a very strong advocate for young Connor in her electorate. What you say in terms of Will and what she says in terms of Connor and many others is sincerely held.</para>
<para>I'm really delighted that last Friday the PBAC announced that, after three previous assessments, on this occasion they had recommended the listing of Orkambi for cystic fibrosis patients. This is a medicine which will be listed for all patients aged six and above. There had been some speculation that, if it were to be successful, it would only be for those aged 12 and above. It is in fact for six and above.</para>
<para>We will move now as quickly as possible. I have already asked the department to begin discussions and to work on the listing process with the company, and indeed I have spoken with the company myself. We did that within the first day of the announcement of the PBAC. As a guide, I would indicate that last year we listed the drug Kalydeco. Kalydeco is another cystic fibrosis drug by the same company which involves treating beautiful young children. That was recommended, I believe, in January, it was announced in February and it was delivered in May. I think that provides a good guide, although we will try to do it at a faster pace, and we've already had a very strong and positive response from the company.</para>
<para>Cystic fibrosis is a horrific condition. It can shorten the lives of so many patients. It's a nightmare diagnosis for any parent and any young child. And so, to all of those parents who have advocated: I thank them for that. To all of the members in this House who have advocated: I thank them for that. Along with other medicines such as Kisqali, for breast cancer, and Spinraza, for SMA, and what we've done with Kalydeco, we will move heaven and earth to do this as quickly as possible, because I want this medicine to be in the hands of patients at the earliest possible time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Health</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health. I refer to the principle of cabinet solidarity outlined in the <inline font-style="italic">Cabinet Handbook</inline>, which applies to all ministers. Does the minister retain enough confidence in the Prime Minister, his government and its policies to remain minister?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, I do. I also believe deeply and strongly in the record of this government. Going straight to one of the differences between what this government does and what the opposition would do in government, and what they did last time, we will list every medicine that the PBAC recommends. Let me repeat that: we will list every medicine. Do you know why? It's because (a) we believe in it and (b) we run an economy which means that we can pay for essential services. That is what this government has done.</para>
<para>Let me remind the House of what Labor did when they were in government. I quote their own budget papers: … given the current fiscal environment, the listing of some medicines would be deferred until fiscal circumstances permit.</para>
<para>I've also done a little bit more reading. There was a Senate inquiry into Labor's policy when they were in government. What the Senate inquiry found is that this decision of the then Labor government 'constitutes a major unnecessary and unwelcome change in government policy' and that, 'This profound and ill-considered change in policy puts at risk affordable access to medicines—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I have two points of order, Mr Speaker. The first is in terms of direct relevance. The question is about the Prime Minister, and the Minister for Health hasn't mentioned him. Secondly, it's difficult to hear him over the cheers of the government backbench while he's talking.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Hunt interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Minister for Health will allow me to rule on the points of order, if that's okay. There's some tolerance given to the Manager of Opposition Business and the Leader of the House. That second point of order exhausts that for today. On the first point of order, the question also mentioned public policy, so the minister is completely in order.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I do support the Prime Minister. Let me be absolutely clear. I support what we have done with record funding for health, record bulk-billing, record funding for hospitals and record funding for mental health. Above all else, the fact is that on Labor's watch they deliberately deferred new medicines. They did it in their own budget statement. They did it for medicines right across the board, including for schizophrenia, IVF, endometriosis, deep vein thrombosis, severe asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.</para>
<para>If you want to understand the difference between these two sides, what you can see is that those opposite cannot manage the economy and, therefore, they cannot guarantee essential services. We can manage the economy, we have created a million jobs and we have been able to guarantee essential services. That is the difference, and it's fundamental. What they would also do is slash the rebate from the private health insurance system, leading to higher out-of-pocket costs and a 16 per cent increase in the cost of private health insurance. They are healthcare vandals through and through. What we have done in guaranteeing the PBS is give patients certainty and give patients earlier access to the medicines they deserve.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Queensland: Economy</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LLEW O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>265991</name.id>
    <electorate>Wide Bay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure and Transport. Will the Deputy Prime Minister update the House on how the government is putting downward pressure on the cost of living for Queensland families and local small businesses? Are there any risks to our plan to help families and small businesses in regional Australia?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Initially, Mr Speaker, I'd like to thank you for reminding the House that we have been in this chamber for 30 years on this particular spot. The Australian public are also very thankful of that, because for more than half of that time there's been a Liberal-National government in place. When you have a Liberal-National government in place you can do things like what we have been doing as far as mobile phone towers in regional areas, such as the member for Wide Bay's electorate. You can invest in mobile phone towers. We're rolling them out—867 of them.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I hear the member for McEwen yelling out. In his peri-urban seat, let me tell you, mobile phone towers are important. They are important. Not one mobile phone tower was delivered under Labor. Then, of course, we have the member for Adelaide. How did that double drop-off go? These are the sorts of policy failures that we saw from Labor in those six despairing years.</para>
<para>But the member for Wide Bay understands farmers. He understands that they're doing it tough at the moment, with the drought throughout Queensland, Victoria and all of New South Wales. He understands small businesses, such as Jason and Susan Kinsella's Moffatdale Ridge Winery and restaurant. They're employing more people. They're benefiting from the tax cuts that we have provided. They will benefit, certainly, from the lower power prices that we will provide through the default price mechanism through the ACCC; through security of the investment in the power sector; and, certainly, through the divestiture measures—a tough cop on the beat. If those energy companies are going to gouge or are going to have cartel behaviour, then they will be broken up. That is what we're doing as far as the energy sector is concerned. We're underpinning one important thing when it comes to power prices, and that is affordability—that is, price—whilst maintaining security and reliability in the system.</para>
<para>Now, the member for Wide Bay is absolutely committed to making sure that we have the infrastructure rollout across the nation—that 10-year pipeline of investment. It's $75 billion worth of investment—</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Albanese interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It was $24½ billion, member for Grayndler, of new money in the May budget—$24½ billion of new money! It included the $800 million that we are investing in the $1 billion project, section D Cooroy to Curra section, for the Gympie bypass. That will save lives; it will help truck drivers and it will help tourists. It will help people get to where they want to go, sooner and safer. That's the important policy platform when it comes to infrastructure: making sure that we invest in the infrastructure, whether it is in Queensland or wherever it is—whether it's in the member for Wide Bay's electorate—we are rolling out the infrastructure we need.</para>
<para>But what do we have from those opposite? We have a policy-devoid Labor Party. That's right! They're devoid of policy, they smash small business, they stand for higher taxes and they stand for higher energy costs.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS</title>
        <page.no>54</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Member for Dickson</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TURNBULL</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I seek to add to an answer in respect of the question about section 44. I'm advised by the Attorney-General that advice has not been sought from the Solicitor-General.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>54</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Human Services</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUSIC</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
    <electorate>Chifley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Human Services. I refer to the principle of cabinet solidarity outlined in the <inline font-style="italic">Cabinet Handbook</inline>, which applies to all ministers. Does the minister retain enough confidence in the Prime Minister, his government and its policies to remain as a minister?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEENAN</name>
    <name.id>E0J</name.id>
    <electorate>Stirling</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the new shadow minister to the portfolio. And the answer, of course, is yes. It gives me an opportunity to go through the achievements that we're actually doing within my portfolio of human services.</para>
<para>Because we're managing the budget well, because we're managing the economy well and because we've created one million jobs, that means there are fewer people in the welfare system. That saves billions of dollars over the budgetary cycle. That's allowed us to employ an extra 2,750 people within my department so that when you call Centrelink you can actually get someone answering the phone within a reasonable time, who can answer your question—a knowledgeable person who knows what they're doing, who can deal with your query in the way that the Australian people want and with the service that they expect.</para>
<para>I will continue to make sure that we're delivering for the Australian people within this portfolio. The Department of Human Services runs the largest call centre in the Southern Hemisphere. We take one million calls a week. When the Howard government left office, the average call waiting time when somebody called in was 90 seconds—a minute and half. When these guys left office in 2013, it was 12½ minutes! And that happened because they ripped 4,800 people out of the Department of Human Services. Those 5,000 people meant that when people called Centrelink they couldn't get the service they needed.</para>
<para>These guys like to pretend that they care about the welfare system. They like to pretend they care about Australians who are on the welfare system. But we're the ones who are making sure they can get a job, and we're the ones who are making sure that they can get the support they need when they need it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ENTSCH</name>
    <name.id>7K6</name.id>
    <electorate>Leichhardt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Will the minister update the House on how the government is ensuring that Australian businesses can create jobs and invest in a competitive international economy? What are the risks of harming investment in Australian jobs by following a very different course?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JULIE BISHOP</name>
    <name.id>83P</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Leichhardt for his question—and what a magnificent advocate he is for the people of North Queensland. Australia is a significant global economy. We are the 12th or 13th largest economy in the world. Our economic growth rate at 3.1 per cent is higher than any of the G7 economies. Indeed, it is higher than New Zealand—and I welcome the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand here today—and higher than South Korea.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Champion interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Wakefield will leave under 94(a).</para>
<para> <inline font-style="italic">The member for </inline> <inline font-style="italic">Wakefield</inline> <inline font-style="italic"> then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JULIE BISHOP</name>
    <name.id>83P</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Over the last 12 months we've created 300,000 new jobs. Female participation is at the highest rate ever. Female participation in our workforce is at a record higher, and youth unemployment is at the lowest level in six years. Through strong economic management, we've now turned the corner on Labor's debt and deficit, and we will be returning to surplus next year. We have the lowest expenditure growth rate of any government in 50 years. That's why Australia is one of only 10 economies that has retained a AAA credit rating, as rated by all the major credit agencies.</para>
<para>I am asked if there are any risks from a different course. Yes, the course forecast by Labor is a threat to jobs, to our budget and to our strong economic management. Today the Australian Labor Party voted against corporate tax cuts, which means that Australia will now have the second-highest corporate tax rates across 36 OECD economies.</para>
<para class="italic">Ms Plibersek interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Sydney is warned!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms JULIE BISHOP</name>
    <name.id>83P</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>This means that there is now a unity ticket—the socialist-communist coalition of Portugal and the Australian Labor Party. So the Australian Labor Party and the socialist-communist coalition of Portugal believe in having the highest corporate tax rates in the world.</para>
<para>The Labor Party are risking jobs, because they said the Trans-Pacific Partnership was dead. That is providing jobs for Australians across this country. The Labor Party voted against the Turnbull government's multinational tax avoidance legislation, and the Australian Taxation Office have confirmed that that law alone has meant an additional $7 billion in tax revenue into our economy that we are investing in health and education areas. The Labor Party stands for higher unemployment, higher taxes and higher costs. We stand for lower taxes and more jobs.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Member for Dickson</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. In December, the Prime Minister said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We can't in good conscience fail to refer anyone—whether on our side or on Labor's side or on the cross bench—to the High Court if it is clear there are substantial grounds for believing that they are ineligible to sit in the parliament.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I say this without any partisanship at all. I would say the same thing about one of our members.</para></quote>
<para>Will the Prime Minister be true to his word and refer the member for Dickson to the High Court?</para>
<para class="italic">Mr McCormack interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Deputy Prime Minister will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TURNBULL</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for his question. We all remember his rolled-gold guarantee about his dual citizen MPs and how they were able to sit in the parliament. It took two High Court decisions for the Labor Party to finally recognise that they were ineligible to sit here. The Leader of the Opposition referred to the member for Dickson. The member for Dickson has advised me that he has legal advice that he is not in breach of section 44, and I therefore have no reason to believe that he is.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALEXANDER</name>
    <name.id>M3M</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on how the release of recent data on the Australian economy demonstrates how the government's economic plan is working to drive economic growth and create jobs? Is the Treasurer aware of any different approaches to managing the economy?</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for McEwen is warned.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bennelong for his question. He will be particularly pleased to know that the Australian economy has continued to move in the right direction. Do you know who said that? The Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia. That is the endorsement from the Reserve Bank of Australia about the direction of the Australian economy. The government's plan for a stronger economy is working and we're seeing that reflected in the most recent data.</para>
<para>Today, construction in the private sector has grown for the past 12 quarters under the Turnbull government. That is the longest consecutive run of growth in over 30 years. Over 30 years! Under this government investments are being made in nation-building infrastructure. There is a $75 billion rolling infrastructure program. Taxes are coming down. Unemployment is coming down. The number of jobs is going up. Another thing that has happened for the first time in 30 years, in the last financial year, is the growth in employment for young people—95,500 young people getting a job—which is why on this side of the House we come to work every day to get jobs for young people, to get small businesses growing, to ensure that we're growing the economy so we can put drugs on the PBS, affordable medicines for Australia, so we can make sure that hospitals can get the extra funding they need, so we can have real needs based funding for schools, right across the country, to ensure that children can get that support in their education. That's what a stronger economy does. Under this government we're getting a stronger economy, and that is enabling this government to deliver and guarantee the essential services that all Australians rely on.</para>
<para>You'd think everyone would believe this statement: the only way to ensure that there's more prosperity is to grow the economy. That seems like a pretty reasonable statement you would all agree with. But not so for the member for Batman. When this happened and she was questioned about this, she said, 'There's nothing to prove that that works'. She says, and disagrees with the statement, 'The only way to ensure that there's more prosperity is to grow the economy.' The member for Batman doesn't think that's true. The member for Batman also doesn't believe this is true. She said, 'Any reduction in the corporate tax rate is going to lead to more investment; it's going to push—'. She said, 'No, that's not true. There's no evidence anywhere else in the world to prove that that is the case.' Well, we know that the Leader of the Opposition said this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Any student of Australian business and economic history since the mid-80s knows that part of Australia's success was derived through the reduction in the company tax rate.</para></quote>
<para>The Leader of the Opposition thinks his backbenchers are nothing, that they know nothing about the Australian economy. I think he's right. I think he's absolutely right. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Member for Dickson</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's previous answer. Has the Prime Minister read the advice that the member for Dickson says he's relying upon? Is it as strong as the advice which said that the member for New England was eligible? And why hasn't he sought the independent advice of the Solicitor-General?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TURNBULL</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for his question. I have not seen the advice of the member for Dickson. He's confirmed to me that he has legal advice, but I have not seen it. I have not been provided with a copy of it. As far as the Solicitor-General is concerned, the matter has only arisen in very recent times. I'm not in possession of all of the facts relating to the arrangements between the childcare centre and the member for Dickson's trust, but it is an issue of the eligibility for the member for Dickson. He has legal advice, but, as I said, I've not read it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Industry</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. Will the minister update the House on how the government is helping workers and ensuring the future of our defence industry by getting on with the job of signing contracts? And is the minister aware of any alternatives to creating jobs and growth in defence industries?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Forde for his question. Last week the government signed the contract with Rheinmetall Defence Australia to build the 211 combat reconnaissance vehicles in Queensland at a cost of $5.2 billion, building our national security, arming our Australian Defence Force. I would like to table a photograph of me, the Minister for Defence and the Prime Minister signing the contract. I will put that on <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline>. The Labor Party would never have seen one of those photographs and they might like to go into the records and have a look at what it is like to sign a contract to actually build something in Australia, using taxpayers' dollars, and growing jobs, investment and infrastructure.</para>
<para>The Labor Party never did that. In their six years in government they reduced spending on defence to 1.56 per cent of GDP, the lowest since 1938. So those people on that side of the House who have some passing interest in national security, when they get time, might like to come and have a look at what it looks like to sign a contract that creates jobs in Queensland, Victoria, New South Wales and around the country—$5.2 billion in the acquisition phase and 55 per cent of that is Australian industry content. When that tender began, it was five per cent. Because of the decisions of this government, it is 55 per cent—and $10 billion more in sustainment and maintenance over the life of type of the project and 70 per cent of that is Australian industry content.</para>
<para>So we are growing the defence industry in this country. We are signing the contracts. We are ensuring that companies like Haulmark Trailers will get that work. Haulmark Trailers will build 800 trailers in Brisbane as part of the trucks, trailers and modules contract that was announced recently. And I see that Jeff Phillips, from Varley, is here. Varley will build a number of the modules for that particular project. And Jeff Phillips is here with Yoav Har-Even, the president of Rafael in Israel. Today Varley and Rafael signed a joint venture to create a new company in Australia called Varley Rafael Australia to build the Spike missile here in this country for the combat reconnaissance vehicles.</para>
<para>So, as you can see, we are building, throughout the economy, the jobs, the investment and the infrastructure. We are working with companies from Israel and Germany who are doing joint ventures with Australian companies. All of that, under the Labor Party, would have been sent overseas. Because of the decisions of this government, driving policy, we are making a difference to jobs and our economy in this country.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Law Enforcement and Cyber Security</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'NEIL</name>
    <name.id>140590</name.id>
    <electorate>Hotham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Law Enforcement and Cyber Security. I refer to the principle of cabinet solidarity, outlined in the <inline font-style="italic">Cabinet Handbook</inline>, which applies to all ministers. Does the minister retain enough confidence in the Prime Minister, his government and its policies to remain as the minister?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question and the answer is yes, I do. The first priority of this government and this Prime Minister is to keep all Australians safe and secure, and I strongly support that priority. Since 2013 this government has provided unprecedented funding and support, in legislation and money, for our law enforcement agencies.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Khalil interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Wills!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We have invested $106 million into our National Anti-Gang Squad. We know that gangs have been running rampant in parts of Australia, including the Labor state of Victoria.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Khalil interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Wills will leave under 94(a)</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Wills then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We have established Taskforce Blaze. Taskforce Blaze intercepted 19.7 tonnes of narcotics before it got to our borders. That quantity of narcotics would wreak absolute havoc in our communities, in our suburbs and on our streets. I think everyone, on both sides of the House, should be enormously appreciative of the strong work that is being done by our law enforcement agencies to intercept those quantities of narcotics before getting into Australia. We have committed $70 million to establish the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation—I'm sure all members of this parliament can support a government that spends $70 million on preventing these heinous offences—and we've announced approximately $120 million for the Safer Communities Fund and the Safer Streets Program.</para>
<para>There is an alternative. We saw Labor raid the accounts of our law enforcement agencies when they were in government. When they had a faltering budget, they raided the accounts of our law enforcement agencies in this country: $128 million from the Australian Federal Police, and $735 million and 700 people from Customs. Labor is also opposing our legislation to introduce mandatory minimum sentencing for firearms trafficking and the worst child sex offenders. You can rely on this side of the House, on this government, to keep Australians safe and secure.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOODENOUGH</name>
    <name.id>74046</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Small and Family Business, the Workplace and Deregulation. Will the minister update the House on how lower taxes support small businesses to invest and grow? What are the risks for small and family businesses of a higher taxing approach?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAUNDY</name>
    <name.id>247130</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the always dapper member for Moore for his question.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCormack</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Sartorial elegance!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAUNDY</name>
    <name.id>247130</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, as the Deputy Prime Minister points out, sartorial elegance. I acknowledge that the premise of the question is simple: what do we believe on this side of the House? The people best placed to spend the profits of their small or family business are those that actually run their small and family business. Already, under the Prime Minister's and the Treasurer's enterprise tax plan, there are three million small and family businesses enjoying legislated tax cuts. In the member for Moore's state of Western Australia, some 250,000—in fact, in his seat, some 15,000—small and family businesses are enjoying the tax cuts.</para>
<para>What do these cuts amount to? They amount to around $3,000 for businesses with under $2 million in turnover. They are keeping around $3,000 of their money and reinvesting it—like small and family business operators in this country have done historically and will do into the future—back in their business. They are growing their businesses and employing more people. It's how the employment numbers are generated at the coalface in small and family business land. It's record jobs growth that is driven off the back of it.</para>
<para>I'm asked, 'What are the alternatives?' The alternative is to place the economy in the hands of a L-plater like the Leader of the Opposition. He has no real world experience. He has never operated a business in his life. He has never put his hand in his own pocket or put his family's home on the line. In fact, since coming to parliament, he has actively fought against those who do. The reality is that, in the last 12 months of when Labor were last in charge of the economy, 60,000 small and family businesses in this country closed. In the six years that they were in charge of this economy, between 2007 and 2013, there were 520,000 jobs lost in small and family businesses.</para>
<para>Compare the pair. On this side of the House, you've got tax policy that has been decreased to today and is decreasing to 2025-26, where, under the coalition's policies, businesses with up to $50 million in turnover will be allowed to keep more of their hard-earned profits. What will they do? They will reinvest in their businesses, as they have always done. They will reinvest in their businesses, back themselves and employ more people, and employ back-end supply chains in the local economy. Let's not forget: businesses don't exist in a vacuum. Businesses, irrespective of size, interact with each other in supply chains, generating local profits and local jobs. The difference is clear. On this side of the House, we will stand and fight for small and family businesses day in, day out. The other side will do absolutely nothing for them.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms OWENS</name>
    <name.id>E09</name.id>
    <electorate>Parramatta</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question as to the Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. I refer to the principle of cabinet solidarity outlined in the <inline font-style="italic">Cabinet Handbook</inline>, which applies to all ministers. Does the minister retain enough confidence in the Prime Minister, his government and its policies to remain a minister?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TUDGE</name>
    <name.id>M2Y</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question. I have given the Prime Minister my assurance that he has my support as leader. I've also given him my assurance that he has my support for keeping our borders secure. In the last few decades, the greatest policy failure that we have seen from any Australian government has been the dismantling of Australia's successful border protection system that the Howard government put in place. We saw 1,200 people drown at sea. We saw thousands of boats arrive. We saw 50,000 unlawful arrivals. We had to put that system back into place, piece by piece, which we successfully did, and we maintain absolutely that commitment to our strong border protection regime. We will resist any efforts from the opposition to return to their previous policies of unwinding those policies.</para>
<para>I've also given the assurance that we will absolutely ensure that we will continue to ensure that we create jobs and prioritise Australians for those jobs. Again, under the previous regime, the Leader of the Opposition, when he was employment services minister, had the world record for the number of 457 visas issued. At the same time, the welfare queues were ballooning out and the number of jobs actually declined. In contrast, since we have been in government, we've halved the number of those types of visas in the country, we've grown jobs by 400,000 and we have the lowest number of people in the welfare queues in 25 years. That's the type of record we have. We have more Australians in jobs and we're taking people from overseas only when they are needed because there aren't those jobs available.</para>
<para>I will ensure that we'll continue to keep our taxes low and work with the Prime Minister and the cabinet to keep taxes low. We do not want taxes, as the opposition does, on investments. We don't want high taxes on small business. We don't want high taxes on property. We don't want higher taxes on retirees. We certainly don't want debt taxes, which is what some of the unions are suggesting. You might keep an eye on that in terms of where the Labor Party goes, because, when the unions start talking about a particular policy, it doesn't take long for the Labor Party to adopt that policy, for Bill to start acting—</para>
<para class="italic">Mr McCormack interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TUDGE</name>
    <name.id>M2Y</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>as the Deputy Prime Minister says, and enact that policy. They're the types of policies which I support and they're the types of policies I will continue to support.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is for the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services. Will the minister update the House on how the government is ensuring the integrity of the tax system? Is the minister aware of any different suggestions regarding taxation?</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Stephen Jones interjecting—</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Conroy interjecting—</para>
<para class="italic">Mrs Sudmalis interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The members for Whitlam and Shortland will cease interjecting. The member for Gilmore will cease giving me advice.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'DWYER</name>
    <name.id>LKU</name.id>
    <electorate>Higgins</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Berowra for his—</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Stephen Jones interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Whitlam will leave under 94(a).</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Whitlam then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms O'DWYER</name>
    <name.id>LKU</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A popular choice! I thank the member for Berowra for his question, and I'd like to congratulate him on the hard work and advocacy that each and every day he displays on behalf of his constituents. He's absolutely right to ask about taxation policy, because he recognises, like all of us on this side of the chamber, that people work hard for their money. And, because they work hard for their money, they ought to keep as much of it as humanly possible after we guarantee the essential services that Australians rely on. He also understands that we need a taxation system that has real integrity.</para>
<para>We've heard a lot of hot air from those opposite—a lot coulda, shoulda, woulda—when it comes to multinational tax avoidance. When the Leader of the Opposition was on the Treasury benches, all of that hot air amounted to absolutely nothing. It has taken a coalition government, the Turnbull government, to actually deliver, to close those tax loopholes for multinational companies and to crack down on tax cheats. We're the ones who have introduced the diverted profits tax, have doubled the penalties for tax avoidance schemes and have put in place the multinational anti-avoidance law. It's not lost on anybody in here, or those who might be watching, that it was those opposite that voted against it. It's a law that has seen an additional $7 billion in sales tax returned each and every year as a result of those changes, plus the hundreds of thousands of dollars we have seen returned in GST revenue as well.</para>
<para>We've also established the Tax Avoidance Taskforce, which, in just two years, has seen $10 billion in tax liabilities against large corporates and high-net-worth individuals also returned. Just last week, we legislated in this place the OECD multilateral convention, further bolstering the integrity of our taxation system. This means that we on this side of the chamber are making sure we have a taxation system that is secure. It allows us to be able to provide tax relief to those hardworking Australians—the mums and dads out there who work hard each and every day for their income.</para>
<para>We have legislated a personal income tax plan through both houses of this parliament. We have been able to legislate that. That has seen 94 per cent of all individuals who've paid tax pay no more than 32½c in the dollar. We have been able to provide tax relief for small- and medium-sized enterprises with a turnover of less than $50 million, but those opposite would simply seek to hike up taxes $200 billion more. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment. I refer to the principle of cabinet solidarity outlined in the <inline font-style="italic">Cabinet Handbook</inline>, which applies to all ministers. Does the minister retain enough confidence in the Prime Minister, his government and its policies to remain as a minister?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CIOBO</name>
    <name.id>00AN0</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's been 916 days since I was sworn in as the trade minister, and, for the first time, the shadow trade minister has taken some interest in trade. Congratulations! It's 916 days later and you've finally found your voice on trade. Let me put it in terms so that even the member for McEwen and the rest of the Australian Labor Party can understand: yes.</para>
<para>Let's talk about the Australian people. The Australian people retain no confidence in the Australian Labor Party. The reason the Australian people have no confidence in the Australian Labor Party is that they know what they've got planned when the next election comes. The Australian Labor Party is going to impose an extra $200 billion worth of taxes on the Australian people. The Australian Labor Party is going to put a retirees tax in place. The Australian Labor Party is going to bring back an emissions trading scheme.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister will take a seat for a second. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's on direct relevance. The question is about his support for the Prime Minister. If he can't speak on it for three minutes, he doesn't need to make the full time.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Manager of Opposition Business is welcome to give guidance through a point of order, but, as I pointed out in reference to earlier questions, the question had a number of elements to it, including in relation to policy. I think the minister is quite in order.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CIOBO</name>
    <name.id>00AN0</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Let me make it very clear again, because obviously the Labor Party can't keep up: the answer is yes. Let me make it very clear: yes, of course there's confidence. How much clearer can I make it? I make the point as well that there is no confidence among the Australian people in the plan that the Australian Labor Party has. We know, as the Australian people know, that when push comes to shove they will have a choice about the future direction of this country. The future direction will be between a higher taxing, big-spending Australian Labor Party or a lower taxing government that has made sure it creates jobs, creates economic growth and delivers a stronger and more prosperous future for the people of Australia.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Drought</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEE</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
    <electorate>Calare</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Regional Development, Territories and Local Government. Will the minister update the House on how the government is supporting our rural communities doing it tough with the drought biting hard? What are the risks to rural communities of not providing this support?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr McVEIGH</name>
    <name.id>125865</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Calare for his question. He, like everyone on this side of the House, understands the importance of backing regional communities doing it tough in this terrible drought. The coalition is committed to helping farmers and graziers through the entire $1.8 million drought package that we have announced to date.</para>
<para>We are helping their local communities as well. As Minister for Regional Development, Territories and Local Government, I am proud to be part of the effort focused particularly on the Drought Communities Program, which is providing some $75 billion to deliver immediate support to the 60 worst-affected council communities and local government areas across Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria. In the first instance, $1 million will go to each of those 60 councils—with more to come—including the shires of Blayney, Cabonne, Mid-Western Regional and Oberon in the member's electorate of Calare.</para>
<para>The Drought Communities Program gives councils the flexibility to choose the projects that meet local community imperatives. Local leaders making local decisions is what we want to get behind in these tough times. We know their focus is going to be on boosting local projects, local jobs—employing local tradies—and local infrastructure that will, at the end of the day, support local families. I know members on this side of the House want to do that throughout regional Australia, particularly in these tough times. I note that some on the other side are obviously not interested in those doing it tough in drought.</para>
<para>Through the Drought Communities Program, we are already backing 124 specific projects across 23 council areas. This latest $75 million boost will deliver hundreds and hundreds more projects. We are backing these communities. We are backing them through the Drought Communities Program. We are backing them through tax relief. We are, quite obviously, backing them through more jobs. Most especially, we are backing them through more trade deals and opportunities. We are backing them through the Building Better Regions Fund. We are backing them with more jobs through those projects in local communities.</para>
<para>We've spent a fair bit of time in regional Queensland, regional New South Wales and Victoria and regional areas right across the country, and we will do more to support these communities because, without support, they will lose families, they'll lose children at local schools and they might even lose a teacher or two. We must support those local economies, and we will do that. We will do that in towns like Blayney, Gulgong, Oberon, Molong and Calare. We will do it in drought-affected areas right across the country. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Today the member for Dickson proposed changing the GST on energy bills—a policy the Treasurer called a 'budget blower, an absolute budget blower'. Can the Treasurer confirm that, if the states lose billions of dollars in revenue from the change in the GST, there is a real risk they will have to cut spending on schools and hospitals as a result?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As I noted, that is not the government's policy and it would have the impact—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It is not the government's policy. As you know, a policy for the GST that affects the base requires the agreement of all states and territories. The Parliamentary Budget Office has costed a similar proposal. It's about $7½ billion over four years. Either that $7½ billion would not then go to the states or the Commonwealth would have to pay that additional money to the states. So that answers the member's question on the issue of tax.</para>
<para>Let me also say on the issue of tax that, today, the Labor Party voted to keep the big banks in the enterprise tax plan. We offered to take the banks out of the enterprise tax plan, and they voted to keep them in.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Members on my left!</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Shorten interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's true. The shadow Treasurer once said how important it was to reduce company taxes. He put it in a book called <inline font-style="italic">Hearts & Minds</inline>. I know what the sequel is—<inline font-style="italic">Feet in Mouths</inline><inline font-style="italic">—</inline>because he is turning back on everything he believes in. I'll tell you what I believe. I'll tell you what the Prime Minister believes. We believe that Australians should keep more of what they earn. We believe that Australians who have a go should get a fair go and shouldn't have to pay the more than $200 billion in higher taxes that that shadow Treasurer wants to ram down their throats. We don't believe that this Leader of the Opposition should put his hands in the pockets of retirees and pensioners.</para>
<para>Indeed, today we said that the energy supplement will be restored to all new applicants.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Now they scoff! They had it in their budget costings at the last election to remove it, and they have never, ever produced another document to change their costings. They went to the last election, they said, 'Oh, they're going to take it off,' and then they adopted the same policy. There is so much hypocrisy when it comes to the Labor Party and tax, but, when it comes to the issue of belief in ensuring that Australians who work hard can to get ahead, they haven't got a clue. All the beliefs they once stood for they have abandoned. This Leader of the Opposition believes in nothing but himself.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Online Harassment</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Attorney-General: Will the Attorney-General update the House on how the government is working to protect all Australians from online harassment and how these measures are providing multiple avenues of redress for victims of image based abuse?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PORTER</name>
    <name.id>208884</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Fisher for the question. I know that he's been an unwavering advocate for reform in this area, as has been the member for Forrest. I congratulate them both for their assistance with my office. The very sad fact is that publication of intimate images is a problem that's being faced by, very sadly, an increasing number of Australians, particularly women and girls. A recent RMIT report noted that one in five Australians, one in two Australians with a disability and one in two Indigenous Australians had been the victim of this very terrible behaviour. It's self-evidently degrading. It's humiliating. It is, very unfortunately, on the rise, and, when victims have their say on this behaviour, they describe how it can leave very, very terrible and lasting damage for them personally.</para>
<para>As a first step, the coalition launched the eSafety Commissioner's portal, which essentially was designed to provide all the assistance that we could through the Office of the eSafety Commissioner to people who had experienced this behaviour to try and have the material taken down. Notably, 70 per cent of the reports to date concerned female victims and 33 per cent concerned victims who are under the age of 18. That portal had 150,000 visitors in 12 months. That indicated to us that more needed to be done.</para>
<para>The next step was that we went through an online consultation and public consultation process, effectively, to test the desirability and viability of a civil penalty regime. One thing that was very notable was that the central concern of people who had experienced this terrible behaviour was that there would be a regime in place that could compel the taking down of the images in real and fast time. The bill that passed this place last week gave the eSafety Commissioner powers to issue what will be known as removal notices to compel websites and social media providers to take down these images. So it's our Prime Minister who, among many other achievements, has provided, for the first time ever, an Australian regime which gives victims timely, accessible and effective means to remove the private images from public view, thereby reducing the distress and damage to the victims. That is something that should have happened prior to this point, but it is the Prime Minister who has actually made it happen. We congratulate him for doing that.</para>
<para>The other thing that has happened in this bill is that there are now two new dedicated offences to the online provision and sharing in a way meant to harass with what is defined as 'private sexual material'. So we have the civil penalty regime and these two new offences. The first offence will carry a maximum of five years, and that's when the general harassment offence involves private sexual material. The second offence has a maximum of seven years and applies where someone has been the subject of three civil penalties. This fundamentally changes the legal system around these offences. I might note that these are the sorts of things that are very good to speak about in this House, because it provides all of us with an opportunity to send a message that this sort of behaviour is not a joke. It is seriously damaging and it is seriously criminal and now, for the first time, the subject of serious criminal penalties. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>The Treasurer</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. I refer to the principle of cabinet solidarity outlined in the <inline font-style="italic">Cabinet Handbook</inline>, which applies to all ministers. Is the Treasurer aware of conflicting media reports of the Treasurer's loyalty, with the Treasurer reportedly doing the numbers for the Prime Minister and for the member for Dickson and for himself? Does the Treasurer retain enough confidence in the Prime Minister, the government and its policies to remain as Treasurer?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Absolutely—the Prime Minister has always enjoyed my support. And I will tell you why, Mr Speaker. It's because together, as a team, the Prime Minister and I have ensured that we have turned the corner on debt. We're bringing the budget back into balance and, together, we've been stewarding economic policies that have seen the single greatest increase in employment on economic record in this country. We've seen young people getting the jobs. We've seen our infrastructure program hitting the ground. Our plan for a stronger economy is getting the results that we want it to get and we've retained the AAA credit rating under great stress and strain—one of only 10 countries to do so. And we've got plans to do even more, to ensure that Australians can continue to enjoy the prosperity and the stability that they rely on, and so that the essential services they depend on can be delivered and can be guaranteed.</para>
<para>This government, the Turnbull government, has a plan for a stronger economy. The Turnbull government has a plan for a safe Australia, and we're delivering on that plan. The Leader of the Opposition and the Labor Party couldn't find an economic policy if their life depended on it. They've abandoned all beliefs—all beliefs!</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They interject about company taxes, Mr Speaker! We believe that taxes should be lower for all businesses. We believe it. They used to say it on the other side of the House, and they allowed themselves to be the victims of populism and walk away from orthodox economic policy. We haven't. We believe it's good for the economy. We believe that Australians who earn more should keep more. We believe that Australians who run businesses should be able to keep more of what they earn.</para>
<para>What does the Labor Party believe, other than to put their hands deeper and deeper and deeper into the pockets of Australians and take more of their hard earned money, and for what purpose? To employ more public servants in Canberra and to spray more money all around the country; to puff their chests up at conferences and not get any results. We are a responsible government that is managing the finances of this country in a responsible way to deliver for all Australians. We've got plans to do just so much more, and we will.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Centrelink</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Human Services. Will the minister update the House on the government's commitment to improving access to the essential services that Australians rely on? And how would a different approach hurt everyday Australian families?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEENAN</name>
    <name.id>E0J</name.id>
    <electorate>Stirling</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for that question. The Turnbull government is delivering on its commitment to improve customer service at Centrelink through the announcement that I made recently about an extra 1,500 staff to complement my department's workforce. These staff are on top of the thousand staff that I already announced in April and the 250 whom we employed last year and who are already responsible for very significant improvements in our service.</para>
<para>Centrelink answers about one million calls a week. One million calls a week—clearly, with that high volume, getting through can be difficult during periods of high demand. Our investment in the extra 2,750 staff will greatly enhance our ability to answer more calls, improve application-processing times and improve overall service delivery, enabling us to better provide the essential services that the Australian people need.</para>
<para>These new staff are going to be based in call centres all around the country, providing local jobs for local workers—call centres in Adelaide, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth. It will mean that the service we deliver for the Australian people is now more in line with their expectations.</para>
<para>I was asked by the member for Fairfax about alternative approaches. Our approach, of course, is to make sure that Centrelink and the Department of Human Services have the resources that they need to actually do the job. It's an enormous service delivery network, and five million Australians rely on it for their standard of living.</para>
<para>While we have been in office, I have announced 2,750 extra staff to help that service delivery process. When Labor were in office, in their last three years, between 2010 and 2013, they cut 4,800 people from the department—4,800 people. And that meant we saw blowouts in processing times and we saw blowouts in our call centres. It went from 90 seconds when the Labor Party came to office to 12½ minutes by the time they left. We're going to clean up that mess, and we're doing it by making sure that the staff are there to answer the phone calls.</para>
<para>And the extra staff, the 250 extra staff we've employed, which is the first cohort of staff that I have announced, have already answered more than two million phone calls. That's helped reduce busy signals by 20 per cent. Of course, busy signals are the most frustrating part of our telephone service, if you can't get through. We will continue to put on extra workforce, an extra 2½ thousand will be coming on over the course of this year, because we are committed to making sure that the services we offer are in line with the Australian people's expectations and that we can deliver the welfare system in a timely and efficient manner.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Turnbull</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER</title>
        <page.no>63</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Fowler, Mr Peter</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before members leave, I've got a very short statement. I want to say a few words about one of the staff of the Department of the House of Representatives, Peter Fowler, who is having his last sitting week in the House. Peter's there in the front row of the gallery this afternoon.</para>
<para>In December 1982, Peter was seconded from the Parliamentary Library, where he had worked, to the House of Representatives Procedure Office, where he established the procedural records system. Peter's been involved heavily in the preparation of all of the editions of <inline font-style="italic">House of Representative</inline><inline font-style="italic">s</inline><inline font-style="italic"> Practice</inline> since the second edition, back in 1989. This has included extensive research, drafting of text and coordinating of all aspects of publishing. Of course, Peter has been very heavily involved in the most recent 7th edition that members have. There can be no doubt that such a dedicated focus on the main procedural reference volume of the House has been of considerable value in the continuity of the development of the text and a benefit to all of us.</para>
<para>Peter's also made a valuable contribution to the work of the Procedure Committee. Of particular significance was his work for that committee's 1993 report <inline font-style="italic">About time</inline><inline font-style="italic">:</inline><inline font-style="italic"> bills, questions and working hours</inline>. That report led to many important reforms, including the establishment of the Federation Chamber, initially called the Main Committee, and which Peter has served as a deputy clerk. Peter also served as a deputy clerk in this chamber.</para>
<para>In 1988 he was awarded an Australia Day medallion to acknowledge his significant contribution to parliament and the department. His sustained focus and interest in House procedure has made him an expert, and he has offered guidance and assistance to many new staff over the years. We wish Peter and his wife, Anne, all the best in retirement and, of course, he leaves on a high after the publication of the 7th edition of the <inline font-style="italic">House of Representatives Practice</inline>. Congratulations, Peter.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Liberal and National parties, we would like to thank Peter Fowler for his service to the parliament and the nation since 1982, particularly in terms of our procedures and our practices since 1989. I don't think it is unfair to say that Peter Fowler is to procedure what Johnathan Thurston is to rugby.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Rugby league!</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Turnbull</name>
    <name.id>885</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Spoken like a South Australian!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Spoken like a true South Australian!</para>
<para class="italic">Dr Chalmers interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>That was mean and cheap, Jim, but that's you!</para>
<para>As a former chairman of the Procedure Committee, and of course as Leader of the House and Manager of Opposition Business, I have studied the procedures over many, many years, in fact 2½ decades—thanks to Wilson Tuckey, encouraging me early in my political career—and much of that work that I've been studying is the work of Peter Fowler.</para>
<para>People like Peter Fowler have done a marvellous service by this great parliament, which is one of the models of the parliaments around the world. I'm sure his procedures have been adopted by many parliaments around the world. For those people who are part of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and travel around the world and see other parliaments in action, I'm sure the work that we've done here has impacted on them, which means that Peter Fowler has impacted on them as well. He leaves with our gratitude and our thanks.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to assure Peter Fowler that the comments made by the Leader of the House are shared by all members of this place, except for the Rugby League reference.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He left my club. The work that is done in <inline font-style="italic">Practice</inline> is absolutely critical to how this place operates and it makes sure that there are limits on how far interpretations are tried. I must say we have tried very hard to set as many new precedents as possible for the new volume this term. We've got a few in there that we're very happy about. But, for all of that work, a parliament needs constant rules to be able to function. While the standing orders are the starting point for that, it's <inline font-style="italic">House of Representatives Practice</inline> that actually delivers it and makes sure that we're able to do that. While we might be talking about a whole lot of work that is technically only one publication, it has guaranteed the democracy of this place and it's been really important. So thank you, Peter.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Report No. 3 of 2018-19</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the Auditor-General's Performance audit report No. 3, 2018-19, entitled <inline font-style="italic">Award of funding under the Community Development Grants Program: Department of Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PYNE</name>
    <name.id>9V5</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have received a letter from the honourable member for Ballarat proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The government's five-year record on cutting health.</para></quote>
<para>I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Yesterday 35 members of this government decided that they would rather have the member for Dickson than the member for Wentworth as their Prime Minister. Thirty-five members of the government, including the current Minister for Health, said that they would rather have the person who presided over some of the worst health policy in the nation as Prime Minister than the member for Wentworth. It says a lot about the mob opposite that they would rather have the worst health minister on record as the Prime Minister than the current Prime Minister. So I think it is well worth this House, as a matter of public importance, looking back at the government's greatest hits when it comes to health.</para>
<para>The member for Dickson was the worst federal health minister in Australia in a generation. That's not just me saying that, although I do have to say I wholeheartedly agree; that was the judgement of the nation's doctors. There has been some pretty stiff competition for the crown from those opposite. There was the member for Warringah, who, when he wasn't obsessing about how to stop women accessing medical terminations, was giving rolled-gold commitments on Medicare and then promptly abandoning them. There was the scandal-plagued member for Farrer who somehow managed to start damaging fights with doctors, pharmacists, pathologists and pretty much everyone else in the health sector. Years later, the government is still trying to clean up some of those messes that she made in the portfolio, but at least she actually wanted the portfolio and cared about it. And now we've got the member for Flinders, the man who's continued the government's freeze on the Medicare rebate. He's presided over billions of dollars of cuts to hospitals and has spent the last 18 months kowtowing to the big private health insurers, putting their profits before patients, and now he's reportedly desperate to get out of the health portfolio so that he can become deputy Liberal leader. Just 18 months in the health job, and he can't wait to get out of it. He doesn't care about the health of the nation. He is just using it as a stepping stone for his political ambitions.</para>
<para>On the other side of the chamber, it's a rogues' gallery of incompetence and attacks on Medicare and our hospital system. And yet none of these hopeless ministers can challenge the member for Dickson for his sheer bloody-mindedness and his assault on the Australian universal healthcare system, a system that is the envy of the world. When doctors were polled a few years ago now, 47 per cent of them named and shamed the member for Dickson as the worst health minister in 35 years. We've had about 15 health ministers in that time, but half of the doctors of the nation agreed that the member for Dickson was the worst. He was only in the job for 15 months, but the damage he did in that short time as health minister was extraordinary. Let's consider his appalling record. Bear with me, as it is going to actually take a while.</para>
<para>The member for Dickson was one of the chief architects of the horror 2014 budget—the cruellest, nastiest budget in living memory. It was a budget so infamously unpopular it ultimately destroyed the Prime Minister and the Treasurer who delivered it. What was the member for Dickson's contribution to that budget? It was $57 billion worth of cuts to public hospitals, for starters. That's not a Labor number; that was the number offered up by the government's own Treasury at the time. The 2014 budget tore up Labor's national partnership agreement on public hospitals, a massive broken promise and a disaster for health care in this nation. A cut like that meant fewer hospital beds and longer waiting times for emergency care and for elective surgery. It meant doctors, nurses and other hospital staff simply did not have the resources they needed to deliver top-quality care. That was his vision for the nation's public hospitals—cutting them to the bone and letting patients suffer.</para>
<para>The Liberals, under the current Prime Minister, eventually restored some of this money because they knew their cuts were electoral poison. But even now they are persisting with the funding formula that the AMA says will doom our hospitals to failure, a deal that is billions of dollars below what was promised and billions of dollars below what a Labor Shorten government would deliver. Of course, we also saw the $7 co-payment to see the doctor. Remember that one? This was another of the member for Dickson's bright ideas, a policy that effectively undermined the universality of Medicare that somehow he thought doctors and patients would welcome. It was a policy that would have forced up the cost of seeing a GP and the costs of out-of-hospital care. He also wanted the states—remember this one?—to charge a co-payment on emergency departments as well. These co-payments weren't just targeted at the wealthy or well-off; they were for everyone, including children, pensioners and the chronically ill—the poorest, most disadvantaged people in this nation.</para>
<para>It was one of the most regressive policies ever proposed. It was only because Labor and the crossbench opposed it that it was killed off eventually. As usual, we ended up saving the government from their appalling instincts to slash and burn health funding. But the member for Dickson thought it was a great idea and spent months advocating for it and then, if that was even possible, made it worse by proposing an even higher co-payment. He liked it in large part because it would deter people from going to the doctor. Deterring people from going to the doctor was what the policy was designed to do. We know that people who don't go to the doctor typically get sicker and sicker and end up costing the health system more.</para>
<para>But, of course, the member for Dickson's health policies didn't stop there. He wanted to also force up the cost of prescription medicines. He wanted people to pay an extra $5 every time they filled a script, and that included extra charges for pensioners and other concession cardholders. He also wanted cuts to the PBS safety net and the Medicare safety net. He wanted to ensure that people with chronic and complex health problems got less support.</para>
<para>But, wait, there is, in fact, actually more! The member for Dickson also began the Medicare rebate freeze. He made it more expensive to visit a specialist, allied health professional, nurse, midwife or dental surgeon. Stared down by the Senate on his genius GP tax, he decided later to extend that Medicare freeze to GP visits—a GP co-payment by stealth. That Medicare freeze still exists in form today and will endure for another two years. It has robbed more than $3 billion out of Medicare. That means it has ripped more than $3 billion out of the pockets of patients. And, as a result, out-of-pocket costs are still getting worse to this day.</para>
<para>Earlier this month, the Australian Institute For Health and Welfare finally laid bare the full extent of the health affordability crisis in this nation. Despite the Prime Minister's promise that no-one would pay more to see a doctor under this government, the report shows Australians are now spending nearly $30 billion a year on out-of-pocket expenses and that includes $3 billion in non-hospital Medicare subsidised services. Half of all patients have incurred out-of-pocket costs to see a GP or specialist or to have blood tests, X-rays or other scans. Seventy per cent of patients seeing specialists made some out-of-pocket payments, and more than a million people spent $600 or more on medical gap fees. As a result of these soaring costs, 1.3 million Australians are either delaying or skipping seeing a doctor or getting a test when they need it, putting their wellbeing and, possibly, even their lives at risk.</para>
<para>Despite all of this, the government has done absolutely nothing when it comes to out-of-pocket costs. The member for Dickson also abolished Health Workforce Australia, which was tasked with ensuring that the health workforce had appropriate skills and training. He abolished the Australian National Preventive Health Agency. He took the axe to, generally, every prevention program that there was federally, cutting millions of dollars from measures put in place to prevent cancer and to tackle obesity, problem drinking and smoking. There were massive cuts to dental funding, diagnostic imaging and ophthalmology and the destruction of Labor's Medicare Locals system. There was no corner of the health system that the member for Dickson did not take an axe to. Not including the cuts to hospitals, he cut $10.4 billion from our health system in a single budget.</para>
<para>Let's not forget this chestnut in the 2014 budget: the market testing of the payment system for health services by commercial payment service providers. That's a fancy way of saying that, in fact, the member for Dickson wanted to sell off the Medicare payment system. It was his idea. He wanted to start the process of privatising Medicare. It's there in black and white in the budget papers. He was an absolute disaster when it came to being a health minister of this nation, yet 35 members on the government side of the House decided that he would make a better Prime Minister. It tells you everything about the Liberal Party and what they think of health and what they think of the Prime Minister that they think he would do a better job. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If you can't manage the economy, you can't manage health. The member opposite talked about what was black and white in the budget papers. Well, it is all there in black and white in the budget papers for 2011-12—the link between the economy and health and the ability to manage it. Again, in the 2011-12 portfolio budget statement, under the previous Labor government, it says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… given the current fiscal environment, the listing of some medicines would be deferred until fiscal circumstances permit.</para></quote>
<para>They couldn't manage the economy and they couldn't manage health. Those medicines were for asthma, COPD, deep vein thrombosis, endometriosis, IVF and schizophrenia, amongst others.</para>
<para>I've been doing a little bit more research about the response at that time and what is interesting is that the Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee held an inquiry into this decision of the last Labor government. What they found, at page 90, was that it:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… represents unacceptable cost-shifting to patients who can least afford to bear an increased financial burden.</para></quote>
<para>They also said, at page 87:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This profound and ill-considered change in policy puts at risk affordable access to medicines for Australians, and will have significant consequences for the pharmaceutical sector, including research and development.</para></quote>
<para>But it's more than just that. Submissions came from some of the most reputable organisations in the country, including SANE Australia. Their submission said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The decision to defer the recommendation of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Council (PBAC) to list medications jeopardises the integrity of the PBS process.</para></quote>
<para>Diabetes Australia said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… we see the decision to delay listing of drugs which have been through the PBAC process as poor policy …</para></quote>
<para>The Consumers Health Forum of Australia said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Consumer concerns about the changes to the PBS listing process can be broadly summarised as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. Delays in access to essential medicines</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2. Lack of transparency in the new process</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3. Politicisation of PBS listing process</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4. Lack of consideration of other healthcare costs likely to arise as a result of consumers not having access to essential medicines.</para></quote>
<para>And then the AMA said, which perhaps sums it up perfectly:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Denying access to medicines that are proven to be both clinically useful and cost-effective is a crude and blunt instrument to attempt to control PBS outlays.</para></quote>
<para>That is what the experts said, that is what the medical groups said, that is what the community groups said and that is what the mental health groups said in response to the inability of the previous government—a Labor government—when they were in power, to manage the economy, which, in turn, meant they could not manage health. That is fundamental. It is the exemplar of everything that is wrong with Labor when they seek to govern.</para>
<para>More than that, let's look at the record of what we've achieved compared with the previous government: record hospital funding, record bulk-billing levels, record Medicare funding and record mental health funding. Let us go through each of those. Hospital funding is up over 50 per cent from when Labor was last in power. I just want to repeat that—up over 50 per cent, from $13.3 billion in their last full year to $21 billion this year, to $22 billion next year, to $23 billion and to $24 billion in the third and fourth years of the budgets. And that means more services, more access to doctors and more access to nurses—so an over-50 per cent increase. So, when they make their claims, just check the budget papers because, when we check their budget papers, we see them denying essential medicines. But when we check our budget papers, we see an over-50 per cent increase in actual hospital funding. That's the reality. That's the truth. That is the undeniable fact, and that is what is actually occurring as a result of good economic management.</para>
<para>In addition to that, though, Medicare funding is increasing to record levels each year, every year, under this government. What we see is that we have gone from $19.5 billion under Labor to $25 billion this year, to $26 billion next year, to $27 billion in the third year and to $29 billion in the final year of the budget papers. So there's a massive increase of approximately $10 billion from Labor's last year to the end of the forward estimates within the budget period.</para>
<para>We've also seen, again, new listings on the MBS. There are new items for 3D mammography for breast cancer, new items for men's prostate cancer and new items for remote and Indigenous renal treatment—important steps forward, delivering real benefits to patients that actually make a difference to their lives. That's what's occurring when you've got a strong economy based on real jobs growth; you can actually lead and see the benefits in health.</para>
<para>More than that, though, we see bulk-billing, and what we've just seen are the highest bulk-billing figures on record—86.1 per cent, up from 82.2 per cent under Labor. So that's nearly a four per cent increase from when Labor was last in power to what bulk-billing is now. It's 3.9 per cent up, nearly four per cent, at 86.1 per cent. It's the first time in Australian history that bulk-billing has reached an 86 per cent level. That means that 86 out of every 100 times that people go to the GP, they go for free—they don't pay a cent to attend that service—and that's an important outcome for Australians. It's important in terms of access and it's important in terms of the ability to seek treatment. What we have also seen since 2011 is a 39 per cent decrease in terms of the rate of people delaying access to GPs. We want to drive that down further. But what we have seen is a 39 per cent decrease from 2011, based on ABS figures, compared with what it was under Labor.</para>
<para>There is a very important additional element here—that is, what we also see is that Labor has a proposal to rip the rebate away from all of the low-cost policies under private health insurance. They're not proposing a cap for private health insurance costs. They're proposing a 16 per cent increase because, if you take the rebate away, what you see is a massive impact on pensioners and low-income earners. And they talk about out-of-pocket costs. What will occur then is a major hit on out-of-pocket costs—not just according to us, but according to Members Health, according to Private Healthcare Australia and, in particular, according to the Queensland Teachers' Union's health fund. So these are not our views, although we agree with them. These are the views of the experts in the space, including some groups that are deeply aligned with the Labor Party.</para>
<para>You would see two things occur. The cost of private health insurance would soar under Labor, because Labor hate private health insurance, as we see from their record—they slashed the rebate last time. But also out-of-pockets would go up because, when you are driving up the cost of private health insurance, the insurers will seek to make savings elsewhere, and that means that there would have to be a reduction in the services that they offer, and that means an increase in out-of-pocket costs. So it's the patient who suffers. It's the patient who would be worse off under Labor. And it was the patient who suffered and was worse off under them last time, when they had private health insurance increases which hovered around the six per cent mark every year. By contrast, through reform that has changed the cost base for private health insurance, we have just delivered the lowest private health insurance change in 17 years. But we are working to drive that down further.</para>
<para>These are real reforms which have made a difference, in terms of record funding for hospitals, record funding for Medicare, new services from Medicare and new drug listings. On the latest figures, over 1,800 new or amended drug listings have been made since we came to government. That compares with what Labor did when they couldn't manage the economy, when they couldn't manage the budget, when they made the country suffer the consequences of their fiscal incompetence: they withheld new medicines for DVT, endometriosis, IVF, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, severe asthma and schizophrenia. When you do that, that shows you can't manage health, you can't manage the economy and you don't ever deserve to be back in government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a bit rich for the Minister for Health and Aged Care to give Labor a lecture on management when he can't even manage the My Health Record rollout. It has turned into an absolute debacle.</para>
<para>Whichever way one turns under this government, currently led by the member for Wentworth, Australians are paying more and waiting longer for essential health services. Billions of dollars have been cut in funding to our hospitals. Three billion dollars have been cut in the last six years because of the Medicare freeze. There has been a 27 per cent increase in private health insurance costs. It's an atrocious record on health, led by the current Prime Minister; a former Prime Minister; a would-be Prime Minister, the member for Dickson; and a would-be Deputy Prime Minister, the member for Flinders.</para>
<para>With to respect hospitals, $57 billion was cut when this government first came to office. Seven hundred and fifteen million dollars will be cut between 2017 and 2020, and that means a cut of $31 million for the state I represent, South Australia. Between 2019 and 2025 the cut will be $2.8 billion. What does that mean? It means longer waiting times for emergency treatment, longer waiting times for elective surgery and shorter recovery times in hospital for patients. Only on Monday of this week the front page of the Adelaide<inline font-style="italic"> Advertiser</inline> said: 'Frustrated paramedics' stress soars over ramping bottlenecks'. The article refers to three stress related incidents a week across Adelaide's major hospitals because of ramping, where ambos and patients wait for hours in hospital corridors, all because of the cuts to our hospital system.</para>
<para>With respect to private health insurance, there has been a 27 per cent increase under this government. Some 40 per cent of all policies now have exclusions, so people are not only paying nearly $1,000 a year more for their private health insurance but they're actually getting less, and, not surprisingly, more and more people are dropping out of private health insurance because they simply cannot afford it. Then what happens? More and more people end up in our public hospitals because they go there for treatment, or they simply don't take up treatment at all. That in turn means that their health deteriorates and, ultimately, the costs of caring for them escalate.</para>
<para>With respect to the Medicare freeze, GP visits are now up to about $38 on average. For specialists it's $88. In 2016, 1.7 million Australians skipped a specialist visit, another 1.7 million Australians did not fill their pharmaceutical script, one million skipped or avoided a GP visit and 1,830 personal bankruptcies in Australia were attributed to health costs because of this government's cuts. More recently, we saw the AMA put out a survey that showed one in three doctors will cut back or cut out their visits to aged-care centres. Aged-care centres look after some 235,000 Australians every year. If the doctors don't go there, they ultimately end up in the hospital ED departments where it costs even more. That happens at a time when we know more and more people are ending up in aged-care facilities because of our ageing population.</para>
<para>When health costs increase across the country it's the most vulnerable who are hit the hardest, particularly country folk. Country folk are already faced with higher levels of chronic ill-health, a shortage of health professionals and higher costs in accessing the health care they need. These are communities that are already seriously disadvantaged when it comes to healthcare services. This government's tenure has made their access to health care more costly and more difficult, and these are communities that are primarily represented by members of the government.</para>
<para>This is a time when Australia's health needs are greater than ever before. We know dementia rates in this country are rising and it won't be long before about a million people in this country have a dementia related illness. We know mental health issues affect so many people across the country and, again, it's an increasing problem. We know Australians are ageing. We know obesity rates are increasing, with about one in four Australians already obese and nearly two-thirds of Australians overweight.</para>
<para>Our health system needs more support not less. Yet what we're seeing from this government, from one minister after another, is cuts to the health system, passing the buck onto the patient or the states, leading, ultimately, to a deteriorating health service. It is time this government understood that, when it comes to the priorities of the Australian people, health and education are first and foremost. They should respond by supporting the health system of Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GILLESPIE</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Here we go again. The usual lies. Everyone's used to seeing mist cleared from the eyes of confused people, from the 'Mediscare' campaign of the last election. But the propaganda that keeps coming out of the other side about cuts to health is starting to be just repeated lies. Like those masters of propaganda, if you keep saying a lie often enough people start believing it—even the people who are telling the lie. And that's where they're going with this argument.</para>
<para>You've just got to look at the budget papers. There was $13.3 billion spent by the federal government in 2013-14. Now it will be $22.7 billion in 2021, as of the last budget papers. At the moment, we're over a 50 per cent increase by the end of the forward estimates. In these budget papers the increase will be 70 per cent. In the latest hospital agreement the increase goes up to $30.2 billion. I will reiterate that: $13.3 billion in 2013; $22.7 billion in 2021. That is a 70 per cent increase. That is not a cut.</para>
<para>Look at the PBS. One of the best initiatives is from the Minister for Health who has organised savings on the old drugs to guarantee extra funds to get the new drugs onto the PBS. Since the coalition government has been responsible for the health portfolio, since 2013, we have had 1,870 new medicines listed on the PBS. That's about 31 a month: one a day.</para>
<para>We have from a Senate inquiry in 2011 all the things the Minister for Health mentioned. Former Minister Roxon admitted that they took drugs off recommendations from the PBAC and didn't list them. They were drugs for schizophrenia, IVF, deep vein thrombosis, asthma and COPD. All the records were delayed. They did it because they couldn't manage the economy. They didn't have the funds to pay for it. Past behaviour reflects future behaviour. They froze the rebate for health insurance. Back in March, the member for McMahon, the opposition Treasury spokesman, was meeting with health funds, saying they're going to freeze it again—at least $2 billion extra in costs for people holding health insurance. There are 13½ million people in this country holding health insurance, and 6½ million of them, many of them pensioners, only earn $40,000. Health insurance is such an important arm of our health system, and they want to increase the cost to make it unaffordable.</para>
<para>We've made it much more affordable for young people to hold health insurance, because we've given the 18- to 29-year-olds a 10 per cent discount. We've changed the regulations to allow people, if they haven't got mental health cover, to upgrade to mental health cover without a waiting period. We've increased a whole lot of initiatives in mental health—extra funds for mental health, for regional people to get mental health by telemedicine and for psychological counselling by telemedicine.</para>
<para>We've had so many great initiatives. You've just got to look at the record funding for medical research, the Medical Research Future Fund and the National Medical Industry Growth Plan—that's another $1½ billion on top of the Medical Research Future Fund. There is $2½ billion at least that's going into direct medical research through the NHMRC funding, on top of the Medical Research Future Fund, and then on top of that the Medical Industry Growth Plan. We have got extra funds for vaccinations for children and mothers for whooping cough and meningococcal disease, and that is why it is so important.</para>
<para>Everywhere you turn there are funding increases. We have made health insurance simpler and more understandable. There were so many complex offers there in the market that we simplified it. In mental health, as I mentioned, former minister Fiona Nash, the former Minister for Rural Health, initiated extra funding for mental health in remote Australia. We have got extra funds for immunisation and for drug treatment and prevention. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBRIDE</name>
    <name.id>248353</name.id>
    <electorate>Dobell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It has been really difficult sitting here in the chamber listening to the doublespeak on the other side. I'm here as a hospital pharmacist and a mental health worker, and I just want to call out this claim about patients not being able to get medication over this delay in listing. I worked in mental health units in our public hospital at the time. No patient missed out on medication. Those medications were available under the patient familiarisation scheme because the medications were TGA listed. Not a single patient in our mental health service missed out on medications during that period, and I think that needs to be put on the record. This doublespeak is misleading the community and the public about access to medications.</para>
<para>If those opposite want to talk about access to medications, what about the problems we have in continuity of access to medications because of the delays in access because of manufacturing problems? That's a real access problem that we have in Australia at the moment.</para>
<para>The health of Australians should be the No. 1 priority of this government, and yet what has it done? It has just cut. Five years of cuts are what has happened to health in our hospitals. The cost of health care is growing, and the system is under strain. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report has finally revealed the full extent of the crisis. Despite this government's promise that no-one would pay more to see a doctor, the report shows that Australians are spending nearly $30 billion on out-of-pocket health expenses every year. In communities like mine, that's not affordable. As a community pharmacist, I've had people come to me and say: 'Which script should I not fill? Which one can I go without? Can I go without my cholesterol medication, or can I go without my hypertension medication? Which one?' That's not a choice that anybody should have to make in Australia today.</para>
<para>These cuts include $3 billion a year in non-hospital Medicare-subsidised services. Half of all patients have incurred out-of-pocket costs to see a GP or a specialist or to have a blood test, an X-ray or other scans. Seventy per cent of patients seeing specialists made some out-of-pocket payment, and more than a million people spent $600 or more on medical gap fees. That is not affordable. That's putting the health of everyday Australians at risk, particularly those in regional and rural communities. And 1.3 million people are delaying or skipping seeing a doctor or getting a test when they need it, putting their health at risk.</para>
<para>The report exposed the bulk-billing doublespeak of the health minister. The data reveals that only 66 per cent of patients are bulk-billed by their GP, not the 86 per cent the minister has claimed over and over again. The Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association now confirms the figures cited by the minister are misleading. Despite this, the government have said 'Medicare has never been stronger' and their commitment to it is 'rock solid'. Perhaps it's like the 'rock-solid commitment' they have to the current Prime Minister. Yet they will not fully lift the Medicare freeze, with some elements staying in place for another two years. Two years is too long for people who are already out of pocket and whose health is at risk because of the costs of care.</para>
<para>Labor created Medicare, Labor created the PBS and only Labor will make sure that all Australians can access the health care that they need when they need it. In my community on the Central Coast of New South Wales, health care really matters. One in five of us is under 15, and one in five of us is aged over 65. The young and the old in our communities have the biggest health needs. What is our government's answer? This government has walked away from its commitment to the states to fifty-fifty fund public hospitals. In real terms that is a cut of $2.8 billion.</para>
<para>I'll give you a real-life example of what these cuts mean. How did the New South Wales government respond? It was by putting five public hospitals on the market and by threatening to sell public hospitals, to privatise them. But what did our community do? Our community stood up. We stood up for our community hospital and we stopped it being privatised. And my community will stand up again. They'll stand up against these cuts.</para>
<para>It is absolutely outrageous what this government has done to public hospitals and health care. I challenge anybody to walk into a public hospital, particularly into a mental healthcare unit, and tell me in good conscience—genuinely—they are properly funded. Tell me that.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Pasin</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Come to the Sunshine Coast.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBRIDE</name>
    <name.id>248353</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Pork-barrelling, is it? Anyone who is waiting for elective surgery or who is waiting to be assessed by a mental health team, anyone who has been to a doctor or specialist and has been hit with a big bill, anyone who has skipped filling a prescription, anybody who has missed an appointment because they can't afford it—do you know where they end up? They end up in the emergency departments of our public hospitals at the end of a queue. That's where this ends up, with people sicker and in emergency departments. This government's record on health is absolutely appalling. It's time for a change in attitude to health. It's time for a change of government now.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I was going to give a speech simply dismissing the absurdity of this policy motion, but the interjections by the previous speaker cannot go ignored. She went out and promoted a series of untruths about hospital funding in this country, and when a member on this side of the chamber stood up and said, 'Actually, we do have well-funded hospitals in the area and the community that I represent,' the response was, 'Pork-barrelling, is it?' This is the fundamental flaw of everything that sits at the heart of what this opposition stand for. When they disagree, they dismiss or ignore, but the facts and the evidence show them up for the political frauds that they are. It needs to be called out by people on this side of the chamber, because if this motion were put to the parliament as simply a form of wording members would be accused of misleading the parliament. It doesn't make it more true by putting it in a motion and putting it to the parliament.</para>
<para>As the Minister for Health outlined in his remarks in addressing and responding to this ridiculous motion, if you do not—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member will be seated for a second. The member for Bass on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hart</name>
    <name.id>263070</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I just wanted to be sure that the member's microphone was working because he was certainly yelling—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member will be seated.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the interjection, Deputy Speaker, because I can assure you I need the microphone. As the Minister for Health said previously in the opening of his remarks, 'Without a strong economy you cannot have a strong health system.' This is nakedly obvious to the people on this side of the chamber. But the point isn't that it's supposed to just be a health system. We don't have a strong economy simply to deliver a health system. We have a health system because it is designed to deliver for Australians, to improve the standard of their care, to improve the standard of their welfare and to make sure that, through people's lived experience, when they need assistance and when they need support, particularly in times of vulnerability, the system is there to provide for them. Because that's whom we, the coalition, are for. We're here for people.</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Hill interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Bruce is in his wrong place and will be removed if he interjects again.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The foundations of this motion are based on a falsehood. We know that, under this government, funding has gone up considerably, from $13.3 billion in 2013-14 to a record $22.7 billion in 2020-21. It's an increase. It's kind of more than a little bit of an increase in nominal terms. In fact, it's about a 70 per cent increase in funding. So the very basis of this motion is a falsehood.</para>
<para>We know that, yes, we are moving and adjusting our spending in line with the lived experience of Australians. We have an ageing population. People consume more of their healthcare expenses in the latter stages of their life, and we need to make sure that we care for people in that moment of vulnerability. That's what's been shown up in bulk-billing rates. We have had an increase from 82.2 per cent, the last time the opposition was in government, to 86.1 per cent in the first quarter of 2018. That's quite a significant increase as well. So there has been an increase in bulk-billing rates, we are matching the funding and we are putting the best interests of Australians first. These are all foreign concepts to the opposition.</para>
<para>What we're doing also is backing Australians to take care of themselves. Imagine that! The very foundation of Liberal policy should always be that people who can stand on their own two feet should do so, not just so they can take care of themselves and not be a burden on others but, more critically, so they're in the best situation to help others. What do we have as part of our policy? We have an active encouragement and incentivisation for young Australians to take up private health insurance so they can take care of themselves.</para>
<para>That's the sort of thing that most governments would be fundamentally proud of. In fact, even if oppositions had introduced such policies and wanted to defend them, they would traditionally be proud of them—but not those opposite. Instead, they simply confect outrage because their interest is the politics of health rather than the human outcomes of health. You can say that, in every minute of every hour of every day of this Turnbull Liberal government, we will stand for Australians and by Australians and their health care.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I've worked at the coalface of health care for many, many years, and one thing I know is that the Liberal Party just does not understand public health policy. I rise today to speak on this matter of public importance to highlight the coalition government's track record of cutting health over the past five years. It doesn't matter whether the Prime Minister, at the end of the day, is the member for Wentworth, the member for Warringah, the member for Dickson or even the member for Curtin; the track record of this Liberal-National party government speaks for itself. Every member opposite has been content with the slashing and burning of health over the past half-decade. Sadly, I do not see that a change of leadership is going to change the outcome. Health, education, the environment and the cost of living—these are the issues that we should be speaking about in this incredibly beautiful building. We should not be bickering, talking about ourselves and engaging in egocentric political games—that is not for the betterment of the Australian people.</para>
<para>I'm happy to speak on today's matter of public importance because it is so important to me and it is so important to the Australian people. We are rapidly developing a two-tier health system where the quality of your health care depends on the size of your wallet, and some of the poorest people are having enormous difficulty accessing health care. I've just received a letter from an eminent colleague of mine, Professor John Corbett, who is a very well regarded neurologist from Brisbane. I'll read out the beginning of his letter to me: 'After providing bulk-billed specialist EEG services for over 20 years, I've recently been forced to cease providing these services due to the freeze of Medicare rebates which has been in place since 2012 and will remain in place until July 2020, a total of eight years. It's now impossible to provide EEG services to my patients on a bulk-billing basis any longer. I'll have to cease bulk-billing. This will lead to increased patient costs. It will also lead to increased public hospital waiting lists.'</para>
<para>Just for the information of members opposite, an EEG is a very important neurological investigation done mainly for conditions like epilepsy. It's very important. Often people who suffer from epilepsy have other neurological disorders. They often have difficulty with employment et cetera. They are now going to face huge public hospital waiting lists or increased patient costs. This is just not acceptable to me.</para>
<para>This is the real coalface of health care. This is something that the Liberal-National Party just does not understand. I understand why: many of them have high incomes and good health and don't have to access health care. For many people in my electorate of Macarthur these increased gap costs are prohibitive and they just cannot get care. Those opposite, who have been intent on talking about themselves and dragging the national agenda and public debate down with them, do not really understand health care and do not understand what the Australian people want. We all need a strong Medicare, properly funded hospitals and fewer out-of-pocket expenses for the average Australian.</para>
<para>The average Macarthur resident couldn't care less who is the Leader of the Liberal Party. They just want this incompetent and out-of-touch government kicked out of office. The government are most incompetent in their attitudes to health care. In government, the coalition have slashed health funding. Tony Abbott did it when he was at the helm and Malcolm Turnbull has continued on this legacy. God forbid the member for Dickson becomes the Prime Minister. We know what he did to the healthcare system. He was instrumental in providing the health cuts in the 2014 budget. It was a disaster and absolutely shocking.</para>
<para>My particular interest at the moment is the electronic health records. I see this as a very important way of reducing health costs and providing better health care for all Australians, from children through to those in aged care. This government's rollout of electronic health records has been a total disaster, a total debacle and a complete shambles. It is just a disaster. This government's record on health care speaks for itself. Let me be clear: each member opposite wants to lock in the health cuts and wants to continue with this American-style, two-tier health system and make the poorest of our community struggle with health care. It's a shame. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FLINT</name>
    <name.id>245550</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am pleased to speak in this matter of public importance debate today because I am proud of our government's record on health. I congratulate the Minister for Health and the Minister for Aged Care on their incredible work in this portfolio. They are doing an excellent job of listening to what the Australian people need. Like the ministers, I'm also listening to my community and my local residents as to what they need on health. Because we are listening I worked very closely with the Minister for Health to see the delivery of a national action plan and, so far, more than $4.7 million of federal funding towards endometriosis. Minister Wyatt joined me in my electorate to listen to senior members of my community talk about the issues that are most important to them, and we are working with them as well to deliver in the aged-care space.</para>
<para>It is unsurprising that those opposite want to talk down our contribution to health, but our record speaks for itself. We are achieving record funding for our healthcare system in Australia. In the 2018-19 budget we announced a $2.4 billion investment for new medicines to be listed on the PBS, including $1 billion set aside for the provision of future medicines. In fact, since coming to government we have listed, on average, one new medicine per day. These are often lifesaving medications. So far we've had an overall investment of $9 billion, which is a very significant investment.</para>
<para>Federal funding for public hospitals under the coalition has increased from $13.3 billion in 2013-14 to a record $22.7 billion in 2020-21. This is a 70 per cent increase. Under a new national hospitals agreement, the government has committed an additional $30.2 billion in public hospital funding from 2020-21 to 2024-25, taking overall funding during this period to $130 billion. This means more hospital services, more doctors, more nurses and increased funding every year for every state and territory. This is what responsible governments do.</para>
<para>In stark comparison, those opposite have a terrible track record on health both at the state and federal levels. Nobody knows this better than I do, because I come from the state of South Australia where we saw the state Labor government make one of the most disgraceful decisions of their 16 years in government when they decided to shut down the iconic Repat Hospital. This was devastating to veterans not just in my community but across South Australia.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Burney</name>
    <name.id>8GH</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Take your hand off your heart!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FLINT</name>
    <name.id>245550</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>If the member opposite actually cared to do a quick google on this issue, she would realise how devastating it was to these veterans, particularly our Vietnam veterans, to have this hospital shut down. It was also devastating to the senior members of my community, who regularly used this hospital, and to so many people whose loved ones had passed away in the hospice over decades. It's a much-loved hospital, which is why I worked so hard with the now member for Elder, the member for Waite, the minister for health and the now premier, Steven Marshall, to see the state Liberal government commit to reactivate and reopen the Repat.</para>
<para>I'm so proud that the now South Australian Liberal government committed to reopening operating theatres to reduce elective surgery waiting times, and to reopening the hydrotherapy pool, which has already happened, for veterans in my community to be able to use. They committed to using Ward 18 as an older persons' mental health facility to care for those people who suffered so badly at Oakden, under the disgraceful treatment by the previous state Labor government, and they also committed to building a new older persons' mental health facility.</para>
<para>The Marshall Liberal government have consulted with health professionals as to what else they can do with this wonderful, iconic community hospital site. Last week they commenced community consultation to find out what other services my local residents would like to see reopened on the site. I would encourage all of the members of my local community to have their say as to what they would like to see returned to the Repat site. They have until 16 September to provide submissions on the future of the site. Following this consultation, the state Liberal government will collate all of the feedback and release a final master plan by the end of the year. This is what Liberal governments do. We govern responsibly, we keep community health services where they need to be and we listen to our community. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KEARNEY</name>
    <name.id>LTU</name.id>
    <electorate>Batman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this very important matter of public importance. Do you know, I was a nurse for 20 years. I worked in both the public and the private sectors, and I have a very good understanding of what it is to work in a well-funded public health system and in one that has been devastated by funding cuts. I worked in Victoria during the Kennett years. The Jeff Kennett cuts were devastating. They slashed, burned and cut the public health system to critical, low levels. Thousands of nurses left through forced redundancies. Many left through overwork—they simply could not cope with the cuts in that system.</para>
<para>I know what it's like to have to scrounge for pillows. I know what it's like to hide surgical tape in your pockets for fear of there not being any stock when you go to the cupboard. I know what it's like when waiting lists are so long that ambulances line up outside the hospital. I know what it's like to have to see patients frustrated by sitting for hours in waiting rooms at outpatient clinics.</para>
<para>I was at the ACTU when Campbell Newman, the then Premier of Queensland, nearly destroyed the public health sector in Queensland. I was there with nurses and saw the looks on their faces when those white slips appeared in their pigeonholes telling them that they had been earmarked for a redundancy. I know what it was like in Far North Queensland when regional hospitals had to tell their patients that they could no longer afford to fund a cardiac rehabilitation unit and that patients, post-surgery, had to travel 50 kilometres for their check-ups. Do you know what happens when people are told that they have to travel as far as 50 kilometres for appointments? They don't go, they don't do it, and their conditions exacerbate. They rebound back into hospital or worse.</para>
<para>Let's face it: the Liberal Party hates the concept of public health. It goes against its free market, trickle-down economic philosophy. 'If you are sick, bad luck. If you can't pay for health care, you miss out. If health care isn't creating a profit for some multinational enterprise then we don't want it'—and so it goes with this government and, I'm afraid, with its potential new leader, Peter Dutton. He hates public health care as much as Newman and Kennett did. We've heard already how he's been deemed the worst health minister in 35 years—worse than Tony Abbott—cutting billions from hospitals; wanting to dismantle our universal health care system, our beloved Medicare; increasing the burden of prescription costs for all Australians by attacking our PBS safety net; Medicare freezes; introducing co-payments for GPs; and tearing up the National Health Reform Agreement. Undermining our public healthcare system is in the Liberals' DNA. Add to this litany the fact that with the current health minister, Greg Hunt, his only focus is on supporting his mates in the private health insurance industry and plotting with Peter Dutton to run a ticket against our Prime Minister.</para>
<para>Do Greg Hunt and Peter Dutton have any idea of the impact of funding cuts? They are forcing services to choose which services they will cut—will it be the Indigenous community health service, diabetic nurses or geriatric psychiatric services?—and forcing nurses to make impossible decisions because of funding cuts and not enough staff. Do they understand what it's like to have to decide between walking an elderly patient for their much-needed physio and starting a complex dressing that takes a long time so they can finish it before their shift ends? They might do both, in which case they will work unpaid overtime. We already have a health system that relies on nurses working for free. They have to make decisions like: 'Do I let a sick child sit for two more hours in the emergency department or do I leave a worker with a burn injury or in pain in the waiting room? Do I sit and feed a patient who has had a stroke or do I leave an incontinent patient in a wet bed?' I know what it's like to have to make these decisions, but Peter Dutton and Greg Hunt don't know because they won't try to find out. They don't care. Cutting $57 billion from public hospitals means that our health professionals have to make these hard decisions and more. They want to cut another $2.8 billion from our health system.</para>
<para>I am proud to say that Labor know what it's like. We have health professionals who know what it's like to work in our public health system. We know what it means to have to make these decisions. We know the difference between working in a well-funded health sector and a sector that has had savage cuts from health ministers who simply don't care. Labor will invest in our health system, we will invest in our healthcare professionals and we will keep our communities healthy.</para>
<para class="italic">Dr Aly interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Cowan will remove herself under 94(a).</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Cowan then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALEXANDER</name>
    <name.id>M3M</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would genuinely like to thank the members opposite for raising this matter of public importance. Of course health is one of the most important matters for the public, which is why I'm so proud to speak to our record today. I'm sure you've heard of my boast that I represent Australia's capital of innovation. A huge portion of this innovation comes from the pharmaceutical industry, much of which is based in Macquarie Park, or Pill Hill, as it's known. These include, but are not limited to, companies like Novartis, with Kisquali, their treatment which will help thousands of people with breast cancer; Jansen with Imbruvica, which will benefit hundreds of people with a subtype of lymphoma; Amgen's drug Neulasta, which helps the body cope with the debilitating effects of chemotherapy; Biogen with Spinraza, a life-changing medicine for those with spinal muscular atrophy; and MSD's treatment Keytruda, which is a game-changer in the way it uses the body's own immune system to fight cancers.</para>
<para>It is all well and good to have companies designing, creating and providing these drugs, but they don't cure one condition or help one person if they can't be accessed by patients who depend on them. That, I am pleased to say, is where this government comes in. Since coming into government the coalition has listed over 1,870 medicines, which equates to an average of one new medicine a day, on the PBS, worth approximately $9.3 billion. In this budget, $2.4 billion has been invested in new medicines, including $1 billion set aside for the provision of future medicines. These medicines will assist people suffering from conditions such as breast cancer, spinal muscular atrophy, heart disease, epilepsy and severe asthma. Some of these cost many thousands of dollars but are now available for $6.40 concessional or $39.50 for general patients per script.</para>
<para>Just this month the government announced it will invest $250 million to make life-changing medicines available to thousands of Australian patients. These include: 1,000 patients with a type of head and neck cancer, squamous cell carcinoma, who would otherwise pay almost $50,000 a year for Opdivo, will now have affordable access; 1,125 patients with rare types of leukaemia cancer, myeloproliferative neoplasms, who would otherwise pay more than $18,000 a year, will now benefit from the listing of Pegasys. The listing of Kisquali will save over 3,000 patients with breast cancer from having to pay $71,000 per year; 220 patients with subtype lymphoma cancer, relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma, will benefit from the listing of Imbruvica as patients would otherwise pay $134,000 a year for this treatment; 1,500 patients who are receiving chemotherapy for cancer will benefit from Neulasta, which will help the body to make neutrophils, a type of white blood cell, saving patients over $4,500 per course of treatment; and there is $241.3 million for Spinraza, a life-changing medicine which treats the devastating illness spinal muscular atrophy, and, without the subsidy, patients would pay more than $367,850 per year.</para>
<para>This record investment in drugs and medicines is only possible because of the arrangements made by this minister with Medicines Australia. These agreements brought certainty to the market, which has brought the industry and government together to help all Australians access more medicines. The PBS needs a responsible government that can afford to pay for these medicines. The Turnbull government will continue to deliver on our promise to list medicines recommended by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee without fear or favour.</para>
<para>In contrast, the last Labor government reversed the policy of the coalition to list all medicines approved by the independent PBAC. On 25 January 2011, the then Minister for Health and Ageing, Ms Nicola Roxon, announced the unprecedented deferral of the listing of seven medicines under the PBS. If it weren't for this government, millions of Australians would be without the medicines that are improving their quality of life and sometimes keeping them alive. Our record on medical listings is a source of great pride to us all. I congratulate the minister. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>74</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018, Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>74</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <p>
              <a href="r6153" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r6154" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>74</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOSH WILSON</name>
    <name.id>265970</name.id>
    <electorate>Fremantle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As I was saying earlier, it's important to see these bills in the context of the trade agreement that they enable, the PACER Plus agreement. As we do that, it's worth asking, particularly when you consider the relationship between Australia and New Zealand, and the Pacific Island nations that form this agreement with us, exactly what the benefit to the Pacific Island nations will be. And I would begin on that point by noting that Papua New Guinea and Fiji chose to stay out of PACER Plus. Together, those countries represent 80 per cent of the combined GDP of Pacific Island nations. To give you a sense of that disparity or the proportion of trade that PNG and Fiji represent, Australian exports to Papua New Guinea and Fiji are $2.8 billion. Our exports to other Pacific nations, as I understand it, are only $84 million. There was evidence before the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties when it looked at the PACER agreement, which is the foundation of the bills we are discussing here, that Papua New Guinea and Fiji chose not to be part of PACER Plus because, in their analysis and from their judgement, it was heavily skewed towards Australia and New Zealand. So as we discuss these bills it's important that we consider some of those related issues.</para>
<para>As I've already said, there is a fundamental imbalance between Australia and New Zealand and the Pacific island nations, and it appears that that imbalance did shape this agreement. I think that is a matter of some concern. I want to look at some particular aspects of PACER Plus that I think are concerning and where those concerns haven't really been resolved by the material that's been available, either in relation to these bills or in relation to the agreement as a whole. Concerns were raised in a number of areas through the JSCOT process that I referred to, and I'll mention three of them. Firstly, there was the reduction in tariff revenue for Pacific island nations; secondly, there were the health impacts of the agreement; and, finally, there was the particular impact on women.</para>
<para>As I said when I began my contribution to this debate, this doesn't remove tariffs that affect goods coming into Australia, it affects exports from Australia. Effectively, it removes tariffs that exist in Pacific island nations on goods that we export. So it costs them tariff revenue, effectively. The analysis that was provided in the consideration of PACER Plus showed that it would cost the larger nations in the Pacific at least $10 million annually, and in relation to the smaller nations it would cost as much as 10 per cent of their government revenue as a whole, which is really quite considerable.</para>
<para>Understandably, if you want to talk about health impacts, when you see that kind of reduction in revenue and that kind of reduction in government capacity you'll see a corresponding reduction in the ability to invest in health services and health infrastructure. The second health impact, which the Public Health Association of Australia highlighted, was in relation to the kinds of products that are likely to flow into the Pacific as a result of tariff reductions. The PHAA was particularly concerned about the increased availability of and lower prices for unhealthy products such as ultraprocessed food, alcohol and tobacco. I will just quote from the material that they provided as part of their submission to the JSCOT:</para>
<quote><para class="block">There is a substantial body of evidence indicating that reduction of tariffs and other 'barriers to trade' in food products can lead to increased availability and lower prices of unhealthy foods, and can affect household food security … The PACER Plus tariff schedules indicate that some Pacific island countries have made commitments to reduce or eliminate tariffs on tobacco products, alcoholic beverages and a variety of processed foods.</para></quote>
<para>So that is one of the possible deleterious impacts of the PACER Plus agreement.</para>
<para>Finally, there was evidence that pointed to the impact of these agreements on women in the Pacific. Again, if you reduce government revenue and the capacity to deliver social services, that does tend to affect women and children disproportionately. And if you have the health impacts that I've just mentioned, they also affect women and children disproportionately. But there are some specific impacts on women that have been identified, particularly by ActionAid Australia, who make the point that women who do paid work in the Pacific islands are concentrated in industries that are likely to be impacted by PACER Plus. Those include agricultural production, clothing, manufacturing and retail. In their submission, they made the following point:</para>
<quote><para class="block">ActionAid is concerned that in its current form, the PACER plus agreement poses a significant risk to women's rights and economic empowerment in the Pacific, and as such is inconsistent with the Australian Government's commitment to gender equality. In particular, PACER plus is anticipated to lead to an erosion of public services, loss of sustainable livelihoods, and adverse health impacts in Pacific Island countries, all of which will disproportionately affect women, and their social and economic empowerment.</para></quote>
<para>What the Pacific islands were particularly interested in when PACER was being considered were the provisions that went to the question of labour mobility. Pacific island nations would obviously like to have the opportunity for their citizens to find work in the region, including in Australia. Remittances from that work is an important source of revenue for Pacific island nations. Unfortunately, the labour mobility piece, if you like, is not included in PACER Plus as a whole but is consigned to a less-than-treaty-status agreement. There were concerns expressed that those kinds of provisions and commitments were far less certain and far less valuable than the tariff reductions and other things that were made plain in PACER Plus.</para>
<para>There's no doubt that, while we make the changes that these two bills, the customs amendment bills, put in place, they are relatively minor in their impact. They really just take care of some sort of technical customs niceties from our side of the arrangement. The PACER Plus agreement as a whole is a relatively significant agreement. The tariffs phase in over a relatively long time. That's probably something to be grateful for. It does leave open, though, the question of just how genuinely beneficial PACER will be to our Pacific islands brothers and sisters. I note that we have allocated official development assistance funds, foreign aid effectively, to help Pacific island nations implement PACER Plus. That puts this agreement squarely in the aid-for-trade—or vice versa—frame, if you like, and I think there are question marks over that approach. There is some irony in providing aid funding to countries to implement trade agreements where the vast proportion of the benefits of those agreements come to the donor country.</para>
<para>The reason it's hard to be sure about PACER Plus is that Australia didn't commission a thorough and independent economic impact analysis. The shadow minister spoke earlier about that failing and our current approach to trade agreements generally. There have been numerous committee reports over the last five years—more than the last five years, actually—during the course of this government and the previous government that have recommended that all trade agreements be accompanied by an independent economic analysis. That has been recommended twice in the course of this parliament in the majority reports of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties; yet we go without the benefit of that kind of analysis.</para>
<para>It was interesting to hear in the JSCOT hearings on the PACER Plus agreement that departmental staff advised that funding had been provided to Pacific island nations for the purpose of undertaking their own economic analysis but that the results of that analysis were not required to be provided to Australia. So one can only assume that the analysis that Fiji and Papua New Guinea undertook showed them that there wasn't any great benefit in PACER Plus and that that informed their decision to not be part of it.</para>
<para>As I said earlier, the interest the Pacific island nations had was overwhelmingly in relation to labour mobility. On that point I will just point out that Matthew Dornan, the deputy director of the Development Policy Centre at the Australian National University noted that the Pacific island countries were unhappy with the outcome in PACER Plus because the agreement didn't include a binding commitment in relation to labour mobility.</para>
<para>I'll finish by saying, in general terms, that these kinds of agreements do need to be looked at carefully. They need to be looked at through the lens of our broad responsibility to our Pacific island neighbours. We don't stand on an equal footing when we negotiate these kinds of agreements. There is a vast disparity in economic power and capacity between Australia and New Zealand on the one hand and Pacific island nations on the other. I think there are elements of PACER Plus that give great cause for concern because of the fact that they essentially bring tariff benefits to Australian companies but there are no corresponding benefits for Pacific island nations. It's clear that they will receive less tariff revenue as a result and it's also likely that they will see impacts in terms of health and on women and children.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MARLES</name>
    <name.id>HWQ</name.id>
    <electorate>Corio</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in favour of the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018. In speaking on both bills, I do so as they are a step—it is probably fair enough to say a relatively small step but a step nevertheless—in a process of putting in place in this country and within the region the PACER Plus agreements, which have traversed the efforts of a number of governments in this country. We already have a largely open economy, but this is an important step forward.</para>
<para>The PACER Plus agreement is a trade agreement. It is therefore reciprocal in nature. It's a multilateral agreement which seeks to create a free trading zone within the Pacific. In that sense, what is happening now is not complete, because, as the member for Fremantle noted, it is not an agreement which covers, at this stage, Papua New Guinea and Fiji, which would be the two largest economies within the Pacific other than, of course, New Zealand and Australia. It is not principally an agreement which is about the Australian economy. No government has engaged in the PACER Plus negotiations as an exercise in trying to fundamentally expand Australian markets.</para>
<para>To put that into context, what free trade agreements we seek to negotiate as a country occur within a context of priorities around our own economic development, which is why you see trade agreements done with either large countries, large economies or countries where there is the opportunity for significant trade growth in respect of Australian exports. You would never say that in respect of the Pacific, because that's not really been the motivation for governments of either persuasion to pursue PACER Plus. Indeed, if this were only seen through the light of what it could do for the Australian economy, it would never meet the priorities test in the list of countries or regions that we would seek to do a free trade agreement with.</para>
<para>PACER Plus is an exercise of regional leadership in respect of regional development. Ultimately, PACER Plus is about playing a part in the development of the Pacific, and that is evidenced by the 'plus' component of PACER Plus, which is a reference to significant development assistance funds which go hand in hand with the trade agreement and which allow Pacific island countries to engage not only in the PACER Plus agreement itself but also in the regional and, ultimately, the global economy. And that is an important form of assistance for Pacific island countries.</para>
<para>This particular bill provides for the tariff reduction components of the PACER Plus agreement. It's in that context that I would argue that these are significant bills to pass this parliament. There is a lot of work still to be done. The member for Fremantle is absolutely right that this doesn't deal with greater access to the Australian labour market, and there is no doubt that that is a key desire of the countries of the Pacific. There is a sense of it being incomplete so long as Papua New Guinea and Fiji are not part of the PACER Plus arrangements. But it is a step in the right direction in a context where any step in the right direction in terms of the development of the Pacific needs to be celebrated.</para>
<para>The fundamental challenge of a small island state is how to bring to bear a viable economy when ultimately you're talking about small populations in very geographically remote parts of the world. That is the challenge of small island states in the Pacific—it is, in fact, the challenge of small island states globally. How to solve the problem of creating a viable economy in that context is actually far from obvious. In many respects it's a much harder problem to solve than having a viable economy in a country of 25 million people like ourselves, being on a continent. If you are a population of 100,000 people on an island in the middle of the Pacific, how you come up with a solution as to what represents a viable economy is a much harder nut to crack. In that context, Australia's place within the Pacific, by contrast, is as a country having a very large economy and, indeed, a very large labour market in comparison to the countries of the Pacific. We are relatively proximate, obviously, to the countries of the Pacific.</para>
<para>Development assistance aid is fundamentally important in the work that we as a nation do in helping the development of the countries of the Pacific. There is no question about that. We have voiced our concern about the cuts to aid that we've seen from the coalition government. A future Labor government would seek to increase the way in which we provide aid in the Pacific. It is profoundly important. But, in the same breath, I also make the point that, given the particular difficulty of trying to establish viable economies for small island states in the Pacific, and given our relatively large economy, being geographically proximate to the Pacific, access to the Australian economy and to the Australian labour market is profoundly important and actually in a different order of magnitude to development assistance in terms of what it can do for the development of the countries of the Pacific. If we as a nation are serious about the exercise of leadership within the Pacific and seeing the development of the roughly 10 million people who live in the Pacific then we have to be about trying to open up the Australian economy and the Australian labour market more to the benefit of the peoples and the economies of the Pacific. That is the single most significant thing we can do, in an economic sense, in driving economic development within the Pacific. It really deeply matters.</para>
<para>I think the labour market component of that, which the member for Fremantle referred to, is probably the most important side of that equation, particularly now. The Seasonal Worker Program is a really successful example of how providing access to a relatively small number of people from the Pacific to our economy is making such a dramatic economic difference to the countries of the Pacific. We have the privilege of seeing that in operation here in terms of companies in Australia which employ people through the seasonal worker scheme. I note the member for Kingsford Smith is here, and he has seen this as well. Also, going to the Pacific, by seeing how the money earnt in Australia is put to beneficial use in villages throughout the Pacific, you realise the economic power and the developmental power that comes from that.</para>
<para>Opening up the Australian economy to be able to freely trade with it is also important. These bills and the PACER Plus are about that. That's principally what they're about. It is not really about trying to create and open up new markets for Australia, albeit that that occurs. The principal function, as I said at the outset, of the PACER Plus and why it has been pursued by governments of both persuasions is an attempt to provide a building block in that architecture that I've described of opening up the Australian economy and the Australian labour market to the countries of the Pacific, which is so deeply important for them. To do that in a meaningful way does require providing development assistance so that companies in the Pacific may be able to export into Australia—and, again, the member for Kingsford Smith and I have both seen firsthand many companies in the Pacific which have an ability to sell into Australia and indeed New Zealand. This makes a difference for them. It's actually them that ultimately this agreement is about and these bills are about.</para>
<para>We would all want bigger steps in this direction, but it is a nevertheless significant small step in this direction. I have done some work in the Pacific, as the member or Kingsford Smith has done as well. Any step in the right direction in respect of the development of the Pacific needs to be celebrated.</para>
<para>I have on many occasions been generally critical, I guess, about our nation's focus and intent—and perhaps our lack of intent—in terms of the way in which we engage with the Pacific. We're a country which has significant presence in the Pacific, to be sure—our diplomatic presence, our defence cooperation programs with the nations of the Pacific and our patrol boat program, and you could name a whole lot of other efforts that have been quite significant in terms of their presence within the Pacific—but our intent in terms of demonstrating an Australian leadership within the Pacific needs to be much greater than it is. It needs to be transformationally greater than it is.</para>
<para>To this point: it is the case that, when we speak about foreign policy and strategic policy, far too often we talk about countries other than those countries within the region where we have the greatest impact. There are 10 countries in the world which would see their primary partner on the planet as not America and not China but Australia, and yet we could walk around this building and challenge members of this House to name who those 10 countries are. That says something about the fact that we do not pay enough attention to the Pacific.</para>
<para>If you look at the most important bilateral relationship that we have in the world today, our alliance relationship with the United States—which obviously is largely characterised by the United States leading, given their size and their being a superpower—there is one area across a very broad relationship with the United States where the United States actually come to Australia and say: 'We'll do what you say. We'll follow you. We want to understand what Australian leadership is.' That space is in respect of the Pacific. In relation to our most important bilateral relationship, the Pacific is the place where we demonstrate to the United States what Australia looks like as a leader. And you can run that analysis in respect of Europe and in a different context in respect of China and indeed the world.</para>
<para>The way in which we behave in the Pacific is the single most important demonstration of Australian leadership in the world today. That's why we need to take this really seriously. The basis on which we need to take this is not seeking to have an influence over that part of the world because we can or seeking the strategic denial of others. Actually, the focus of why we need to engage in the Pacific is the 10 million inhabitants of the Pacific themselves. We need to be focused on their development, and there is significant development to be done.</para>
<para>The Pacific is that part of the world which performed the worst in respect of the Millennium Development Goals. It's a relative measure, but it means that development in the Pacific is going at a slower rate than in almost any other part of the world. On that measure, by a point in the 2020s, probably the late 2020s, the Pacific may become the least developed part of the world. That is relevant to Australia. That has something to do with us and who we are.</para>
<para>We need to change our focus so that we are absolutely focused on the development, the welfare and the prosperity of those 10 million people, because that is about how Australia looks as a leader in the world. What we have today is a small step but a step nevertheless in the right direction in respect of demonstrating that leadership, and it's because of that that I support these bills today.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THISTLETHWAITE</name>
    <name.id>182468</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingsford Smith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a pleasure to follow my friend the member for Corio, who, I think, is widely respected as one of the best parliamentary secretaries and ministers for the Pacific and who really did a lot for development and aid within the Pacific. I'm reminded of programs such as Pacific Women Shaping Pacific Development, the climate change adaptation program and all of the health, education, infrastructure and welfare programs that were put in place under the stewardship of the member for Corio when he held this ministry. He's very well respected within the Pacific and someone who I see as an expert on these matters. All of the points that he raised in his speech were spot on.</para>
<para>The Pacific is our neighbourhood. They are our greatest friends and, in many respects, we can be doing more to assist this region within our neighbourhood to ensure that we lift development and that we lift living standards. Given the wealth that Australia has, the relatively high living standards that we have and the absolute poverty and low living standards that most people in the Pacific enjoy, we do have an obligation to do our best to ensure that we're working with the nations of the Pacific to boost their development.</para>
<para>That's why Labor does support these bills that establish, finally, the PACER Plus trade agreement. In this respect, these bills give life to the changes to tariffs and to excise duties that provide that favourable nation status to those Pacific nations that are signed up to this agreement. PACER, of course, means the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations. It's been in negotiation for many years. When I was the Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Island Affairs, this agreement was being negotiated back in 2012. It's an agreement that is good for our region and will support our neighbours. It helps the Pacific island countries become more active partners in, and benefit from, the regional and global trading system.</para>
<para>PACER Plus also includes an aid component to help with the development of the region. Australia's Pacific aid for trade supports helping to increase economic growth, generate jobs and boost living standards. But it was Labor that really committed to establishing this as a foundation for our relationship with the Pacific, and it's Labor that's truly committed to rebuilding Australia's international development assistance levels to beyond what they are at the moment, particularly within our neighbourhood in the Asia-Pacific. A Shorten Labor government will commit to redeveloping Australia's international development assistance program, including in our neighbouring region in the Pacific, and increasing our aid investment to that area.</para>
<para>As our friends in the region know all too well, the Abbott and Turnbull government have slashed aid. That's resulted in approximately $12 billion being slashed from the international aid assistance budget over the course of this government. These cuts are a source of some international embarrassment for Australia, particularly within our region, given the relatively high living standards that we have compared to our Pacific neighbours. There's a clear expectation of many of those in the Pacific that Australia will take a lead in this region on supporting our neighbour's development, and our behaviour and our relationship with our Pacific neighbours is quite important to Australia's international reputation. As the member for Corio mentioned, when it comes to the Pacific, the United States, our very important defence ally, will often come to Australia and ask us our views on particular issues because they see us as the experts. It's within our region. We have traditionally played a very important partnership role with Pacific nations. In some respects, we have assisted with their defence. The pacific patrol boat scheme comes to mind. And many in the region face a range of development challenges, including small domestic markets, narrow production bases, a weak regulatory and private sector capacity, low savings and investment rates as well as high trade and business costs. They also have young fast-growing populations that need growth and jobs.</para>
<para>The Pacific, unfortunately, has performed the worst of any region when it comes to global development goals. Many of the nations in our backyard don't meet the individual goals within the global development goals, related to things like child mortality rates, levels of primary education and preventable diseases. Tuberculosis is one of the diseases that, unfortunately, is rampant throughout the Pacific. Many people die needlessly each year from a disease that should be preventable within our region. On current measures of relative development, it's possible it won't be too long before Africa overtakes the Pacific on progress towards achieving those development goals. That would mean the Pacific would be the least developed region in the world. That is why Australia has an obligation to do more to support its neighbours within the region.</para>
<para>When Labor were in government we introduced a number of programs aimed specifically at doing just that. One of the big problems within the Pacific is the shockingly high rate of domestic violence and lack of opportunities for participation of women within the economy, within society and within government. That is why Labor instituted the Pacific Women Shaping Pacific Development partnership program. It aimed at ensuring we worked with those nations to reduce levels of domestic violence but also to encourage women's participation in society.</para>
<para>I can recall visiting a domestic violence centre in the Solomon Islands. We saw it first hand and spoke to victims of domestic violence about the assistance they were getting from a community centre specifically established to help people deal with domestic violence and to take them and their children out of abusive relationships. It was Australian aid at work, making a difference to the lives of people within our region.</para>
<para>We all know that climate change is a huge problem for nations within the Pacific. Whenever I would meet with Pacific leaders I would ask them what their challenges and issues were. Climate change would always be the No. 1 issue, particularly for nations like Kiribati and Tuvalu where climate change is threatening their very existence, on islands they've inhabited for thousands of years. Wells are becoming salinised. Crops can no longer be grown in traditional areas. Sea levels are rising out of control and extreme weather events, such as cyclones, are becoming all the more frequent. Access to fresh water is becoming an issue for these nations because of climate change.</para>
<para>In Australia when we speak of climate change we see it as something that will affect us in a generation's time—something we don't have to worry about for years to come. But, if you talk to someone in the Pacific, it is affecting them now. It is an immediate threat. Unfortunately, Australia hasn't been doing enough on climate change adaptation. We certainly haven't been doing our fair share when it comes to reducing emissions within our economy and transitioning to cleaner renewable energy, to try and do our bit to reduce the impact of warming and climate change.</para>
<para>Australia should be a natural partner of choice in assisting its close neighbours in their development needs. But, unfortunately, under the Abbott and Turnbull governments—and, let's face it, whoever else is Prime Minister at the end of this week—our leadership role has been eroded in the Pacific. Labor's been warning for some time now that, under the Abbott and Turnbull governments, Australia has dropped the ball and damaged its reputation within the Pacific. Those $12 billion of cuts to the international aid budget that I mentioned earlier are part of the reason for that.</para>
<para>Earlier this year we saw New Zealand commit to a 30 per cent increase in foreign aid over four years, with the money earmarked primarily for the Pacific region. Their foreign affairs minister, Winston Peters, who is visiting Australia today and did a joint media conference with our Foreign Minister, said that the new commitment reflected New Zealand's identity as being anchored in the Pacific. He said: 'What is good for them is good for us. We all know that, if we look after each other, we're all better off, more prosperous and, therefore, more secure.' He went on to say: 'Prevention saves money. Prevention health strategies save far more taxpayer dollars downstream by tackling health problems early.'</para>
<para>Likewise, Australia has a deep interest in contributing to global poverty alleviation, and our international development program supports security and stability in our region. One obvious need in the region is greater infrastructure investment. Labor has repeatedly stated that infrastructure projects should be transparent, conform to environmental and social safeguards and not place unsustainable debt burdens on regional countries. Australia has an interest and responsibility to assist our smaller regional neighbours with projects that best meet their development needs and provide them with the maximum benefit. This is not about any other country; it is about the role Australia wants to have in our region.</para>
<para>That is why we welcome last month's announcement by Australia, the United States and Japan of a trilateral partnership to invest in infrastructure projects in the Indo-Pacific region. We do need to be much more active when it comes to infrastructure and development within our region. This economic agreement has been years in the making and is signed by most of the nations of the Pacific. It is a shame that Papua New Guinea and Fiji, two of the biggest nations of the Pacific, aren't partners to this agreement. But there is always the opportunity for them to join at a later stage. The focus of Australia, through this agreement, is on building the economic and social capacity of our dear friends in the Pacific to grow their economies, to provide great opportunities for investment in business and greater economic mobility, and ensure that we ultimately improve and boost the living standards of our nearest and dearest neighbours, our friends in the Pacific.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 implement Australia's obligations under the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus, otherwise known as PACER Plus. I note that the minister in the chair was responsible for signing the agreement. It is good to have him here as part of this debate. Australia's relationship with the Pacific island nations is a very important one. The nations of the Pacific are our neighbours and also our friends. This agreement helps to build on this, helping to tie our economies closer together. There are currently 11 signatories to this agreement: Australia, the Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. As the member for Kingsford Smith just said, hopefully more countries will join this agreement in years ahead—in particular, Papua New Guinea and Fiji.</para>
<para>This agreement will mean tariffs will be cut on 88.5 per cent of Australian exports to signatory countries, apart from New Zealand, and it will also mean that there will be no tariffs on goods imported to Australia from countries that have signed this agreement, apart from New Zealand. These bills implement that commitment. Under the agreement, we will also provide $4 million to assist Pacific island countries to prepare to ratify this agreement and $19 million to update their customs processes. I should note, though, that this doesn't make up for the more than $11 billion that this government has cut from the aid budget. As the Lowy Institute Pacific Aid Map that was released earlier this month shows, aid to Pacific island nations has been cut by a number of countries over the last four years, and other countries and organisations like the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank are moving to fill that gap.</para>
<para>It's also worthy of note that the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties gave a report to the House on this agreement. In recommending support for it, they also recommended that this agreement include—or that future trade agreements include—independent economic analysis of the merits of these agreements. This is the third time that the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties have recommended that the government conduct independent economic modelling for trade agreements. I note they did that again for a fourth time today. The committee reported today on the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, and recommendation 3 of their report is identical to the recommendation they gave in relevance to PACER Plus. I can read that for the House:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Committee recommends that the Australian Government consider implementing a process through which independent modelling and analysis of a proposed trade agreement is undertaken by the Productivity Commission, or equivalent organisation, and provided to the Committee alongside the National Interest Assessment (NIA) to improve assessment of the agreement.</para></quote>
<para>That was a unanimous recommendation of the committee, led by the Hon. Stuart Robert, who I know the minister holds in high regard. His recommendation, and the recommendation of all of the members of that committee, is worthy of serious consideration by this parliament and by this government.</para>
<para>It has also been recommended by other parliamentary committees. It has been recommended by the Harper review, by the Productivity Commission and by the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. However, unfortunately, so far it has fallen on deaf ears. I think that is a mistake, because this sort of independent analysis helps to respond to community concerns about agreements like this and whether they are in the national interest. At the moment, what the parliament relies upon and what the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties relies upon is that national interest analysis, a report done by DFAT, a report done by serious and capable professionals, but by individuals who are responsible for negotiating the deal, saying that it's a good deal. I think it would be a worthy addition to public debate and consideration of these agreements for the parliament to have available to it an independent economic analysis of that agreement struck by the government. That's why, if we win the next election, I and other members of the Labor Party team have said we'll fix that and ensure that all future trade agreements are subject to independent economic analysis. With that, I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CIOBO</name>
    <name.id>00AN0</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the speakers for their contribution to the Customs Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018 and the Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018. I note the comments that have been made by a number of people who have participated in this discussion, including the member for Blair, the member for Fremantle, the member for Corio and the member for Kingsford Smith, as well as the shadow minister. At the outset let me say that I find it interesting when I hear the Labor Party talk about reductions in Australia's foreign aid budget. I find it interesting for two reasons. The first is that one of the key initiatives of the Turnbull coalition government has been to refocus our aid assistance—or what we call ODA—towards the Pacific. So we took what was effectively a shotgun approach that previously existed in the sector and targeted it and directed it specifically to—although not exclusively to—Pacific island countries in our region. It's our neighbour and this government feels we should be doing the heaviest lifting. That's precisely what we're doing.</para>
<para>I also find it interesting because, of course, the Labor Party stand up and wring their hands about how there should be more foreign aid money, but they do two things. The first thing they do is never acknowledge they are not committing to replace that money. They just complain about it and make absolutely no commitment whatsoever, which makes, of course, their words exceptionally hollow. The second observation is that the very reason we've had to reduce Australia's foreign aid budget by such a significant amount is the massive structural deficit that the Australian Labor Party put in place. There's a reason why as a country now we are over half a trillion dollars in debt, and that is called the Australian Labor Party.</para>
<para>The structural deficit that the Australian Labor Party left includes, for example, the fact that Labor put in place an unfunded NDIS and committed to a range of spending that they did not have funding for. That is precisely the reason why this country is faced now with these very difficult challenges. But we've been making slow and steady progress. We're exceptionally close now to going back into surplus, and that's been through prudent economic management. I note, as I said, the complete hollowness of the Australian Labor Party's position when they whinge and complain about the reductions in foreign aid, even though (1) they're responsible for it, and (2) they make zero commitments about actually putting in a single extra dollar.</para>
<para>With respect to broader comments about the contributions that members have made in this debate, including, for example, concerns I heard that were put forward by both the member for Blair and also the shadow minister about how they would like to see, and that there should be, economic modelling on trade agreements: for starters, when Labor were in power they didn't start and conclude a single free trade agreement. But they were able to conclude a couple, and guess what—there was no economic modelling from the Australian Labor Party when they were in government. It's just another example of the Australian Labor Party coming in here and bleating on about how they want the government to act in one way when they themselves didn't do it. It just reinforces, once again, the sheer hypocrisy of the Australian Labor Party.</para>
<para>But let's talk specifically about this actual agreement, PACER Plus. As the person who has engaged continuously with the economies across the Pacific, both in my previous role as Minister for International Development in the Pacific and also now as Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment, what I am most excited about is the numerous conversations that I've had with key government figures, the private sector and others in the Pacific who are energised and excited about the opportunities that this PACER Plus agreement will provide. It is, in many respects, in equal parts both a trade agreement and a development agreement.</para>
<para>This will be a game changer when it comes into force, not only for Australia's relationship with the Pacific but also in terms of the way in which we will, in a sustainable way, help to build economic resilience and long-term sustainability of Pacific island country economies. Ultimately, it is always going to be far more profitable, in a social sense, for Pacific island countries to build long-term sustainable industries across the Pacific, and we should help provide integration with the Australian economy and the New Zealand economy for those countries.</para>
<para>I note some comments that have come from the Labor Party as well about wanting PNG and Fiji to be part of this agreement. Well, of course we do—of course we do. We have engaged in a very constructive way with both Papua New Guinea and Fiji to try to secure that outcome. We remain very open and willing to engage in very constructive discussions with both of those countries, and we will work to deliver a whole-of-region PACER Plus that includes those two major economies as well.</para>
<para>As I've said on numerous occasions, this coalition government has the most ambitious trade agenda in Australia's history. PACER Plus will create closer economic integration of Australia and the Pacific island countries. It will drive economic prosperity, raise living standards in the region and complement our trade agreements that are already in force, which are delivering record growth in exports and creating more jobs here in Australia.</para>
<para>PACER Plus is a regional-development-centred trade agreement. To date, PACER Plus has been signed by 11 members of the Pacific Islands Forum, namely, Australia, the Cook Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. PACER Plus will provide commercial opportunities for Australian exporters and investors in a range of sectors. These opportunities will increase over time as the provisions of the agreement lead to more open and transparent policies, and as wider relationships are built regionally and beyond.</para>
<para>The agreement reflects Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific island countries' commitment to the principles of free and open trade, and the underlying impetus for negotiating PACER Plus and its goal of regional economic integration is the formation of an interconnected Pacific market, including Australia and New Zealand, enabling the Pacific islands to access a larger market for their consumers and producers. While PACER Plus provides the framework for this integration, dedicated assistance is critical to addressing barriers in Pacific island signatories and to unlocking the benefits. PACER Plus provides this assistance.</para>
<para>The PACER Plus bills represent the key legislative changes required to give effect to the new rules of origin required to implement PACER Plus. The Customs Act 1901 is being amended to include new rules-of-origin requirements and, also, to enable a full set of related product-specific rules that remain in keeping with modern FTAs. The amendments contained in this bill will enable eligible goods that satisfy the PACER Plus rules of origin to be entered into Australia at preferential rates of customs duty. The Customs Tariff Act 1995 is being amended to set out the preferential rate of customs duty for goods that satisfy the new rules-of-origin requirements. These new rules are consistent with existing arrangements for duties imposed on excise-equivalent goods. Without these amendments, Australia would not be able to complete its domestic arrangements and the agreement would not be able to enter into force. This would prevent Australian businesses from receiving the various benefits that will flow from the agreement.</para>
<para>It's important that Australia be among the first eight countries to ratify, as early ratification would signal Australia's commitment to both PACER Plus and the rules based trade in the Indo-Pacific. PACER Plus will enter into force 60 days after the eighth signatory notifies, and I note that Tonga, as the depository, has ratified the agreement. Closer economic integration with the Pacific region and with larger economies such as Australia and New Zealand is essential for sustainable economic growth in the Pacific. In addition to implementing PACER Plus, Australia will continue to work to increase Pacific-wide trade, tourism and investment.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>82</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CIOBO</name>
    <name.id>00AN0</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>82</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <a href="r6154" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Customs Tariff Amendment (Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations Plus Implementation) Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>82</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>82</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CIOBO</name>
    <name.id>00AN0</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education and Other Legislation Amendment (VET Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018, Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>82</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <p>
              <a href="r6091" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Education and Other Legislation Amendment (VET Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r6085" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>82</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate>Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's my understanding that the two bills, the Education and Other Legislation Amendment (VET Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018 and the Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2018, are being dealt with concurrently. I rise to speak on these bills concurrently. The VET student loan debt separation bill will amend the VET Student Loans Act and the Higher Education Support Act to establish the VET student loans as a separate program under the VET Student Loans Act. The second bill, the overseas debtors repayment levy amendment bill, will amend the Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Act to ensure that arrangements for students with a VET student loan debt who are living overseas are updated to reflect the changes in these bills.</para>
<para>The VET Student Loans program was introduced at the end of 2016 as part of a series of reforms to income-contingent loans for vocational education and training diplomas and advanced diplomas. Income-contingent loans were first made available for VET students under the HELP program in 2007 for study in 2008. This started with pathway courses and was extended to all diploma and advanced diploma courses from 2012 onwards through the VET FEE-HELP program. During the period from 2009 to 2015 we saw a huge increase in the number of students taking up these loans, with numbers increasing from 5,262 to 272,000 students. Regrettably, during the same period, we saw a tripling of course costs and a rise in unscrupulous behaviour from some private providers. It took three years for the government to act and to introduce the VET student loans scheme.</para>
<para>This bill will separate VET student loans debt from other forms of debt taken under the Higher Education Loan Program. Under the current HELP scheme, all debts are treated the same. These debts can come from HECS-HELP, FEE-HELP, SA-HELP, OS-HELP, VET FEE-HELP or VET student loans. This allows for much greater transparency around the repayment of debts of vocational, educational and training student loans and allows for much better modelling of debt that may not be repaid. The bill will also lay the groundwork for a legislative instrument to specify courses eligible for VET student loans to be referred to the national register of courses. The national register is the authoritative information source on nationally recognised VET courses and training packages.</para>
<para>Labor cautiously supports this bill but is reminded of all the work that needs to be done to ensure Australia really has a world-class secondary education, post-secondary education and training system. Labor believes that simply tweaking the current system will not deal at all with the now profound systemic problems in the vocational education and training system, a system with inequitable access to loans and subsidies and, overall, an increasing cost shift to young people, including apprentices and trainees.</para>
<para>We know that the business community in this country are shaking their heads at the chaos on the other side—the dropping today of the government's one-point economic plan, the company economic tax plan, and earlier this week the government's chaos around energy policy. We have seen the business community shaking their heads in response to these decisions from the government. But we also have the business community saying to me, again and again, when I'm meeting with representatives of business, individual business owners and managers who are looking for staff that they feel utterly let down when it comes to vocational education and training in this country. Billions have been ripped from our training system, when we know that the best investment we can make for people looking for work is to make sure they have proper industry-relevant, up-to-date qualifications, and the best investment that we can make in a productive and successful nation is to ensure that we're training our future workforce. It's no wonder that so many in the business community are scratching their heads when it comes to the actions of this government.</para>
<para>Students, of course, and those who work in the vocational education and training area and those who work in universities gave up on the government a long time ago. If you look at the record, you will see that this government has ripped more than $3 billion out of TAFE skills and training. There are 140,000 fewer apprentices and trainees—lost over the course of this government. TAFE campuses have closed, courses have been scaled back and fees have increased right across the country. There was a 30 per cent drop in government funded training at public TAFEs between 2013 and 2016. A Skilling Australians Fund has been introduced, inherently flawed and underfunded.</para>
<para>Labor won't just sit by and allow the crisis in TAFE, vocational education and training and apprenticeships to continue. The Mitchell Institute tells us that by 2021 nearly 90 per cent of all jobs will need a TAFE or university-level qualification. Their modelling also says that, because of cuts to higher education, nearly 235,000 Australians will miss out on a university place by 2031. In vocational education, the story is even worse, with enrolments set to fall by 250,000 over that same period. We already have skills shortages. We've got occupations that have been on the skills shortage list for years, and we're cutting investment in the courses that would fill those skills shortages.</para>
<para>In February, I was proud to join the shadow minister for skills, TAFE and apprenticeships, Senator Doug Cameron, to announce that in the first 100 days in government Labor would establish a once-in-a-generation commission of review into post-secondary school education. This sweeping inquiry will look at every aspect of vocational and higher education and will look at the systems to ensure that they can best respond to the needs of Australia's economy and society. We're living in a time of rapid change, and that's impacting on every element of our lives. Now more than ever we need a post-secondary education and training system that responds to those changes and works for every Australian.</para>
<para>We've already met with stakeholders from the union movement, businesses, the community, universities, TAFE, academics and private training providers to discuss the terms of reference of this inquiry. This is what a responsible government should be doing: actually talking with stakeholders to set out a long-term, sustainable vision for a sector which is properly funded and of high quality. We need a vocational education and training system built on quality, collaboration, depth, reliability and transferability that equips people with knowledge and education for good working lives; skills the workforce for existing and emerging jobs; produces skills that power innovation and careers; provides greater social engagement and inclusion by guaranteeing access to quality lifelong learning and further education; provides, in apprenticeships, a contract for employment and a contract for training with nationally recognised portable skills; and recognises the importance of highly skilled TAFE teaching professionals.</para>
<para>Finding the way forward will be both intellectually and practically challenging. It's a job that's clearly proven to be beyond this government. It's abundantly clear that the only way it will happen is under a Labor government. There is an immediate and urgent need to protect, stabilise and rebuild the TAFE system. Labor will place TAFE at the centre of our agenda for vocational education because our commitment to TAFE is unequivocal. TAFE is the backbone of our skills and training sector. Only Labor will guarantee secure and stable funding for TAFE, skills and apprenticeships. We've made the commitment that at least two-thirds of public funding will go to our public TAFE network. Labor will waive the upfront fees for 100,000 students to attend TAFE and invest $100 million modernising TAFE facilities around the country. Labor will ensure at least one in 10 jobs on Commonwealth funded projects are done by an apprentice. Labor will provide 10,000 pre-apprenticeships for young people wanting to learn a trade and 20,000 adult apprenticeships for older workers who want to or need to retrain. A government without a plan for education and training has no plan for Australia's future.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KEARNEY</name>
    <name.id>LTU</name.id>
    <electorate>Batman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to support the Education and Other Legislation Amendment (Vet Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018 and related bill. The Education and Other Legislation Amendment (Vet Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018 will separate VET student loan debts from other forms of debt taken under the Higher Education Loan Program. Labor, of course, supports transparency relating to all government student loans and the ability to better track behaviour, to monitor performance and to regulate associated standards.</para>
<para>Those are the good outcomes from this bill and, as you can see, that has taken me a whole 30 seconds to get through. This is a small tweak to a complex and outdated HECS system which is now nearly 30 years old. Fiddling at the edges of the current system will not address the profound problems that undermine vocational education and training and, consequentially, the productive performance and international competitiveness of our economy. We have consistently called on the government to fix the profound systemic problems in the VET system, and this is the government's response: a tiny tweak. The Turnbull government doesn't care enough or have the capacity to do the hard work that needs to be done to build a better post-school system.</para>
<para>We shouldn't be surprised by the disdain this bill shows the VET sector. The Abbott-Turnbull government has ripped more than $3 billion out of TAFE, skills and training funding over the past five years. In his last budget, Malcolm Turnbull cut a further $270 million from TAFE skills and training over the next four years. The bill will not deal with the inequities that have grown as student loans have expanded and costs have been shifted onto young people, including apprentices and trainees, the young ones who can least afford the burden of this cost. Worse, the bill does not attempt to fix the mess caused by the privatisation of the VET sector and the consequent rorting of the VET FEE-HELP scheme by unscrupulous and profit-driven private training providers.</para>
<para>Like with so many things this government has turned its hand to, the assumption that a market-driven, privatised approach will build a better, more efficient sector has been proven false. This approach to vocational education has caused great damage. Coupled with a massive decline in government-funded training, the picture is bleak. Introducing VET FEE-HELP turbocharged rorting, where profiteering and dishonest private providers targeted students with inappropriate courses, provided poor-quality education and saddled them with unfair debt.</para>
<para>The marketisation and underfunding of the sector has led to TAFE campus and course closures and the loss of jobs. For students enrolling in VET, it meant cost-shifting to them, fee increases, limitations on access and unequal treatment across the post-school sector—not to mention poor-quality courses. So many young people, and not-so-young people, have also found themselves in the terrible situation of having a debt to repay after their dodgy provider has collapsed financially. So they have debt, no training and no qualification.</para>
<para>ASQA, the training regulator, openly recognises that the training market has created a race to the bottom with fast turnaround and poor-quality training putting enormous pressure on quality education and training providers like TAFE, the public provider. Unlike Labor, the government does not understand the critical role of TAFE as the public provider, the value in skills and apprenticeships or the value of hardworking and passionate public TAFE teachers. The effect of overzealous application of competition policy and privatisation in the sector, coupled with chronic underfunding, has had devastating effects on the sector. TAFE and vocational education funding, as well as the number of supported students, are lower than they were a decade ago, and this is despite an increasing number of jobs requiring vocational skills.</para>
<para>In too many towns and regional centres across Australia, TAFE campuses have closed, courses have been scaled back and fees have increased. Between 2013 and 2015, employer dissatisfaction with the availability of vocational education in regional and rural areas more than doubled, and investment in TAFE and vocational education capital infrastructure fell by almost 75 per cent. From 2016, hours of government-funded training delivered by TAFE fell by over 30 per cent.</para>
<para>These are not just statistics; this abject failing of the government has a real effect on people's lives. Young people in regional areas keen to stay near home and family, or unable to afford to move away to study, benefit greatly from regional TAFEs, gaining skills that give them a start in life close to home. Regional TAFEs provide employment for locals and inject money into the local economy. They are often the heart of the town—a hub for the community to gather and engage. Unlike those who sit opposite us, we value the role of an appropriately funded VET sector for the training, skills and apprenticeships it provides to so many Australians and its vital role in driving the economy and enhancing industry.</para>
<para>In my electorate, I'm fortunate enough to have the wonderful Melbourne Polytechnic, a vibrant and innovative campus providing nearly 300 courses, ranging from short courses to certificates, diplomas, bachelor degrees and master level qualifications. The breadth of their courses is incredible. They provide everything from bricklaying apprenticeships to a Master of Creative Industries. Melbourne Polytech is currently educating over 26,000 students. It's a hub in the north, for the north. Amazingly, they educated their millionth student in 2013, which was also the year they turned 100. Melbourne Polytech focuses on real student outcomes, particularly employment.</para>
<para>I was speaking to Melbourne Polytech teachers the other day and they told me about one student, and I think it says everything about the value of VET education. Lisa won the 2015 Melbourne Polytechnic Student Photographer of the Year award. She decided to study photography at Melbourne Polytechnic because the flexibility of the class allowed her to study part time while caring for her two young, adopted Ethiopian children. This flexibility is one of the crucial reasons people decide TAFE is right for them. Lisa says it took her a while to come around to study. She always found an excuse to put it off, but she kept saying to herself, 'When my kids are in school, I'll study.' So she put her money where her mouth was and enrolled at Melbourne Polytechnic.</para>
<para>She decided to focus her career because she was inspired by her volunteer work with young African-Australians at Collingwood's The Social Studio. This is an organisation that empowers young refugees and migrants from a diverse range of backgrounds to realise their dreams. Lisa said that she didn't feel like she was the right fit for a qualification, but believes that Melbourne Polytechnic offered her a unique perspective, especially studying with and learning her skills from the wonderful teaching staff. She said, 'You aren't just coming here to learn. You're mixing with peers, people who have won big photography awards, people who are living and breathing all things photography. For someone my age, 48, this was integral to my confidence and success. Not for one minute was my age an issue. The teachers never made me feel like I'd gone too far artistically. The teachers constantly told me that my goal was completely possible. Having those teachers made me realise these possibilities.' Lisa now owns Liberation Images, a Melbourne based fashion and portrait photography business that specialises in African-Australian and multicultural models and clients. That, my friends and Deputy Speaker, is what education is about: having your whole life turned around by amazing teachers, by your learnings and by a TAFE sector that is flexible, invested in outcomes and invested in students and not in profits. All of us in this place should be working every day to ensure that every person in Australia has access to a fantastic education.</para>
<para>Let's not forget the wonderful teachers in the VET sector, particularly TAFE teachers—skilled instructors who are experts in their trade and who are prepared to pass on that knowledge to future generations. The vast majority, however, are employed on less than optimal terms and conditions. Short-term or casual contracts mean they live insecure lives, and this gives them and their students little assurance of continuity.</para>
<para>The contrast between Labor and the coalition when it comes to the VET sector could not be more stark. We know it is abundantly clear that we cannot allow for the education and training sector to continue as it is currently designed. It is abundantly clear that this bill does not even consider the challenges that exist in the sector. Labor gets it. That's why the member for Sydney, the member for Griffith and Senator Cameron have announced that Labor will instigate a once-in-a-generation inquiry into the post-secondary education system, to commence within the first 100 days of a Shorten Labor government. There has never been a national review that considers the full gamut of post-school education, and it is time to have one—and the whole sector welcomes it. I believe the review must seriously and rigorously consider alternatives to the competitive training market model.</para>
<para>Now, more than ever, we need a post-school education and training system that works for every Australian. We know the progress we need isn't being delivered in the system that is operating today. Labor will place TAFE at the centre of our agenda for vocational education and training. Labor's commitment to TAFE is unequivocal. TAFE is the backbone of our skills and training sector. Labor has guaranteed secure funding for skills and TAFE and has made the commitment that at least two-thirds of public funding will go to the TAFE network. Only Labor will guarantee secure and stable skills and training funding. Labor is waiving the up-front fees of 100,000 TAFE students and investing $100 million into rebuilding TAFE. Labor will ensure that at least one in 10 jobs in a Commonwealth-funded project is done by an apprentice. Labor is committed to working with unions and industry to have better industrial relations laws that help address the issues of job insecurity.</para>
<para>A government without a plan for education and training has no plan for Australia's future. So, while we are happy to support this small tweak, I call on the government to adopt Labor's policy and support our undertaking of a root-and-branch inquiry into the post-secondary education system. Only then can the underlying problems in the vocational education and training system and the associated funding inequities be brought to light and resolved.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's good to be able to do something to support TAFE in this House. I think this is one of the first opportunities that I have had in the two years that I have been here to focus purely on vocational education and not just on fixing a mess. It is rather timely that, as I rise to speak, the 'TAFE meets parliament' event is getting underway in this place. I hope that MPs and senators will take the chance to go and speak with the TAFE people here to really understand the diversity of things that TAFE is bringing to our community.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, the Education and Other Legislation Amendment (VET Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018 and related bill merely tinker around the edges of vocational training, and that is disappointing. The bill places VET student loans second in the hierarchy of repayments after HELP debts. On the positive side, this certainly allows for greater transparency of repayment rates of VET student loans, and that should enable governments to better model those loans. So it is practical in that sense. It also lays the groundwork to be able to specify courses eligible for VET student loans to be referred to on the national register of courses, which ensures that students aren't disadvantaged when a course is replaced. So it is minor administrative work that we are happy to support.</para>
<para>But we on this side of the House know that there is an urgent need to make changes, so that we have a world-class post-high-school vocational education and training system that is designed for the 21st century. This legislation fails to address the inequalities that have grown as student loans have expanded, as profit margins of providers have increased and as educational costs have been shifted onto young people, including disproportionately onto apprentices and trainees.</para>
<para>One of my local TAFEs, Richmond TAFE, held its open day last weekend, and what a privilege it was to speak to teachers, administrators and students about the courses that are offered there: child care, horticulture, computer skills, equine and animal care—it has a huge range. Actually, you can learn to do everything from shoeing a horse—in fact, learn to be a blacksmith—to caring for cats as a vet nurse or carving a feature stone wall and creating a water feature in the garden. Their horticulture courses are designed to skill workers to care for a racetrack or landscape a public space or propagate plants. So Richmond is an amazing TAFE. It's part of an educational precinct that we have in the Hawkesbury, which includes the campus of Western Sydney university.</para>
<para>The Wentworth Falls and Katoomba TAFE, in another part of my electorate, in the Blue Mountains, skill up workers for a completely different set of jobs. They focus on hospitality and on outdoor adventure work, which, of course, is very fitting for the Blue Mountains. Disability support and beauty therapy are among the many courses that are available. The point I want to make is that there is huge diversity in courses in my electorate alone. They're surviving in spite of, not because of, government policy at both the state and federal levels. It's time we had policy from a federal government that helps the sector, rather than nobbles it.</para>
<para>One of the worst things that we would all be aware has happened to vocational education students in the private sector has been the government's failure to stem the corrupt practices of unscrupulous for-profit training providers. They allowed the ripping off of students and the ripping off of taxpayer dollars long after it was clear there was a problem and clear that the system was being abused. And it does seem that it's not over; a recent report showed that the VET Student Loans Ombudsman received over 5,000 complaints about dodgy private training providers in nine months. That really should have been a wake-up call. Alarmingly, the ombudsman expects this number to increase as students lodge their tax returns, only to find they've been charged for courses they haven't done. I have to say that one of my own staff has experienced this just recently. The ombudsman's report states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… many complainants first discover they have a student loan or discover that the loan amount is larger than they expected, when they submit their tax return.</para></quote>
<para>It's described as one of the biggest rorts in Australian education history by newspapers and commentators. It is feared that many students still remain unaware that they have been charged and therefore haven't reported it.</para>
<para>The failure to act has meant that VET students have really suffered and that the whole sector has got a bad name, which is really disappointing—and enrolments continue to drop. I want to point out that it isn't every private provider that deliberately sets out to rip off taxpayers or students. We know that. We know there are quality providers, and they should be absolutely congratulated on what they do. Quality private providers have a really key role in vocational education.</para>
<para>I also want to talk about the specialist providers, some of whom still have students being excluded from eligibility for VET FEE-HELP loans. As an example, these are the private colleges that are teaching music, dance, acting or filmmaking. For example, they're providing professionally focused training, often using professional-standard equipment. They have small groups and a very large number of teachers to students. They certainly don't deserve to be tarnished by the same brush as many of the dodgy private providers. Their courses may not meet the criteria that are demanded from the more online delivery-focused courses on offer, but they provide a really vital role in skilling up our actors, dancers, musicians and filmmakers to tell Australian stories. I note the recognition that places where pilots study also fitted into this category, and that they were given an exemption. So I really think that we have to make sure we don't just brush all of them into the same category when they really have quite individual characteristics. But be in no doubt: any abuse of the system in place by any provider should be acted on fast. The vast majority of training should be delivered, we think, through the public system.</para>
<para>In contrast to the government's approach, Labor will ensure that at least two-thirds of all government funding for vocational education will go to the trusted public provider, TAFE. The balance will go to not-for-profit community and adult educators, and then only high-quality providers with demonstrated links to industry so that there is less opportunity for bad operators in the private sector to take advantage of students and to give the sector a bad name. We need a robust inquiry into vocational education in Australia, which Labor is committed to doing.</para>
<para>The Abbott-Turnbull governments have stripped $3 billion from vocational education since being elected. The vocational system has been damaged by privatisation, poor regulation and unhealthy competition. So, in our first 100 days of office, Labor will establish this inquiry into postsecondary education. Ensuring secure consumer protections for students will form a key part of our review. Foremost, the inquiry will build a postsecondary education system focused on ensuring sustainable, quality provision in the first place, with TAFE and universities at its centre.</para>
<para>When you think about the data on what has happened to TAFE and the VET system in the last five years, it is a sad tale, with $3 billion taken out of TAFE skills and training funding and a fall of more than 140,000 apprenticeships and traineeships—and still falling. In towns and regional centres across Australia, TAFE campuses have closed, courses have been scaled back, fees have increased and teachers have lost their jobs. There was a 30 per cent drop in government-funded training happening at TAFE just between 2013 and 2016. The numbers are damning.</para>
<para>There have been so few initiatives by this government that have helped TAFE or vocational training, but the one it has tried is the lamentable Skilling Australians Fund. This is the fund that depends on visas being issued to foreign workers in order to get money into it. If the number of visas goes down, so will the funding for much-needed skills development for Australians.</para>
<para>There is absolutely no commitment by this government to training young people or retraining older workers. Now, if we just think about the role that TAFE has, yes, we think about it for young people. They might not have thrived in a school environment, but once they can get their hands on something tangible—whether it is in Richmond TAFE, where they can get their hands on a horseshoe and they can be looking after the animals in the small-animals-care area, or it is being able to learn the skills to be a childcare worker, which involves interacting with young children, as opposed to the high school students that they have spent many years with; whatever it is that changes the dynamic for young people—TAFE seems to be able to offer a range of different experiences that can transform young people's lives. That's why it is such an important institution.</para>
<para>But it isn't just young workers. I have spoken to so many people who have said that they got their second chance from TAFE. They may have left school early, raised a family as a mum or a dad, had time out of the workforce or never really had a career that they were really inspired by, but they were able to go back to TAFE and try something new. The thing that really is telling is that it's not always the first course that someone tries at TAFE that they end up doing forever. But those small courses that give people some skills, even if it's just the confidence that they can actually do it and have the ability to complete a short course—it might be the only course they've ever completed in their life—are the sorts of things that we need to make sure TAFE can still do.</para>
<para>We also need to make sure that support is there for people who have disabilities for them to be able to expand their skills and their knowledge and really be workers who can contribute to society. For me, that's what's so important.</para>
<para>You can't do that if you don't have teachers who can be fully committed to TAFE. What has happened to teachers? I'm very fortunate: the Blue Mountains have more teachers per head of population than any other place in the country. Not only do we have schoolteachers in the public system, in the independent system and in the Catholic system; we also have TAFE teachers. Over the years, hearing the stories of how the system has let them down and how many of them have walked away from it has been really dispiriting and disheartening. Those who have stayed deserve an enormous thankyou from us. They have kept with the system, even though it has been crumbling around them, and they've been determined to make sure that students have not felt the pain of the disaster that has been happening.</para>
<para>There are many things that we need to do to rebuild TAFE, to take it back to what it was. In New South Wales, TAFE was considered one of the world-leading vocational education training systems. In the first 100 days of government Labor will establish its once-in-a generation review into post-school education, with TAFE and universities at its centre. Labor's commitment to TAFE is unequivocal. It is the backbone of our skills and training sector and is needed even more as people move through not just one or two careers in their lifetime but several careers.</para>
<para>Labor has guaranteed secure funding for skills and TAFE and has made a commitment that at least two-thirds of public funding will go to the TAFE network. Only Labor will guarantee secure and stable skills and training funding, by reversing the $637 million cut to the skills budget and investing $100 million into rebuilding TAFE. As I look around the campuses in my electorate, they're not crumbling but they haven't had a lot of updates to them. You can certainly see the opportunities to equip these teaching institutions with the tools people need to use in their professional working lives. We'll be doing that around the country.</para>
<para>The other thing that will really make a difference for apprentices and trainees is our commitment to ensuring that at least one in 10 jobs on Commonwealth funded projects is done by an apprentice. It is too easy to think that we can find already skilled workers from somewhere else. I have real fears that the international agreements we have signed, which free up and get rid of labour-market testing, will mean that we see even fewer apprentices and trainees being given that chance they need on big projects. We will ensure that at least one in 10 jobs is for an apprentice.</para>
<para>The difference is that without a plan for education—as those opposite don't have a plan—and without a plan for training you have no plan for the future. It's only Labor that has a very clear vision of where our future lies—in a skilled and educated group of people, flexible in their skills, who can adapt to the changes that we know are coming and we need to be ready for.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We on this side of the House love talking about education and training. It's in our DNA. We know that investing in education and training is money well spent. It's telling when you look at this side of the House and the number of speakers on this bill. In fairness, it is a fairly benign bill. We are lining up to talk about education and training and on the government side they've had, I think, one speaker. On this side, we know that investing in education and training is money well spent. Indeed, a study into Victoria's TAFE sector shows a $2.19 return for every dollar invested—not a bad return at all. Education and training is the single biggest enabler of social mobility, and education and training is a pathway to a brighter future. On this side of the House, we believe that pathway should remain open to all.</para>
<para>The only things that we believe should limit kids from a fantastic education or training are aptitude and effort—never their postcode and never their parents' pay packets. But we are happy to support this bill before the House today, as it does improve transparency in the area of student loan repayments. We are delighted to speak to this bill because it serves to remind us just how much work remains to be done to ensure that Australia has a world-class post-secondary education and training system. Little tweaks won't do. The issues confronting this vital sector are far bigger than that.</para>
<para>We would love it if the government adopted our policy to undertake a full review of the student loan system as part of a root-and-branch inquiry into post-secondary education and training. If the government—whether it's under the current Prime Minister or a new Prime Minister, in the days ahead—fails to take us up on that, if Labor is elected to government after the next election, within the first 100 days, Labor will initiate that review. We think a review into education and training in this country is so important that it needs a full review and inquiry. Let's find out where the problems are so we can get a fix that takes us into the future. And let's take the politics out of it. The future of our kids is far too important to be caught up in the sort of nonsense that bedevils this place this week.</para>
<para>A strong TAFE sector is essential as a part of education and training in Australia, not just for those who embark on its courses but for national prosperity. There is a feeling, I'll admit—I get this in my electorate sometimes—that Labor, over the last 15 or 20 years, has believed that every kid should go to uni. I have hit resistance on that idea. There are a lot of people who say their kids don't want to go to university, but they don't want their kids leaving school at 14 and going on the dole or kicking about in casual work either. People want a different pathway. And that's where TAFE and training comes in. There are many, many fantastic jobs and careers that people can get from doing a vocational course. It leads to good pay packets and long careers if they go to TAFE. But TAFE needs to be properly resourced.</para>
<para>As the member for Macquarie mentioned, TAFE has been neglected for far too long and teachers have been left hanging for far too long. I think it is fair to say there is a view that, if you are not at school, not at uni or not working in a good job, then you should be in a training course of some description. Back in the eighties, about 30 years ago—and I'm probably betraying my age here a bit—the Hawke government introduced HECS. I think the first name for it was the graduate tax. It later became HECS and now it is HELP. It was essentially a student contribution for education. It started out very modestly—it was very, very modest by today's standards—and it has ramped up over the years. The current government was hoping to increase it even more. But we have staunchly sought to prevent that, and I am pleased to say the Senate has agreed with us on that. The last thing this country needs is $100,000 degrees, because it just puts kids behind the eight ball from the get-go. So HECS, or HELP, has been a good program. It has made people contribute to their education. As we know, education is both a private benefit and a social benefit. And HELP, to date, has also included TAFE. This bill separates out VET-HELP and makes it very clear that that is what it is about—and it is the second order of priority after fees that go towards universities.</para>
<para>Across Australia, despite HELP and the effort to raise the value of education in Australia, 60 per cent of Australia's young people will not attend university. If the other 40 per cent were working or in training, that would not be a problem, that would be perfectly valid. But too many kids are falling through the gaps. So it is important that every Australian kid—in fact, every Australian, even adults—should be able to feel that they can get education that can improve their lives and, in turn, improve society. TAFE is one solution to this. A proper TAFE system, supported by a well-designed VET student loan system, is realistic and, for many Australians, it is a better alternative than university.</para>
<para>It is a great shame that we have seen a significant drop in apprenticeship numbers under this government. In Tasmania, the TAFE system saw over 3,000 students commence studying in a non-trade TAFE course in 2017. That has been good news. TAFE in Tasmania has been going through some problems in recent days. Hopefully, that is now on the mend. TAFE is a flexible learning environment with a breadth of courses providing students and potential students with the opportunity to build their skills across a wealth of areas. It does battle with a perception that the only people who would want to go to TAFE are those who couldn't get into university. That is a perception we need to address. TAFE is a valid option in and of itself; it is not just for people who didn't get into university. There are many, many careers that are valid careers, very good careers, that that you can get with a certificate from TAFE.</para>
<para>TAFE used to be an excellent training system. It's had its problems in recent years with, I think, underfunding and underresourcing. I'm delighted that, if Labor are elected to government, we will make TAFE central to education and training in Australia. We will make TAFE a central pillar once again. It'll take its rightful place as the central pillar. We've tried the private education model with training, and there are some good providers out there, but there are a lot of dodgy ones who've hit the wall and taken a lot of government money with them on the way out the door. It's a model that doesn't work, so I think it's right that TAFE has its place as the central pillar of training in Australia. There is a place for some private agencies and colleges, but they need to be much better regulated than they have been in the past.</para>
<para>TAFE has been battling with reduced attendance rates, campus closures, increased fees resulting in high withdrawals and a network of state and territory governments that have been failing to support their TAFE systems and failing to prioritise TAFE over the private RTOs. So it has been incumbent on this government—it has been failing the test—and it's certainly incumbent on the next government to ensure that there is a national approach to TAFE education in this country, regardless of whoever ends up leading this government. Australia has seen a fall of more than 140,000 apprenticeships and traineeships over the term of this government to date—that is absolutely scandalous. And there's been a 30 per cent drop in government funded training across our public TAFE system. At a time of supposed economic growth, it is absolutely scandalous that the apprenticeship and training system has been allowed to wither on the vine to this extent. The government has taken its eye off the ball, and, frankly, it's spending far too much time looking over its shoulder for the next knife in its back rather than looking to the future and educating our kids.</para>
<para>This bill does give us the opportunity to reflect upon what an Australian training system should look like. It could be world class, properly funded and able to accommodate the changing nature of the workforce, including the emergence of new jobs and career paths based on new technology and new industries. It also provides us with the opportunity to call out this government's manifest failures in education and training, for cutting more than $3 billion out of national TAFE skills and training budgets over the past five years. Why on earth would you cut more than $3 billion out of TAFE over five years when you've got, apparently, $17 billion to give to the banks? What a crazy set of priorities this government must have.</para>
<para>This government simply does not care about TAFE. All it cares about is business. It thinks it can approach education and training as a business model, but that's failed. This government is eroding TAFE's ability to provide training and vocational education. It has encouraged and supported profiteering, dishonest and corrupt private practices, while at the same time failing to invest the money and the time into building a contemporary best-practice, public, postsecondary training system.</para>
<para>Instead of futureproofing our workforce by preparing Australian vocational students with the skills they need for the rapidly transforming labour market, this government has demonstrated that it has no plans for Australia's future needs when it comes to jobs, skills, vocational education and TAFE. Australia needs a strong postsecondary vocational education system and network that provides opportunities for every Australian while also promoting economic growth and social and community progress and delivering educational training outcomes. We know the current system is not doing this. This government's history of mismanagement and budget-stripping will continue.</para>
<para>I appreciate the value that TAFE and vocational training offer our communities. As the member for a regional and rural electorate, I recognise that a large number of the people in my electorate of Lyons rely upon TAFE and vocational qualifications in their chosen industries. As of 2016, 6.8 per cent of people in Lyons who are engaged in education are going through vocational learning, including TAFE. It's a rate which is considerably higher than those who attend university. But that's where the good news ends. In September 2013 there were 1,947 people from Lyons studying or training through TAFE. In September 2017, just four years later, that number had fallen by 244 to 1,703. So, after four years, there had been a fall in the number of people studying or training. It's a drop of 13 per cent in my electorate alone. In Tasmania, over the same period, there's been an overall drop in numbers of almost 2,000 or 20 per cent overall—all this at a time when Tasmania and Lyons are crying out for skilled workers and people to train.</para>
<para>I'm pleased to say that, if elected to government, Labor will ensure that at least one in 10 jobs on Commonwealth funded projects will be done by an apprentice. It is a sad indictment on our country and this government that this has to be an election commitment. It should be a given. You would think that a government that cares about apprentices and young people would be saying to the firms it gives contracts to: 'Employ apprentices. Make sure you've got new skilled people coming through the system.' It hasn't been happening. Firms and companies have not been putting apprentices on. Labor will address that. We will make sure we get that job done. Labor know we need to be supporting local jobs and local training. It saddens me to think that providing apprenticeships on Commonwealth funded jobs has to be this sort of commitment.</para>
<para>My electorate and its businesses, families and communities recognise the value of TAFE. They see it as a stepping stone to success. They see it as a way to build practical skills for modern jobs, and they see it as a way to support our regions and our communities. TAFE and the broader vocational learning system have unfortunately not kept up with the needs of modern Australia's economy and society. Labor will address these issues. Labor will make TAFE central once again to vocational education and training in this country. We will do what this country needs. We will look after young people. We will look after apprentices and get the job done.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HART</name>
    <name.id>263070</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Education and Other Legislation Amendment (Vet Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018 and the Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2018. It's important that we reflect on the gulf that exists between both sides of the House when it comes to addressing the issue of not just vocational education and training but also education and higher education generally. This side of the House understands that investment in education, whether it's in early childhood education, primary school, secondary school, higher education or vocational education and training, is vitally important so as to put the Australian economy on its best footing for an uncertain future. Not only is it vitally important for the entire country, for economic reasons, but it's also the best way that we can assist young individuals in making the best fists of their futures by giving them the opportunity to do what best prepares them for that uncertain future. In particular, when we talk about the future of work, we know that there are occupations that do not exist now but may exist in the future that will come to dominate the requirements in education in little more than five to 10 years in the future.</para>
<para>Having an education system which prepares our students for an uncertain future, a future where highly skilled people are more likely to be able to cope with change, is vitally important. Of course, we can talk in the abstract about the importance of education but we also need to consider the machinery which underpins that abstract discussion. We are talking about the funding and the debts that are left for students to pay after they've completed any course of study.</para>
<para>The principal purpose of this particular piece of legislation is to separate VET student loan debts from other forms of Higher Education Loan Program debts, otherwise known as HELP debts, and to establish VET student loans as a separate income-contingent loan administered under the VET Student Loans Act 2016—that is, the VSL Act.</para>
<para>Currently, all debts are treated the same. A debt under the HELP scheme can arise from HECS-HELP, FEE-HELP, SA-HELP, OS-HELP, VET-FEE HELP or VET Student Loans. From 1 July 2019, individuals who incur a VET Student Loans debt will access a separate statement of account for the VET Student Loans debt. From 1 July 2020, individual notices of assessment will display VET Student Loans repayment details.</para>
<para>The amendments in this bill operate together with amendments in the Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2018, which provides measures to ensure that persons who have a VSL debt who reside overseas will continue to make payments in respect of those debts. Together, these bills are a timely reminder of all the work that needs to be done to ensure that we have that world-class, post-secondary education and training system that's necessary to give students the skills for the future—for that uncertain future that I spoke of previously.</para>
<para>We are constantly reminded that this Turnbull government doesn't care enough or have the capacity to do the hard work that needs to be done to build that better post-school system. Tweaking the current system such as it is will not deal with some of the profound systemic problems within the VET system, nor will it deal with inequities that have arisen as student loans have expanded and costs have been shifted onto young people. Indeed, if you look at the introduction of the original system of providing for students to bear responsibility for the payment of their university fees, that system has changed remarkably over many years and most recently has resulted in accelerated repayment at, I think, a disappointingly low income threshold.</para>
<para>Labor will not oppose this bill in the House. However, this bill does raise several matters which will benefit from closer scrutiny through the Senate inquiry process. In particular that process will need to reassess what to do with income-contingent loans. As it stands, this government is given cover on questions around whether it is doing enough to enable accurate reporting of the debt in the VET FEE-HELP system, including assessments of unserviceable and unfair debt due to the amassing of debt into a single HELP pool.</para>
<para>I'll digress for a moment: I serve on the Public Accounts and Audit Committee. There have been inquiries around the significant level of student loan debt. This should not be a party-partisan issue. It's in the interests of the nation to understand the extent of that debt, the extent to which it's recoverable and whether that debt is being incurred responsibly for an appropriate level of education.</para>
<para>There are currently eight different active income-contingent loan schemes, and I've made reference to those previously. Some of those schemes feed into a single HELP debt pool, but increasingly in recent years, for accounting purposes, we have been creating separate debt pots. These bills create yet another debt pot. This will be the fifth separate pot created, proliferating the accounting task, proliferating the legislative provisions, making the system more complicated generally and increasing the potential for error.</para>
<para>Obviously, when we examine the evidence that's been presented at various inquiries, the matching of data between the taxation system and the education system makes this very difficult, even in the most simple system. But, obviously, with all these different pots it does become more than complex. An inquiry by the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee received a handful of submissions that raised concerns by key stakeholders as to whether alternative means of improving transparency were available without the need for this legislative change. In their submission, the organisation Open Colleges, for example, suggested:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Retaining all forms of such lending under the HESA but focusing on improved data management within and between the systems to deliver disaggregation capabilities would achieve the objective without need for legislative change.</para></quote>
<para>In plain language, what that really means is the fact that the data gateways between the tax office, for example, and the education system are currently broadly incompatible. They're actually not providing the data in a flow between the two organisations in both directions so that we can make policy decisions based upon the material that we're seeing in a live manner.</para>
<para>In their additional comments in the committee report, Labor senators noted:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the government continues to fail to address the inequities that have grown as student loans have expanded, rent seeking—</para></quote>
<para>which we've spoken about in this place previously—</para>
<quote><para class="block">has increased and educational costs have been shifted onto young people, including to apprentices and trainees.</para></quote>
<para>I note that this is a particular concern, especially in the context of a Universities Australia report released recently which found that about one in seven students in 2017 regularly went without food and other necessities because they could not afford them.</para>
<para>The Abbott-Turnbull government has ripped more than $3 billion out of TAFE, skills and training funding over the past five years. That government has presided over a fall of more than 140,000 apprenticeships and traineeships. Nationally there was a 30 per cent drop in government funded training, whether occurring at TAFE or elsewhere, between 2013 and 2016. Since the Liberals came to power, there have been more than 443 fewer apprentices and trainees in my electorate of Bass.</para>
<para>This is in addition to the outrageous rorting of the VET FEE-HELP system that has occurred and been identified, where profiteering and dishonest private providers targeted students and saddled them with unfair debt. Evidence has been received by various inquiries as to the offer of free laptops, iPads and other incentives for very low-value training. As I said in my opening, it's in the interests of the broader economy and the community generally that we support good-quality vocational education and training but not low-quality vocational education and training.</para>
<para>In one particular case, a young lady had been self-funding trips to a provider campus in Queensland on the promise of graduating with a dual diploma in early childhood education and school-aged children's education. She was abruptly advised after 12 months of study that the provider was closing down, going into voluntary administration. With some intervention by my office and facilitation from the Australian Council for Private Education and Training, to whom I'm most grateful, this student was eventually able to get her qualification recognised.</para>
<para>But we know that there are thousands of students who've not been that fortunate. The government sat on its hands whilst corrupt for-profit training providers reeled in hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money.</para>
<para>Effective vocational education and skill formation is essential to our national economic and social prosperity. Despite its critical role in providing the conditions for prosperity, this government has not made the investments it should have made in vocational education and training. It has cut $3 billion from vocational education and apprenticeships, with additional cuts in the 2018-19 budget of $270 million over the forward estimates.</para>
<para>In contrast to this, in the first 100 days in government, should there be a Labor government elected, Labor will establish a once-in-a-generation commission of review into postschool education. It will examine and make recommendations about how our vocational and higher education systems address the country's economic and societal needs. The review will be inclusive and commence with an inquiry into the structure of the vocational education and training system, including curriculum, pedagogy, assessment, funding and quality assurance. Critically, it will examine the role of TAFE, which Labor has committed will be at the centre of Australia's future vocational education system. This inquiry will look at every aspect of the vocational and higher education systems to ensure that they can best respond to the needs of Australia's economy and society.</para>
<para>Labor have stated that we will place TAFE at the centre of our agenda for vocational education. TAFE has educated and trained millions of our citizens. It delivers critical education and training services to regional and rural Australia. Labor's commitment to TAFE is unequivocal. TAFE is the backbone of our skills and training sector and has been for generations. TAFE will play a vital role in our skill formation system. It sits at the forefront of the 21st century challenges. It is essential to Australia's future prospects and its domestic and international competitiveness. Labor has guaranteed secure funding for skills and TAFE and has made the commitment that at least two-thirds of public funding will go to the TAFE sector.</para>
<para>Only Labor will guarantee secure and stable skills and training funding, by reversing this Prime Minister's $637 million cut to the skills budget and investing $100 million into rebuilding TAFE. This investment will mean the re-establishment of TAFE facilities in regional communities that have lost campuses or course facilities. Investment in TAFE infrastructure will ensure that Australians have access to the best possible preparation for the rapidly changing world of work I referred to earlier. TAFE is the custodian of quality in our vocational education system. Skilled workers help the economy grow and make us all more prosperous. TAFE provides pathways for millions of Australians to fulfilling work and further study. Labor will reverse the decline of TAFE and make sure that quality vocational education is available in our suburbs and regions.</para>
<para>For generations, Australians have followed the trusted path into decent work through an apprenticeship. They provide young people with the opportunity to build prosperous working lives as well as retraining for experienced workers seeking to reskill throughout their careers. After all, that future of uncertain work means that people will be going back to retrain on multiple occasions throughout their careers. Labor will ensure, as the member for Lyons has said, that at least one in 10 jobs on Commonwealth funded projects is done by an apprentice. Labor will only fund projects where major contractors have an apprenticeship and training plan that links in with local TAFEs and provides skills to workers living locally. This is a challenge for our future. Our economic future depends upon investment in vocational education and training.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBRIDE</name>
    <name.id>248353</name.id>
    <electorate>Dobell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>While Labor will not oppose these bills, I want to speak on them today because they remind all of us of the work to be done to build a more equal society. And that work is education. Other speakers have spoken on the technical matters. I want to use my time to talk about the human face of these changes. I want to talk about Tom, Christine and Maggie, because education is not just good for the individual; it's good for all of us. It's the outcome of education that matters: knowledge, skills, opportunities and control over your life. These are the words of Michael Marmot. He goes on to say, 'Education is not a bad proxy for empowerment.' He's right. In Australia the best start is a postschool education—an apprenticeship, a traineeship, a degree. My dad was an engineer, a builder and a TAFE teacher and the first in his family to go to university. He told all of us kids that education was a great elevator in life. He's right.</para>
<para>I'll start by sharing Tom's story. He wrote to me recently. Tom's from Berkeley Vale, in my electorate, on the coast. His story is the story of TAFE. Tom said he left school in 1963 at the age of 15 after completing the intermediate certificate. Unfortunately, he failed maths 1, which was required to obtain an apprenticeship in fitting and machining. Fortunately, at the time, he could do that through TAFE. He completed and passed it in 1964. This set him on his way. He was then able to be apprenticed in a five-year apprenticeship, of which four years of education were required at Sydney Technical College. Incidentally, that's where my dad taught engineering. It's now called TAFE.</para>
<para>After completing his fitting-and-machining course Tom went on to acquire additional qualifications. Then he enrolled in a mechanical engineering certificate through TAFE. He completed this course in four years, part-time. Because of this he gained employment as a detail draftsman. He then advanced to become a senior design draftsman. He also finished an electrical welding certificate through TAFE, at Gosford Technical College on the Central Coast, while employed as a senior technical officer, at Eraring Power Station, with the Electricity Commission of New South Wales.</para>
<para>Tom said, 'I gained entry into Newcastle university with a 15-unit standing in mechanical engineering. I completed four units of maths in addition to the 15-unit standing but did not complete the degree. However, I would not have gained entry to the degree without the qualifications gained through TAFE.'</para>
<para>Tom's now retired on a good superannuation pension and says he owes it all to the TAFE system. He was employed by several companies in his working life and he has never had any trouble getting a job. Tom says: 'I owe all of this to the TAFE system in New South Wales.' For Tom, TAFE was the pathway to a fitting-and-machining apprenticeship, to a mechanical engineering certificate and to an arc welding certificate. With the right skills and training, Tom had a successful career and is now secure in his retirement. We were talking to his wife today and were told that he won lawn bowls—so he is very happy today. That's the type of security in retirement that every person deserves. Tom has that because of his career through TAFE and the superannuation scheme introduced by Labor.</para>
<para>Why is this government denying so many young people the opportunities that gave people like Tom his start in life? Tweaking the current system won't deal with the systemic problems in the VET system, nor will it deal with the inequities that have grown as student loans have ballooned and costs have been shifted onto young people, including apprentices like Tom and trainees. These bills remind us that this government really doesn't care enough to do the heavy lifting that needs to be done to build a better postschool system in Australia. Vocational education and training matters. It's good for the individual like Tom and it's good for our society as a whole.</para>
<para>Vocational education and training matters, particularly in electorates like mine on the New South Wales Central Coast, where the number of people who leave school to take up a trade is higher than in other areas. According to the latest census data, 57.7 per cent of people living on the Central Coast with post-secondary qualifications have vocational educational qualifications compared to the national average of 46.1 per cent. But this is the pathway that is being systemically undermined by conservative governments at a federal and state level.</para>
<para>This government has ripped more than $3 billion out of TAFE skills and training over the past five years. Cutting funding to TAFE is not just mean; it's bad economic policy. This government has presided over a drop of more than 140,000 apprenticeships and traineeships, and we will see significant skills shortages in the future, particularly in regional and rural areas. In towns and regional centres across Australia, TAFE campuses have been closed, courses have been scaled back and fees have been increased, putting them out of reach of many students. Nationally, there was a 30 per cent drop in government funded training at TAFE between 2013 and 2016. The training regulator, ASQA, openly recognises that the training market has created a 'race to the bottom', with fast-turnaround, poor-quality training putting enormous pressure on quality education and training providers like TAFE. VET FEE-HELP encouraged rorting, where predatory providers targeted students and saddled them with debt.</para>
<para>I now want to talk about another student, Christine. Christine recently contacted my office. She's undertaking a certificate III in pathology through a private provider in Parramatta. Christine is retraining after having a family and had previously worked as a nurse in pathology. Most of the course was offered online, with some face-to-face classes in Newcastle, and Christine turned in her assignments in Parramatta. Christine needs to complete one week's placement with a pathology clinic to finish the course. This was scheduled for November last year. The provider initially said that they couldn't find a placement. When they finally found one at Warners Bay, Christine drove there only to find out it hadn't been finalised. She believes that the pathology clinics won't deal with the provider due to malpractice. Christine has paid $6,000 for the course and wants and needs to complete it. Worse, Christine originally wanted to undertake the course through TAFE but couldn't as 60 people were competing for only 25 places. This government has stood by while corrupt for-profit training providers, like Careers Australia, reeled in hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money and left students like Christine with large debts and no qualification.</para>
<para>With the lowering of the VET FEE-HELP repayment threshold this financial year, students may get a surprise when they're asked to repay debts for which they've received no qualification, in some cases for courses they did not even realise they were enrolled in. I'll now turn to Maggie, because this is exactly what happened to her. She is one of my constituents. Maggie and her family moved to the Central Coast two years ago and Maggie found herself looking for work. When this took longer than she originally expected she considered upskilling to help to boost her chance of being able to land a job on the coast. She was searching for jobs online and she entered her contact details in a pop-up advertisement for Careers Australia. Almost immediately she got a phone call and was encouraged to enrol in a diploma of business administration. She didn't realise at the time that providing personal information, including her tax file number, was an enrolment, nor was she advised of any course fees for this diploma of business administration. Shortly after this phone call, Maggie found a full-time job. She didn't undertake any coursework with Careers Australia, wasn't aware she had been enrolled in a course with Careers Australia and tells me it took three attempts to then withdraw from the course. When she lodged her tax return, she discovered she had a debt of $9,439 for a course that she didn't intend to enrol in and hadn't undertaken.</para>
<para>The government has to act now. They have to act urgently. How can somebody like Maggie end up with a $9,439 debt for a diploma in business administration that she didn't intend to enrol in and then only found out that she was enrolled in when she lodged a tax return? This is just dodgy and it must be properly looked in to.</para>
<para>The answer to this is a strong TAFE. TAFE is of national importance. This government should fund TAFE to prepare Australians with the skills for a rapidly changing labour market. Instead they've designed a training fund that relies exclusively on a levy for skilled migrant visas. Independent analysis has established that the design of the Turnbull government's Skilling Australians Fund is flawed. If the number of visas goes down, so will funding for much-needed skills. Not surprisingly, for 12 months the states and territories have steadfastly refused to sign up to the government's Skilling Australians Fund.</para>
<para>This government's mishandling has meant that, since July 2017, the Commonwealth has contributed no money to replace the lapsed National Partnership Agreement on Skills. The Prime Minister doesn't appear to have any answer on jobs, skills, vocational education or TAFE. Now more than ever we need a post-education-and-training system that works for every Australian, particularly young people in rural and remote Australia.</para>
<para>In its first 100 days a Labor government will establish a once-in-a-generation commission of review into post-school education. The sweeping inquiry will look into every aspect of vocational and higher education to make sure that we can get the best response to the needs of Australia's economy and society. We don't want to see more people like Maggie and Christine ripped off by dodgy RTOs.</para>
<para>Labor will place TAFE at the centre of vocational education. Labor believes in TAFE. It's the backbone of skills and training in Australia. Labor has guaranteed secure funding for skills and TAFE and has made the commitment that at least two-thirds of public funding will go to the TAFE network. Only Labor will guarantee secure and stable skills-and-training funding by reversing the government's $637 million cut to the skills budget and by investing $100 million in rebuilding TAFE. Under Labor at least one in 10 workers on Commonwealth-funded projects will be an apprentice. That will make a difference in regional communities like mine.</para>
<para>On the Central Coast of New South Wales today, the youth unemployment rate is 18.6 per cent—18.6 per cent in a regional area that's an hour and a half north of Sydney and an hour south of Newcastle, two of Australia's leading cities. Every time I visit a classroom—and I was a student in classrooms on the Central Coast—I think one in five of those students will potentially be on the end of a job queue. That's not about talent. That's not about effort. That's a structural problem that leads to inequality and that's something that must be fixed. It's something that must be first acknowledged by the government and then properly addressed. Tweaking around the margins isn't going to fundamentally transform the vocational education system, and that's what young people and older people in Australia so desperately need. This government doesn't have a plan for education and training, it doesn't have a plan for Australia's future and it is clear that the Prime Minister has no plan for the future other than trying to save his job.</para>
<para>I'll go back to my opening remarks. I think it's something that we all need to think about in an increasingly unequal world, in a world where there's a widening gap between those that have and those that don't. I speak as someone who worked in mental health for most of my life and saw the consequences of government's decision or indecision, government's action or inaction, and the very real impact it has on people's lives.</para>
<para>I think that's something that we need to look at. We need to look beyond the numbers. What we need to look at is the real human face of these decisions and the consequences and the impact that they have on people, particularly younger people in regional and rural communities across Australia. That is because we know that, if we really want to have a more equal society in Australia, the work that we must do is in education.</para>
<para>As I said at the outset, education is not just good for the individual; it's good for all of us, and it's the outcomes of education that matter. It's the knowledge, it's the skills, it's the opportunities and it's the control over your life that really matter. In Australia, every young person deserves the best start in life. In order to have that, we need to have a properly funded, properly regulated, postsecondary education sector.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BRODTMANN</name>
    <name.id>30540</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I commend the previous speaker for highlighting the obvious: education is good for all of us. It gives us control. It gives us options. It gives us choice. It gives us opportunities. And I know because my sisters and I are living proof of the transformative powers of a quality public education and the transformative powers of a tertiary education.</para>
<para>Like so many Australians, like so many here in this chamber, I was the first in my family to go to university. It was the changes that the Whitlam government made in the seventies that allowed me that opportunity. When I first went to university, when I went to the Australian National University in the early eighties, my first degree was free. That was thanks to Whitlam, who opened up those opportunities for so many hundreds of thousands of Australians who were the first in their families to be educated. It was an amazing reform, one of the many amazing reforms of the Whitlam era and one that was truly transformative for our nation in positioning us for a modern future and in opening up opportunities to so many hundreds of thousands of Australians who were the first in their families to be educated, thanks to free tertiary education.</para>
<para>As I said, education is transformative. It's been transformative for me and my sisters. Those who know my story know that, as I said, I was the first in my family to be educated at university. And here I am now, thanks to the people of Canberra, enjoying the great honour and privilege of representing them here in this parliament. My middle sister is Australia's first Master of Wine and a world-renowned winemaker and was also a scientist in her former life. She was at the vanguard of AIDS research in this country during the 1980s. And then there is my baby sister, who is a world-renowned neurologist who is a specialist in stroke and dementia. So here we are. My incredible sisters have had all these opportunities, as have I, thanks to the education that we received, thanks to the tenacity of my mother, thanks to a quality public education and also thanks to the great work done by Gough Whitlam in opening up tertiary education to hundreds of thousands of Australians.</para>
<para>Thanks to that work, thanks to that tenacity and thanks to that opportunity, I and my sisters broke a three-generation cycle—an intergenerational cycle of disadvantage, an intergenerational cycle of poverty, an intergenerational cycle of lack of opportunity, lack of options and lack of choice. My great-grandmother was a single mother. My grandmother was a single mother. My great-grandmother brought up 13 children on her own. My grandmother brought up seven children on her own in a Housing Commission house in Melbourne. And my mother, also a single mum, brought us up because my dad left us when I was 11—and with $30 in the bank. It was tough. But education is the silver bullet. It is the great transformer.</para>
<para>Over the years, various federal governments have increased their reliance on income-contingent loans. They've made students pay more for tertiary education, and they've expanded loan programs into completely new domains. There have been close to a dozen different income-contingent loans. Assuming that VET FEE-HELP is still kicking around, there are currently eight different active schemes.</para>
<para>Essentially, the Education and Other Legislation Amendment (VET Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018 will separate VET student loan debts from other forms of debt taken under the Higher Education Loan Program, or HELP. The separation doesn't change the existing arrangement but prioritises the repayment of VET Student Loans over other loans, like the Student Start-up Loan and the Trade Support Loan. The new prioritisation framework lays the groundwork for courses to be specified as eligible for VET Student Loans by referring them to the national register of courses. This is a register of nationally recognised VET courses and training packages.</para>
<para>Labor has argued that it is time to reassess the architecture of our entire postsecondary education system. The measures in these bills are a timely reminder for us to reassess what we do with income-contingent loans. Labor's great reform of 1989—and the great reform of Whitlam in the 1970s—means HECS is now nearly 30 years old. That expanded higher education opportunities by helping to finance opportunities for people who, in general, would derive great benefits from university study. It did so without compromising the government's ability to direct resources to people who were less well-off—people who may be unemployed, people who may be aged, people who may have a disability or people who need health care. It's worth noting that, even today, 60 per cent of our young people will not go to university.</para>
<para>When I went through university in the eighties with my first degree, which was free, only five to 10 per cent of Australians were tertiary educated—and I was one of those. I must admit, I was opposed to the changes that were made by Labor—again, the great reforming Labor, particularly on education—in the eighties. I was the union president of the oldest workers college in the world, the RMIT. I was in the National Union of Students. My very first Labor conference was actually protesting against HECS out the front of Wrest Point down in Tasmania. There were probably many of us who marched. But, with age and with wisdom, we realised that the transformation that happened as a result of that HECS reform opened up the opportunity for so many to go to university.</para>
<para>When university was free, it opened up many opportunities—many were the first in their family to go—but it was still about five to 10 per cent. Once you got into the HECS era, it opened that up from that five to 10 per cent to about 30 or 40 per cent of Australians getting a tertiary degree, which is extraordinary. It was a great result, a great reform. As I said, I was opposed to it as a student politician and as head of the Labor Club down at RMIT and also head of the union. I protested with my NUS colleagues. But with age and wisdom, I now realise that this was a major reform that has delivered significant benefit and significant opportunity. The Whitlam reforms made that first step towards opening up opportunity for tertiary education. The Dawkins reforms broadened that even further to an even larger group of people who now had that opportunity.</para>
<para>These bills—unlike those significant reforms by Whitlam, unlike those significant reforms by Dawkins, unlike those significant reforms under the Hawke and Howard governments—just tweak the edges. It reminds us of all the work that needs to be done to ensure we have a world-class postsecondary education and training system. Tweaking the current system will not deal with the profound systemic problems in the VET system. It will not deal with the inequities that have grown as student loans have expanded and as costs have shifted onto young people, including apprentices and trainees. It reminds us that this government doesn't care enough or have the capacity to do the hard work that needs to be done to build a better postschool system.</para>
<para>The VET sector is an area of huge concern for Labor. We are concerned about insufficient funding of the VET sector. We're concerned about the history of VET providers profiting under the VET FEE-HELP. And we're incredibly concerned about the skills shortage crisis in Australia. Canberra has been hit hard by the Turnbull government. We are always hit hard by coalition governments. When John Howard was elected in 1996, we lost tens of thousands of people from Public Service jobs and from our beloved national capital. We had three seats then. We had three electorates here in Canberra for the federal parliament. As a result of the plummet in the population, thanks to the savage cuts by the Howard government, we were then reduced to two seats. We've only, finally, got the third seat back. I look forward to helping whoever should win the preselection for that third seat to contest that election for Labor. I'm looking forward to being there. I've been there since 1983 handing out how-to-vote cards for Labor and I look forward to doing it yet again in the next few years. We're always hit hard by coalition governments. We've seen cuts to our Public Service and cuts to our national institutions, and I remind you of our pathetic share of the national infrastructure spend in this year's budget, but that's another speech.</para>
<para>Vocational education has not escaped unharmed. We are in a serious skills shortage in Canberra. The number of trainees and apprentices in Australia has plummeted by 49 per cent since 2013. That's a massive 49 per cent drop in trainees and apprentices right here in the nation's capital. This statistic does not go unnoticed in my community. You don't have to walk too far from this building to speak with someone who has been charged an absolute fortune for calling a tradie on the weekend, if they've managed to get a tradie on the weekend. I know that it's not just the expense for people at home but it's also the challenge for businesses that want to grow and prosper. Businesses with new ideas and innovations just can't find the talent to be able to do that. So it's hampering business opportunity and it's hampering economic opportunity here in the ACT. We're short on bricklayers, early childhood teachers, hairdressers, locksmiths, mechanics and bankers. The list goes on and on and on. Local businesses just can't fill these positions, even though they are trying. Instead of investing in skills and vocational education to fix this disaster, the Turnbull government ripped away $270 million in the 2018 budget, and this was on top of the $1.5 billion commitment this government made in last year's budget which wasn't spent. I repeat: not a cent of the $1.5 billion commitment to apprenticeships and TAFE in the budget last year has been spent. What's the point of budgeting for it if you're not going to use it?</para>
<para>What's the impact of those cuts in vocational education? It's a sector that provides a great opportunity, particularly for people from disadvantaged backgrounds and those who don't necessarily see tertiary education as an option for them and want to go into a trade or a vocational career. It provides a great opportunity for those who want to have a pathway from school through to VET and then on to university but want to take their time, find themselves and work out the groove for themselves. This government, with its never-ending cuts, has denied access and opportunity to tertiary education as well as the opportunities and choice that are provided by vocational education.</para>
<para>My community is in dire need of skills based workers—not just a quick fix but a permanent solution. We need a strategic solution. We need a considered solution. We need a well-researched solution. Canberra needs a government that is committed to trades and vocational education and will give it the investment it needs. This is the government that is constantly preaching 'jobs and growth', but it has failed miserably in investing in the skills to ensure the jobs and growth, particularly in the skills for trades. As I said, we've had a 49 per cent drop in trades and apprentices in Canberra since 2013.</para>
<para>Effective vocational education and skills formation is essential to national economic and social prosperity. It's essential for the jobs that haven't even been created yet. I'm talking here about cybersecurity. We need 19,000 cybersecurity experts in this country right now. We're not going to be able to get that through a tertiary degree. We need them right now. I don't even want to think what it's going to look like in two or three years in terms of our skills shortage. It is vital that we amp up the vocational sector and that we amp up the opportunities that are provided by cert IIIs and cert IVs to build that skill base, and build it quickly. What is this government doing on that front?</para>
<para>As I said, my sisters and I are living proof of the powers of education, as are hundreds of thousands of Australians. We need to provide opportunities for all Australians. We need to address the significant skill shortage that this nation is facing—not just our national capital, but the whole nation. If we are going to grow, if we are going to prosper, if we are going to be able to compete in the future and if we are going to keep our nation secure and safe, and cybersecure and cybersafe, we have got to make the investment in vocational education and we have to make it now.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank those members who have spoken on the Education and Other Legislation Amendment (VET Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018 and the Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2018. The bills amend the VET Student Loans Act 2016, the Higher Education Support Act 2003 and other legislation to establish VET student loans as a separate income-contingent loan. The bills move the legislative basis for VET student loan debts from the Higher Education Support Act into the VET Student Loans Act. In effect, this provides greater transparency of repayment rates for VET student loans and more timely and accurate reporting on the fiscal sustainability of the VET Student Loans program.</para>
<para>The repayment thresholds, repayment rates and indexation with respect to VET student loan debts will be the same as the repayment thresholds, repayment rates and indexation for HELP loans. Persons residing overseas who have a VET student loan debt will be required to make repayments in respect of those debts as per current arrangements. The bills also enable better continuity and more flexibility in delivering approved courses. This is achieved by enabling the courses and loan caps determination to reference the national register of courses, the authoritative information source on nationally recognised VET courses, training packages and their status.</para>
<para>The Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee, in its <inline font-style="italic">Scrutiny Digest</inline> No. 5 of 2018, requested more information on provisions in the VET student loan debt separation bill that apply an offence of absolute liability. In addition, there is a typographical error in the explanatory memorandum. To address the Scrutiny of Bills Committee's request and amend the typographical error, I table a correction and addendum to the explanatory memorandum.</para>
<para>I also wish to respond to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee's report on its inquiry into the bills. The committee recommends that the Senate pass the bills. I commend the committee's recommendation that supports better information for government and individuals through more timely, transparent and accurate reporting on the fiscal sustainability of the VET Student Loans program. I note that both the Labor senators' and the Greens senators' additional comments support the intent of the separation. However, Labor's comments also raise concerns with the VET sector more broadly and seek a large-scale review of the tertiary sector. I note that this is out of the scope of the bills. The Greens' comments indicate that the bills change repayment characteristics of VET student loan debts and question the repayment process. The bills, rather than make policy changes, ensure VET student loan repayment parameters align and are consistent with other HELP subprogram debtors, as is currently the case. I thank the various providers and peak bodies that made submissions to the inquiry and thank the committee for its endorsement of the bills. I also thank members for their contributions to this important debate about accurately reporting on the fiscal sustainability of the VET Student Loans program.</para>
<para>Finally, I intend to move parliamentary amendments to the Education and Other Legislation Amendment (VET Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill in the committee stage. The amendments delay the commencement of some items and provide for a renewable HELP balance, which also includes consequential amendments to the Higher Education Support Act and the VET Student Loans Act. These amendments are consistent with parliamentary amendments that were made to the Higher Education Support Legislation Amendment (Student Loan Sustainability) Bill 2018 prior to its passage on 14 August 2018. The parliamentary amendments to the Education and Other Legislation Amendment (VET Student Loan Debt Separation) Bill 2018 also include minor technical amendments to ensure consistency between how VET student loan debts are calculated under the VET Student Loans Act, following the separation from HELP debts, and how HELP debts are calculated under the Higher Education Support Act. These additional amendments are minor in nature and relate to the rounding down of cents.</para>
<para>I commend the bills to the House.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
<para>Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>98</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill and I ask leave of the House to move government amendments (1) to (16) as circulated together.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That government amendments (1) to (16), as circulated, be agreed to.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill, as amended, agreed to.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>98</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>98</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <a href="r6085" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>98</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>98</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Services Legislation Amendment (Student Reform) Bill 2018</title>
          <page.no>98</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
            <a href="r6150" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Services Legislation Amendment (Student Reform) Bill 2018</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>98</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BURNEY</name>
    <name.id>8GH</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before going into the substantive comments on the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Student Reform) Bill 2018, I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) condemns the Turnbull Government's cuts to Centrelink which have caused delays in Youth Allowance processing times for students from regional, rural and remote Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Turnbull Government to end these delays, which are putting at risk students' ability to start and continue their studies".</para></quote>
<para>I rise to support this bill. I think it's important that we understand, as I know this parliament does, the context in which we are having this debate on this piece of legislation. It is in the context of—as we have heard today and on many occasions—an incredibly crippling drought, particularly in New South Wales and Queensland. In a sense, this bill is not what I would describe as a response to that and not a measure to address the drought specifically, but it certainly has implications for young people who are living on those properties and the children of people who are very much affected by drought.</para>
<para>This is really an issue of access and equity. At the moment it is well understood that young people in regional and rural Australia are participating in tertiary education much less than their city counterparts. That's a really important point to understand in relation to this bill. The Social Services Legislation Amendment (Student Reform) Bill 2018 will expand access to youth allowance to regional and remote students who move away from home to study. Of course, it goes to reason that young people living in regional and remote areas of Australia, in many cases—in most cases—do need to move away from home to study. We know that, according to the Independent Review into Regional, Rural and Remote Education, commissioned by the government and conducted by John Halsey from Flinders University, young people in regional Australia are half as likely to have completed a university degree compared with their urban counterparts. I think that's a fact that a lot of people don't fully appreciate. When you think that only half as many young people in regional and remote Australia are participating in university, it is quite a shocking statistic.</para>
<para>It was a Labor government that introduced the youth allowance regional workforce independence criteria in 2011, as part of our reforms to increase the number of regional students attending university. It is thought by the government that this particular reform will bring about an extra 2,000 young people from regional and remote Australia participating in a university degree. It will hopefully take the numbers from something like 3,000 up to over 5,000.</para>
<para>A young person must satisfy criteria to participate in this scheme, and there are a number of criteria which I'd like to go through for the benefit of the House. The student's parental home must be in a regional or remote area. The student must need to move away to study, as I have outlined. Since leaving secondary school, the student must have, over a 14-month period, earned 75 per cent or more of wage level A of the national training wage schedule—that's about $25,000—or, for at least two years, worked at least 15 hours a week. Those criteria need to be understood in the context that it is often very challenging, particularly for young people from remote areas, to actually meet those two criteria. We need to understand that, in some remote areas, there is not an economy that allows a student or a young person to meet that criteria—and that is something to take on board. Nevertheless, Labor will support this bill, as I initially indicated.</para>
<para>This bill will increase the regional independence criterion parental income limit for students from regional and remote areas from $150,000 to $160,000 and add $10,000 to the income limit for each additional child in the family. Currently a flat threshold exists regardless of the number of children in a family. That is a very significant change to the criterion—one we hope will see an increase in the number of students being able to qualify for this payment. It will allow students to use the financial year prior to their gap year—assuming they do have a gap year—as the year when parental income is assessed. This will provide additional certainty about whether they will meet the parental income limit before taking a gap year—as I said, if they do take a gap year, and of course not all students do that.</para>
<para>We don't need a study to tell us that rural and remote students face extra and sizeable hurdles in undertaking post-secondary education. As I have outlined, some of that is geographic but it is often the capacity, particularly in difficult times like this, for families to afford for their young person to participate. As I said, it is about access and equity. The independent review that I referred to earlier was helpful in outlining and articulating those very challenges to policymakers—which, ultimately, has prompted the drafting of this bill. If people have a great interest in this, I recommend that they apprise themselves of Dr John Halsey's very fine work.</para>
<para>We all know too well that accommodation and living expenses represent a major challenge. For students from rural and remote areas there are the additional travel expenses that come from travelling from remote and regional centres to locations where places of study are and travelling home to visit your family. Accommodation is expensive—there's no question about that—especially in inner-city and suburban areas, and affordable accommodation can be difficult to find. That's a really important point to dwell on. The closest university to where I live is Sydney University, and housing and rental prices in that inner-city area of Sydney are absolutely exorbitant. You can pay $500 or more a week just for a one-bedroom unit, which of course is absolutely impossible for most students. There is of course student accommodation, but there is not enough to meet the needs of all students. This is a huge challenge, particularly for young people who have limited resources.</para>
<para>Travel from remote and regional areas can also be costly. We recognise that travel to reconnect with family is important for the successful transition into post-secondary studies. That is also an important point. For a young person who has lived in a small country town, a regional centre or indeed on a property their entire life and is adjusting to moving to a larger centre, studying, going to university and often being isolated, the ability to travel back home and have connection with family and country is very important. If that is not available to the young person, the student in question could abandon their studies. That's a very important point to be recognised.</para>
<para>The challenge facing all students in terms of meeting their daily living expenses is also one that, of course, will fluctuate depending on where you live. This week we saw the release of the 2017 Universities Australia student finances survey. It showed that a large proportion of regional students were experiencing a shortfall between their income and their expenses. Of course, the people that make up that shortfall are the family. As I said, for many families in regional and remote areas, as you would know, Deputy Speaker Goodenough, their situations are extremely challenging and difficult at the moment. It showed a larger proportion of regional students were experiencing that shortfall. The report says they are less likely to have savings to use in serious financial difficulty, less likely to have financial support from family and partners and more likely to be financially supporting dependents. The analysis showed a higher proportion of regional students were experiencing financial hardship when compared with major city students. It goes back to the point that I've been making throughout this speech about the inequities and what this is about at its heart: trying to address some of those inequities. Shockingly, the report found that almost one in five regional students were regularly going without food or necessities because they could not afford them. That is a shocking situation for young people to be in. Many have had to defer studies because they are unable to afford to continue.</para>
<para>Again, Labor supports this bill. This bill is integral to improving the welfare of regional and remote students and their access to further education. But let us not overlook the fact that the government has given with one hand and taken away with the other. Regional and remote students will not forget the government's cuts to regional universities and to regional students. Just before Christmas, the government cut $2.2 billion from Australian universities. The government's cuts to universities will hit regional universities the hardest as it's simply more expensive to deliver education in regional areas.</para>
<para>Not only is it more expensive to deliver education in regional areas; but there remains a huge disparity between levels of higher education attainment between regional and metropolitan Australia. Regional universities have said this policy will likely see some regional campuses close and local programs certainly cut back. The New South Wales Charles Sturt University, which is my old alma mater, will lose $57 million under this government because of those cuts; the University of Newcastle, $69 million; and the University of Wollongong, $51 million. In Queensland, James Cook University will lose $36 million under this government, and in Victoria La Trobe University will lose a whopping $81 million. If the National Party really cared about tertiary education for students from regional areas, they would stand up to the Liberals on university cuts, but we can see that's not happening.</para>
<para>According to Universities Australia, under Labor's policy there was an increase in regional and remote undergraduate enrolments of nearly 50 per cent between the years of 2008 and 2016. Regional and remote families won't forget the government's cuts to regional universities. They also won't forget the government's attempt to unleash cuts to regional students. Regional and remote families will not forget that the government had a bill before the parliament to cut energy supplements for anyone who had begun to receive a pension or allowance in September 2016. Of course, we see today, with the Prime Minister's one o'clock presser along with his Treasurer and Minister for Finance, that they have withdrawn not only big company tax cuts but also the cuts to the energy supplement. I have to say that I feel very cynical about that, because I think it was not about assisting students or people receiving a government benefit; it was more about saving the Prime Minister's job. That has been noted. I think it has been very much noted, along with the many other retreats that this government has displayed around energy over the last week, and the public will not be fooled by that.</para>
<para>I think it's also extremely important that we understand what is going on with the Prime Minister withdrawing—taking off the table—the cuts to the energy supplement. I have to say that, at a time of increasing underemployment, fewer graduate-entry jobs and rising energy bills, the government's capitulation on the energy supplement after 2½ years shows just how out of touch and cruel this government truly is.</para>
<para>And we cannot forget how difficult this government has made it for young people and students to contact and access Centrelink. I don't speak from an academic perspective on this. I have been contacted by many families and many students in distress over the Centrelink call wait times. They have blown out despite the minister's protestations today. They have blown out for students, with the average call wait time increasing from 31 minutes and 15 seconds to 35 minutes, and these are just averages. Ask any Australian who has had to contact Centrelink and they will tell you their own personal nightmare. The reality is that we've heard stories of people waiting hours just to speak to someone at Centrelink.</para>
<para>The median processing time for those on youth allowance is 28 days, but in many instances it has been well over a semester, placing enormous strain on those students. In two cases where I have spoken personally with the family, it has meant that students are living in absolutely substandard conditions or they have had to leave the course. Again, we know that many students, as I have said, have waited much longer. This is because the median times do not take into account the instances when Centrelink requests further information, which can further delay the approval process.</para>
<para>In June we heard the story of the 26-year-old student called Alex who had waited, at that point, 12 weeks for his youth allowance payment—12 weeks! That's three months, and even then he was still waiting. Because of these long wait times for youth allowance, students are living on the edge of their bank accounts and in many instances not coping. It is pushing them to the brink of desperation, if not into desperation.</para>
<para>Students shouldn't be forced to wait anxiously for their payments. They shouldn't be forced to choose between studies and welfare, between eating and not eating, between being warm and being cold. This not only affects the students but will also affect their families and immediate support networks. But this is the reality for students under this government: cuts to university, chipping away at the youth allowance and longer payment wait times.</para>
<para>Whilst Labor support this bill, we raise these issues in great seriousness. We also raise the issues, as I have said, in the terms of the amendment that I have moved. Families of remote and regional students won't forget the disregard that this government has shown towards students.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>74046</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the amendment seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Conroy</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>74046</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Barton 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.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RICK WILSON</name>
    <name.id>198084</name.id>
    <electorate>O'Connor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to support the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Student Reform) Bill 2018. This bill implements measures that will make it easier for rural, regional and remote students who have to move away from home to study and to gain youth allowance payments. Youth allowance is subject to partner, personal and parental income testing. Independence for youth allowance purposes means that the student payment is not reduced by parental income testing.</para>
<para>The bill will improve access to youth allowance for regional students who must relocate to study, in response to the Halsey review of regional, rural and remote education. In August 2017 Professor Halsey visited both Albany and Kalgoorlie, in my electorate of O'Connor, where access to independent youth allowance was expressed as one of the main factors affecting students' ability to pursue tertiary education.</para>
<para>This government has already made some positive changes to youth allowance, but there is more work to do. In 2015 the government removed the family asset test and the family actual means test from the parental income test. Removing the family assets test saw around 4,100 additional students qualify for independent youth allowance for the first time, accessing payments of more than $7,000 per annum. The passage of this bill in 2015 significantly reduced the regulatory burden on around 200,000 families subject to the family asset test.</para>
<para>Removing the family actual means test saw an additional 1,200 students receive youth allowance for the first time and some 4,800 existing students have had their payments rise by approximately $2,000 a year. Additionally, in 2016 the government announced it would reduce the period of employment for regional, rural and remote students under the youth allowance regional workforce independence criteria from 18 months to 14 months. This reduction responded to parental and student concerns that the 18-month period was causing regional students to take two years off, in order to earn their independent status prior to attending university. Reducing the period to 14 months has meant that students could satisfy the youth allowance regional workforce independence criteria by taking a single gap year rather than having to take two gap years. For example, if a student finished school in November 2016 they could commence university in February 2018, following their gap year, and receive youth allowance payments immediately.</para>
<para>In 2018 this government is making more changes to the independent youth allowance to ensure that our regional students have the same opportunities and access to tertiary education as their city counterparts. Schedule 1 of this bill allows for the implementation of a 2018-19 budget expense measure of $53.9 million over four years, to provided additional support for students, as a direct response to the independent Halsey review. The bill will increase the income cap for students accessing the youth regional workforce independence criteria from $150,000 to $160,000. It will also increase the new $160,000 cut-off by $10,000 for each additional child in the family, to take into account the extra cost of raising large families. This means, for the average two-child family, the parental income cut-off for youth allowance regional workforce independence criteria will be $170,000, a significant increase from the current $150,000.</para>
<para>On the passage of this bill, the increases will come into effect on 1 January 2019. In addition, feedback from some students has indicated that when they finish school their parental income may be under the cut-off but, by the time they have completed their self-supporting period, their parental income may have increased, preventing them from qualifying as independent and resulting in these students feeling they've, effectively, wasted their gap year. This bill will provide students with the option to make the year in which the parental income is assessed the financial year preceding the beginning of the self-supporting period. With this change, students will know before they decide to take a gap year whether their parental income will be under the cut-off. The number of students who qualify for youth allowance regional workforce independence criteria, it is estimated, will increase by 75 per cent.</para>
<para>Access to tertiary education for regional students is already difficult. To be denied assistance based on parental income, when they are already considered independent for most government related programs, is ludicrous. The $150,000 parental income cut-off to access these criteria was set in 2011 and has remained at $150,000 since its introduction. In addition, this parental income cut-off is the same regardless of family size. This doesn't reflect increasing wages or the extra costs associated with raising a larger family, household debt or real disposable income. The distance of students' parental homes in O'Connor to Perth, where universities are based, is significant. Unlike their city counterparts, these students are not able to live at home whilst studying and have their living expenses absorbed into the family home. Being unable to access financial assistance can prevent some regional students from pursuing tertiary study and places a significant financial burden on regional families.</para>
<para>The changes contained in this bill will help mitigate the disparity in access to higher education between regional students and their city counterparts. City students can live at home while studying at university or equivalent institutions and continue to be supported by the family. If they are eligible, they can also apply for youth allowance and receive an allowance of between $239 and $288 per fortnight.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>102</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Sydney Electorate: Redfern</title>
          <page.no>102</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PLIBERSEK</name>
    <name.id>83M</name.id>
    <electorate>Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>One of the great privileges of being the member for Sydney is representing the wonderful community of Redfern. Redfern is a suburb that's changed a lot over the years, but it is and has been for a long time the home of a thriving First Nations community. There's not just one mob in Redfern but representatives of many nations from around New South Wales and around Australia. The suburb first attracted Indigenous people from all over New South Wales to work in the factories and the railway workshops that were there in the 19th century. The connections that were formed across First Nations peoples—across tribes, across language groups—became the basis for a strong political movement.</para>
<para>Redfern locals attended a day of mourning and protest in 1938 to mark the 150th anniversary of the arrival of the First Fleet. In 1944, the Redfern All Blacks were formed by Aboriginal players who could not get a run with the other clubs in the local south Sydney district junior competition. It was in Redfern that the first Aboriginal-controlled community organisations were established—the first medical service, the first legal service and the first housing company. In 1972, four young men left Redfern for Canberra to set up a beach umbrella on the lawns opposite what is now Old Parliament House, founding the Tent Embassy. The Coloured Diggers march that started in Redfern saw, in 2017, First Nations service personnel and veterans leading the Anzac Day march here in Canberra—again, a movement that was started in my suburb of Redfern. The Babana Aboriginal Men's Group uses positive values of traditional Aboriginal culture to help men address a range of issues like men's health, family relationships, antiviolence, anti-drug and alcohol campaigns and post-release programs. The Tribal Warrior Aboriginal Corporation uses Aboriginal culture to provide employment skills and promote economic and social stability within the Redfern community. The relationship between these organisations and the local police area command has been fantastic and incredibly successful under the previous commander, Luke Freudenstein, and no doubt will be under his successor as well.</para>
<para>I'm so very proud to represent this community that has produced generations of activists who have changed the course of this country, and that's why I think it's a very good time to start to have a conversation not just in Redfern but around Australia about whether we should have a cultural centre, a museum, celebrating the contribution of First Nations people—the history, the culture, the art. Of course, this has to be led by local people in the Redfern community, including the traditional custodians of the land, the Gadigal people of the Eora nation. But of course it must include a much broader collection of people too.</para>
<para>Washington DC has the National Museum of the American Indian and Canada has its First Peoples Hall. In my view, we should have something similar in this country to tell the story of more than 60,000 years of continuous history and culture: the stories of the Dreaming; a place that would preserve and teach hundreds of First Nations languages; to tell the recent stories of the frontier wars and the massacres, the long and continuing struggle for land rights, the Wave Hill walk off, Mabo and Wik; to tell the story of the world's oldest continuing culture—its art, language, dancing, music and spirituality; to celebrate First Nations leaders across our country in their communities, in politics, in arts, in business and in sport; to celebrate their successes. It could be a place of pilgrimage for all of those who count First Nations people among their ancestors. It'd be a terrific educational resource for schoolchildren and students of any age, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, from all around our country. Such a centre would ensure that the real history of this country is taught—not a black-armband version of history but not a whitewash either; a truthful acknowledgement of the role that those of us with non-Indigenous heritage played in the position of continuing disadvantage that so many First Nations people still suffer now. It'd be an international tourist destination that could provide employment for the local community. Of course the planning and campaign has to be led by the local community, but I'd love to work with them on that.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>What's Your Superpower?</title>
          <page.no>103</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VASTA</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have some very special guests in the gallery tonight. Laura Lewis and Deborah Oxtoby are two incredible advocates for people with autism in our community. Hi, Deb. Hi, Laura. Hi, Jeff. They flew down from Brisbane to be here tonight. I hope this speech can do justice to the amazing work that you do and to the difference that you're making to so many people's lives.</para>
<para>This year Laura and Deb started a social group for children with autism. The What's Your Superpower? group meets every Friday night at Waterloo Bay Leisure Centre. In just one month they grew to over 100 members. They're growing faster by the day, and when you hear their members' stories and how much the group has helped them it's easy to see why.</para>
<para>I first met Laura at one of my weekend mobile offices. The thing that strikes you most when you talk to her is just how passionate she is about the work that she's doing. Laura's oldest son, Clay, has autism spectrum disorder. She recently shared a beautiful piece that she wrote on her blog about the struggle that she's been through since Clay's diagnosis. I would read the whole thing here, if I had enough time. It's called 'To feel like you belong'. I encourage everyone listening to give it a read. About the What's Your Superpower? group Laura says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I met my peers and we could just look at each other and understand.</para></quote>
<para>What a touching line that says everything about this wonderful group. It's not just about giving children the chance to hang out with other people just like them and it's not just about giving their families a space to socialise without being judged; it's about helping others understand—really understand—that people with autism aren't so different. Deb told me the group breaks down barriers and encourages acceptance. That's why I'm so happy to be here tonight speaking on their behalf and getting their good word out.</para>
<para>Laura's son, Clay, is a great example of a person with autism overcoming barriers. After he struggled to find part-time work after school, Clay started his own bin-cleaning business. It's been a roaring success. He's in great demand in the Bayside area. The glowing reviews on the Clay Needs No Moulding Facebook page all point to what a professional, hardworking young man he is. I'm pleased to say the tight-knit Bayside community has thrown their support behind What's Your Superpower?</para>
<para>Deb told me that, after Clay's story ran in the local paper, some local businesses approached their group to ask them what they could do to help. It really highlights the importance of what this group is doing. Laura and Deb started What's Your Superpower? to give kids with autism and their families a place to have fun and be themselves on Friday nights. Now they're looking to inspire others across Australia to start their own groups. What's Your Superpower? has helped reduce social isolation for these children, raise awareness in the community and bring local businesses and local representatives like me in to bat for them. If you're in the Brisbane area, you're welcome to join them. Or, if you can, start your own group with other like-minded parents. You can also spread the conversation and advocate for greater support for people with autism.</para>
<para>The government is also doing its part, with two very important announcements on the weekend. We've announced the new Autism Advisory Group made up of autism experts, service providers and people with autism. This group will advise the NDIA on autism and how to deliver the best outcomes for people with autism. We've also announced $7.8 million in funding to fix six autism-specific early learning and care centre to stay open until 2020 and continue to provide intensive support to children with autism. Thanks, Laura. Thanks to you, Deb, and to your husband, Jeff, for being here tonight. There are great things ahead for What's Your Super Power? I look forward to seeing the group and its members thrive into the future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Paterson Electorate</title>
          <page.no>104</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SWANSON</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
    <electorate>Paterson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>During the past few days of this parliamentary sitting week the people of Australia could be forgiven for thinking that the business of running this country has been forgotten, for thinking that those entrusted to govern believed their positions and egos were more important than their policies, for thinking that the core business of this parliament, serving the people of Australia, had been eclipsed by the sideshow we have all borne witness to—and I believe the bastardry continues this very night. I rise this evening to make sure my constituents in Paterson know that they are not forgotten. They remain my first priority. I am here in Canberra and I gear every day towards making our beautiful region—the Hunter and Port Stephens—an even better place to live, work, play and raise a family. And this will be the case as long as I sit in this parliament.</para>
<para>I am here to call out this government's new botched childcare plan which disadvantages so many children and their parents in my electorate and completely abandons any pretence that we should be engaged in early childhood education. I am here because I want to support the workers, the businesses, the entrepreneurs and the industries in my electorate as they embrace innovation. I am here to continue to lobby for better NBN services and mobile phone services. I am here to fight for pathways from education to a worthwhile and meaningful career. People entering the workforce is what I care about. I am here to call for more apprenticeships and VET funding and incentives towards lifelong learning.</para>
<para>I want my constituents to know what I stand for. But, most importantly, I want them to know that I stand for them. I want them to know that I'm working to redress the ridiculous aged-care crisis. Right now, there are more than 100,000 Australians in limbo, waiting. This is an issue that cuts to the core of almost every Australian family at some time. Our old Australians deserve better.</para>
<para>I want my big-hearted constituents who have worked tirelessly in support of our drought-stricken farmers to know that my heart beats for those affected and, more than that, that I have spoken up in this place on many occasions about the need for a coordinated whole-of-government response to the situation and that I have called out the former agriculture minister, the member for New England, who sat on his hands and did nothing for five years and now bleats on about how we should be helping those poor farmers.</para>
<para>I want workers to know that the cuts to their penalty rates were absolutely despicable, and I will strive with my colleagues to reverse this situation. I want people who face financial challenges to know that I understand how difficult it can be to make ends meet and hear how debilitating the energy bills are at the moment and know that something must be done. I too want everyone to be able to put on the heater in winter and put on the air conditioner, if they've got it, in summer. I will continue to call on this government to reveal some energy policy that attracts investment in renewables, and I will fight for projects to be built in our electorate.</para>
<para>I want investment to flow to the regions, not just the big cities, and I want the hardworking people who pay their taxes to know that I really oppose the idea of giving billions of dollars to big businesses and banks. Well, it seems like the government decided they opposed that today; they have flip-flopped on that as well.</para>
<para>Suffice it to say that, in my role as the elected member for Paterson, there are times when issues keep me up at night. One such issue is the PFAS shame. I am here to continue to shame this government, who have done nothing meaningful to support my constituents at Saltash, Williamtown and Fullerton Cove whose lives have been devastated by the chemical PFAS. I am here to say to the Prime Minister, whether it be Mr Turnbull, Mr Dutton, Mr Morrison or whoever: come to Williamtown. The New South Wales Liberal Council meeting is on this very weekend at Port Stephens in my electorate. Gladys Berejiklian, the state Premier, will be there. Tradition says that the federal leader should attend as well. Whomever that may be, Prime Minister, when the VIP lands at Williamtown on Saturday do not detour past the people of Williamtown. Have the gumption to face them and explain why you have done nothing to help them get through what is one of the worst experiences anyone living in modern Australia could go through—having their land and, indeed, their body contaminated by toxic firefighting foam. Stand up and be a true leader, Prime Minister. Come to Williamtown.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>La Trobe Electorate: Tour of Hope</title>
          <page.no>104</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOOD</name>
    <name.id>E0F</name.id>
    <electorate>La Trobe</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise tonight to speak about a solution to the great concern in my electorate regarding youth crime and gang crime. Together with Pastor Larry Sebastian, from Casey City Church, and Mr Beram Kumar, chairman and CEO of Strategic Missions Partnerships Inc, I am working with the Tour of Hope project, where Brazilian soccer players come out to help disadvantaged kids. I've actually met the soccer players, and some are former Brazilian World Cup champions. They are so excited about helping young people, in particular our Sudanese youth. Many of these Brazilian soccer players, I was told through their interpreters, had very tough childhoods and they just want to give back. They go all around the world doing an amazing job.</para>
<para>I'm also working with Dr Thomas Edwards, who has been a senior lecturer in psychology, and Dr Cosimo Chiera on a proposal to facilitate behaviour change in at-risk youth through the development of hope, as people with high levels of hope also tend to demonstrate increased levels of wellbeing. This is most clearly seen through increased social competence and improved social support, which is much needed for our disadvantaged youth. The great thing about this is that I've known Pastor Larry Sebastian for many years, and I was able to team him up with Dr Edwards and his team.</para>
<para>We are working on a three-year proposal to assist migrant youth, but particularly Sudanese youth—we've had a lot of problems out in my electorate. It will be a fantastic project for our local area. This proposal outlines the opportunity to establish a soccer academy in the La Trobe electorate, which is home to one of Australia's most diverse and quickly growing populations. The growth, disposition and composition of this population, which comprises some of the neediest and most disenfranchised people groups, has seen a significant increase in antisocial behaviour and general disengagement from social norms. The wider public has expressed concerns for safety, and authorities struggle to meet the growing needs of these communities.</para>
<para>The soccer academy has the potential to counteract some of these issues through a social intervention spearheaded by the sport of soccer while enabling integrated and multipronged opportunities for engagement and support for those involved and their families. The migration committee, which is a joint committee—and I thank the member for Bonner, who is beside me, who is also on that committee—heard, when we were talking to various migrant youths and organisations around the country, how important soccer and sports are, especially in the Sudanese community. One of the things we learnt is that, when they play soccer, it's a team sport. They have to be at training on time and they have to work with their team. The big thing we learnt was the common language becomes English, which is so important to make sure that everyone who's migrated to Australia fits into Australian culture.</para>
<para>This preventative initiative would be a collaboration between several not-for-profit organisations and former professional Brazilian soccer players who are now coaches. Many of them have experienced poverty, worked in foreign countries and faced other barriers to success. However, each has overcome those barriers and played soccer at the highest levels of the game. This is all about giving young people hope. These players have a strong desire to give hope and improve the lives of young people through participation and learning skills of discipline and resilience. Working with other partners as well, this venture is so exciting.</para>
<para>Can I thank Larry Sebastian, for all the great work he's done within the community, and his church, Casey City Church. They have a fantastic youth program and they've teamed up with Tom, realising that, if they work with him, they can bring the science behind giving hope to these young people. I'm very excited about this project. We just have to make sure we deliver it, because it will make a difference to so many young lives in La Trobe.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>India: Floods</title>
          <page.no>105</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROWLAND</name>
    <name.id>159771</name.id>
    <electorate>Greenway</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise tonight to address the parliament about the devastating floods that have befallen southern India. The state of Kerala hugs the south-western coast of India and it is home to more than 33 million people. It is renowned as a tropical paradise of golden beaches, picturesque canals and Ayurvedic rejuvenation. But today it is in the grip of catastrophe.</para>
<para>Twelve of its 14 districts have been impacted by what have been described as the worst floods this century. Reports vary on the precise scale and scope of the devastation, but the impact is staggering. To appreciate the scale of this tragedy, one need only look to the estimated more than one million people who have been displaced by the floods. Sadly, some 400 people have died and there are fears that, inevitably, the toll will climb. Aid agencies have reported widespread destruction resulting from floods and landslides. The damage to property has been disastrous. Homes remain submerged, crops destroyed and livestock lost. An estimated 10,000 kilometres of roads and bridges have been washed away, further frustrating disaster relief efforts.</para>
<para>The storm and flood damage is predicted to go in excess of $3 billion. As I speak, there are still fears for hundreds of thousands of people in Kerala who do not have access to clean water, sanitation, food and shelter. Approximately 4,000 relief camps have been set up to house people who have been displaced and to provide emergency assistance. Hundreds of boats and dozens of helicopters have been deployed as part of the rescue efforts. In many towns and villages in Kerala, rivers and lakes are the lifeblood of the community. Unfortunately, these waterways, which provide water for residents, livestock and crops alike can and have become deadly, with monsoon rain swelling rivers and overflowing dams. This is the reality Kerala now faces.</para>
<para>Kerala is also a popular location for tourists, with its beaches, rivers, forests and mountains, along with its temples and ports—all major attractions for domestic and international visitors. The impact of flooding on the local tourism industry will be significant. Kerala is a drawcard for significant religious and cultural festivals, including Onam, which falls on 25 August this year. It is an auspicious occasion which I have celebrated with my own local community.</para>
<para>Whilst it is crucial that disaster relief support is provided immediately, it is also imperative that ongoing support is given in the region to alleviate the damage to the local economy. Officials have reported that the rainfall in some areas is well over double that of a typical monsoon season. It's crucial that we elevate discussion within the Asia-Pacific and the Indo-Pacific region about preparation efforts for extreme climate events, including flood mitigation. Australia can and should lead this conversation.</para>
<para>Labor has offered its support for the Australian government to provide any assistance required in the wake of the floods, but we also understand that the government of India is advanced in the deployment of its own resources to cover disaster relief and rehabilitation. At a non-government level, I pay tribute to the generosity of the Indian diaspora in Australia, who are assisting in supporting the relief effort. I know that a number of local events and support drives have been initiated. Individuals and groups from the Australian Indian community have already begun fundraising and supporting those efforts to assist displaced people in need.</para>
<para>The people of Kerala face a long road to rebuild their homes and lives. <inline font-style="italic">The Indian Express</inline> reported today, quoting the state medical education minister, Girish Mahajan, about those affected:</para>
<quote><para class="block">They are shattered. Floods have played havoc with their lives and there is a sense of gloom among them.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">They have waded in the floodwaters for more than 20-30 hours and several have fungal infections. Their houses are flooded and furniture can be seen submerged in water. It is a dismal sight.</para></quote>
<para>I am privileged to represent a diverse, strong and growing community in Greenway which has ties to India, and specifically to Kerala, by birth or descent. My thoughts, prayers and a standing offer of support are with my many constituents who have family or loved ones affected by this terrible disaster.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Robertson Electorate: Central Coast Mariners</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs WICKS</name>
    <name.id>241590</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In my electorate of Robertson, on the New South Wales Central Coast, there's been plenty of excitement this week. It's all thanks to the fastest man in the world. Usain Bolt has signed on to train with our local team in the Hyundai A-League, the Central Coast Mariners, and is now calling the Central Coast home.</para>
<para>We all know Bolt as the fastest man in the world, the eight-time Olympic gold medallist, the world record holder for the 100- and 200-metre sprints and the man who can cover 100 metres in just 9.58 seconds. We know that Usain Bolt is an incredible track athlete, and now we get to see him tackle a new challenge, swapping his running shoes for the football. Usain has now signed on to train with the Mariners to learn as much as he can, hone his skills and chase his dream of playing professionally.</para>
<para>It's been widely reported that Usain Bolt had plenty of offers from across the globe, including offers from football clubs in Asia, France and Spain. But I do have to say that it wasn't a huge surprise that he opted for Australia and the Central Coast. I've said before in this place that I'm lucky enough to represent the best region in the best country in the world, and it would seem that Usain Bolt might also agree.</para>
<para>Just yesterday, Bolt had his first training session with the Central Coast Mariners at Central Coast Stadium, in Gosford, and there were plenty of spectators. Nearly 100 journalists from across the nation and even some from France made the trip to Gosford to see Usain's first training session, which happened to be on his 32nd birthday.</para>
<para>I've got to say there really is a buzz on the Central Coast for football fans and even for those like me who are reasonably new to the sport—although I will admit to now being a weekend soccer mum—and we're all eager to see the Central Coast's newest resident in action on the pitch. I think it's safe to say that the Central Coast is insane for Usain. There's been plenty of love for Bolt from all over the community and especially from the Mariners. Shaun Mielekamp, the CEO of the Central Coast Mariners, said that one of the reasons Bolt chose the Mariners was that they believed in him right from the beginning and gave him a chance. Mariners coach, Mike Mulvey, said that Usain brings to the team the determination and willpower it takes to win eight Olympic gold medals and that that is a real asset.</para>
<para>For the Mariners, Usain Bolt brings with him a boost for the club, and this is also flowing down to local clubs on the Central Coast. Rowena Brooks, from the Avoca Sharks football club, said that the Sharks are thrilled. She said she can't wait to see what this means for football on the Central Coast moving forward. Rowena also said she knows that plenty of families, including her own, are excited to get to a match where Usain will be playing in the yellow and navy.</para>
<para>Phil Butler, from Southern & Ettalong United Football Club, told me that every second year the Mariners head to the club and take the younger players through a session, and they're now very much looking forward to the next visit. Phil said that the Southern & Ettalong United Football Club have had players from the club go to join the Central Coast Mariners junior team. With so many younger players looking up to the Mariners, Phil told me he thinks Usain will be a great role model for the next generation of local football stars.</para>
<para>Julie Dolan, from the International Football and Tennis School, in Kariong, said that the whole school is delighted that Usain Bolt has joined the Mariners. Julie said that the students are particularly happy, as the school has got a great working relationship with the Mariners, and that there's a chance that students will have the opportunity to see Usain either train or play or maybe even visit the school. Julie said she thinks that having Usain Bolt on the Central Coast will help drive even greater passion and a higher level of participation in the sport on a local level.</para>
<para>Usain Bolt's motto is 'Don't think limits', and I think that that sums up the Central Coast—our people, who we are, what we stand for and where we're going—pretty nicely. I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome Usain Bolt to the Central Coast and to wish him all the success in the world with the Mariners. I know that everyone on the Central Coast will be backing him all the way. We can't wait to see Usain Bolt go from strength to strength and kick even more goals for the Central Coast, both on and off the field.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 20 : 0 0</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>107</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <fedchamb.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" background="">
        <p class="HPS-MCJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a href="Federation Chamber" type="">Wednesday, 22 August 2018</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Hogan)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 09:59.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>108</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Macarthur Electorate: Schools</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to inform the chamber of an issue with the physical condition of many of the public schools in my electorate of Macarthur. Many of the schools in Macarthur were built in the sixties and seventies and have only had infrequent and superficial maintenance since then. Conditions that would be unacceptable in other areas are considered okay for the people of Macarthur.</para>
<para>The particular issue I wish to raise is the present condition of Passfield Park School, a special school located in Minto, within my electorate of Macarthur. I've had a longstanding relationship with the school over my many years as a paediatrician and now as the federal member. Indeed, many of my patients have attended the school over the years, and I wish to state on the record that the staff and the teachers at the school are some of the most incredible people I've ever had the privilege of working with. They do a very hard job very well and very compassionately. However, over the years I've noticed the truly disturbing condition of the school's buildings, which the staff and students are made to deal with. The school's buildings are in such a poor state that I have in fact been contacted by members of the community, completely external to the school, who have noticed the conditions deteriorate even further over the last few years.</para>
<para>This is perhaps one of the worst-kept secrets in Macarthur, but I've had enough. The New South Wales Liberal government has failed to address the community's concerns in fixing the school, which is no surprise when one considers the backlog of school maintenance in the area. Instead of receiving the work it requires, the school over the years has merely received touch-up jobs. Some visible mould has been removed from time to time, and minor paint jobs have been undertaken. But, from firsthand experience and exposure to the school, I can tell you that the school needs much more than that to bring it up to an appropriate standard. It needs to be knocked down and rebuilt. It's no longer fit for purpose. Some classrooms are inaccessible to those in wheelchairs—and many of the kids at the school are in wheelchairs—and the mould problem is unrelenting. It is a truly sad state of affairs, and I must confess that I get quite upset when I see and hear of the conditions that these beautiful children and their loving teachers and carers are made to endure.</para>
<para>I've tried to undertake the appropriate action, lobbying the New South Wales government to take care of the situation, but its lack of compassion and empathy has left me with no choice but to call this out in the parliament of Australia. I wish to take this opportunity to formally invite the New South Wales Premier, the New South Wales Minister for Education and the federal minister for education to see firsthand the conditions of the school and see if they can justify the government's continued ignorance and lack of action. Premier, we can even meet there on a weekend. Trust me: I know my way around the school. There will be no PR, no cameras, no spin. Just bring yourself and some builders, please.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Dunkley Electorate: Women's Sports Facilities</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CREWTHER</name>
    <name.id>248969</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>With the growing number of girls and women participating in sport across Australia, and especially in Dunkley, and an increased focus on health and activity levels throughout the community, one of my major focuses has been ensuring that the facilities, support and services we need are available. Recently, I had the pleasure of visiting the Langwarrin Football and Netball Club at Lloyd Park in Langwarrin. Langwarrin FNC is a growing club, and many teams are experiencing success this season in their finals campaigns, both at the junior and senior levels.</para>
<para>I was delighted to recently open the new women's change room at Lloyd Park, specially designed to cater for female umpires as well as players, towards which the federal coalition government contributed $10,500, which I secured in partnership with the Frankston City Council. This much-needed upgrade, which includes a portable change room and associated utilities to accommodate female players and officials, will assist the club to keep growing its membership base and supporting women in sport. The project will improve the viability of the Langwarrin Football and Netball Club and will provide opportunities to grow the club's membership even further, making it an attractive destination for young girls and women in our community. This project is on top of another project at the same place, where we put in $15,000 towards a new scoreboard.</para>
<para>I've also had a number of conversations with some of the female umpires as well as the young players who came along to our announcement the other day. They agreed that, had they had the facilities, community support and infrastructure in place a long time ago, it would have enabled them to participate more in football—to start playing to begin with and then to keep playing. In the past, our society didn't provide sportswomen with the same opportunities in football, but we are making sure that this up-and-coming generation have better opportunities to do what they love.</para>
<para>The reception we received from the girls playing football, who were training there when we came down, was fantastic. Their enthusiasm for the sport and their drive for success was infectious. I'm very proud to be delivering the infrastructure that they need and have a consistent record of doing so, along with my friend and colleague the Minister for Regional Development, Territories and Local Government, the Hon. John McVeigh. We have some amazing sports men and women in Dunkley, and I am committed to working with our sports clubs, whether they be Langwarrin Football and Netball Club or other clubs across the community, to provide the best possible chances and facilities for this new generation of champions. We are committed to supporting healthy communities across Australia, including in my electorate Dunkley. It's great seeing such a push across the community, with people getting out and exercising and pursuing their passions.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Turnbull Government</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to ask the question that's being asked around the corridors of Parliament House: what are our Liberal government talking about today? It's clear they're talking about themselves. We are here in Canberra watching the final fizzle of this fizzer government. We are here listening to the infighting and seeing a government that has been completely lacking in focus on the Australian people across this last week, but that should not be a surprise, because it has been five years of a lack of attention to the Australian people from this government.</para>
<para>Today, they are trying to press control-alt-delete. They want to reset this government. Whether it be a Turnbull prime ministership, a Dutton prime ministership or a third one that comes through the ranks, they are really just trying to press the reset button. It doesn't matter who the Prime Minister is under this government. They can't walk away from their voting record. They cannot walk away from the last five years. Pressing control-alt-delete will not work. It will not work in the communities that I represent, because you can't walk away when you voted against a royal commission into the banks repeatedly. Now we're seeing exactly what was going to be unearthed by that royal commission, and people in my electorate are mortified. They are horrified to think that people—ordinary people, ordinary Australians—were being ripped off by the banks. The government can't walk away from the fact that they have no economic answers for communities like ours and those around the country. They can't walk away from the fact that they voted for $80 billion worth of tax cuts for the big end of town. They've done nothing about housing affordability. They can't walk away from their voting record on education. None of them can walk away from what is happening now in the early education and childhood sector. They can't walk away from the errors that were made. They can't walk away from families having to deal with Centrelink and having to pay full fees while waiting for rebates for weeks and weeks. They can't walk away from their record on schools or from the $17 billion that they want to give to the banks. On this side Labor want to make sure our schools are funded fairly and properly. They can't walk away from their cuts to universities. They can't walk away from their failures on TAFE and failures for apprentices.</para>
<para>It doesn't matter if, at the end of this week, we have a Prime Minister named Turnbull or a Prime Minister named Dutton. They can't walk away from their record on health. They can't walk away from their attempt to introduce a GP tax or their cuts to hospitals or, sadly, their cuts to preventable health. They can't walk away from the long waiting lists in aged care for My Aged Care. They can't walk away from any of this. They cannot press control-alt-delete, because the Australian public will remember how they voted and what they voted for.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Boothby Electorate: Volunteering</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FLINT</name>
    <name.id>245550</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On Sunday, 12 August, I joined the dedicated Marino Residents Association volunteers and local residents for a working bee at Burnham Road, Kingston Park, in my electorate of Boothby. Kingston Park is one of the suburbs that make up the postcode 5049, which also includes Marino, Seacliff, Seacliff Park and Seaview Downs. This part of Adelaide is home to our best coastal views and coastline. The Marino Residents Association, also known as the 5049 Coastal Community, donate much of their time to preserving the local environment and advocating for issues that matter to our community. That's why I was delighted to join them in planting over 1,000 plants along the Kingston Park foreshore. This really was a whole-of-community effort with local residents, Councillor Lynda Yates and staff from the City of Holdfast Bay, Phil and Jo Rogers from LJ Hooker Glenelg, members of the Friends of Marino Conservation Park and the Marino Residents Association all helping out.</para>
<para>In addition to their fantastic planting efforts, the Marino Residents Association have worked hard on community issues including the restoration of services to the Seaford train line and the reopening of the Pine Avenue crossing at Seacliff, and I have been supporting them and our community in these efforts. I am always delighted to help the association out with the production of their quarterly newsletter and to play a small part in supporting their incredibly hard-working committee volunteers—President David Bagshaw, Vice-President Alison Cormack, Ric Bierbaum, Beryl Hall, Emma Sandery and Noel Paul.</para>
<para>I also want to take this opportunity to recognise the work of the Friends of Marino Conservation Park, who look after around 30 hectares of land surrounding the Marino lighthouse. I joined the Friends of Marino Conservation Park volunteers at the end of July for a very successful community planting day, when we planted native grasses and groundcover plants to add to the natural flora in the area. Working with the friends, I helped them to secure 2½ thousand dollars for seating along the Marino Conservation Park botanical trail so that visitors of all ages can stop and rest and enjoy the view as they enjoy the walk. The Marino Conservation Park does not just provide beautiful native coastal bushland on its hillsides; it also provides the most spectacular view of Adelaide's coastline and suburbs. I really do encourage everyone to visit the park. A huge thank you to Alan Wilson, Nigel Charman, Barbara Randall and all of the Friends of Marino Conservation Park for everything you do to ensure the future of our natural environment for many years to come.</para>
<para>As we know in this place, volunteer groups play such an important role in our communities and are just one of the reasons I am so proud to represent them and my community in this place.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tasmania: Health Care</title>
          <page.no>110</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Denison</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There's a health crisis in Tasmania and, frankly, both the Liberal and Labor parties are to blame. To see it for yourself you only need to wander down Liverpool Street past the Royal Hobart Hospital, where it is all too common to see ambulances queued all the way up the ramps because they're waiting for beds. According to the relevant union, it's the new normal. Moreover, people are waiting months or sometimes years for elective surgery, with over 7,000 people currently on the elective surgery waiting list and nearly 30,000 on the list just to see a specialist. And, of course, there are those who wait hours and even days in the emergency department because they simply can't get a bed in a ward. It doesn't have to be this way; although it will be until whoever is in government gets serious about fixing things.</para>
<para>A good start would be more funding, because health in Tasmania is still grossly underfunded. The current Liberal government might crow about record investment, but the fact is there's still not enough when ambulances are ramped and people are waiting hours or days in emergency. While I did manage to secure $340 million for the Royal rebuild and $325 million in a boosted Tassie health system, it shouldn't be left up to a federal politician to go chasing money from Canberra for what is the responsibility of a state government, a state government that also needs to plan better and have the vision to make big, bold reform. That's why I call, again, on the Tasmanian government to close a northern hospital, because it is simply absurd that we have three hospitals in the north of the state for half of the population and only one in the south. Yes, I know there are three marginal seats in the north, but that's why we need politicians to put the public interest ahead of their political self-interest.</para>
<para>Planning also means looking well into the future and anticipating the distant needs of our health system, not just applying bandaids to get us to the next election. Hence, it's unfathomable that neither party, Liberal or Labor, has committed to stage 2 of the Royal Hobart Hospital rebuild that would see a dedicated mental health facility, and it defies all logic that mental health more broadly remains so neglected. For instance, we desperately need more acute mental health beds at the Royal Hobart Hospital right now, as well as increased support in the community, such as more CAT teams and supported accommodation.</para>
<para>In closing, let me simply say that the Tasmanian public health system is in a deep hole, born of many years of neglect under both Labor and Liberal governments. Mercifully, there are solutions at hand. We just need a state government to finally come along and seize those opportunities.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>International Space Settlement Design Competition</title>
          <page.no>110</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Deputy Speaker Hogan, I'm sure that this will be close , and near and dear , to your heart . This is about regional kids having a crack, regional kids who are successful, r egional kids who I think will be the absolute apple of their parents' eye . The ir school s are proud of them, their state is proud of them and their nation is proud of them. I'm talking about three y ear 11 students from the Bundaberg State High School who were selected to take part in the International Space Settlement Design Competition. For those who might not know, that's for NASA, that big organisation that does all sorts of wonderful things and is cutting edge in terms of its design. Brooklyn Davis , Kasey Chandler and Alex Buck holz are our three local champions who travel led to Cape Canaveral in a combined Australian team to take part in the competition , which they won. They won. The Australian team , t hree of them from the Bundaberg State High School , won this international event for kids .</para>
<para>This competition started in 1983 and was supported by NASA , of course . It targets high - school students and recreates the experience of working on an aerospace company's proposal team. The teams are asked to envision space colonies in accordance with an RFP , which is a request for proposal. An RFP is used where the request requires technical expertise or specialise d capability , or where the product or service being requested does not yet exist and the proposal may require research and development to create whatever is being created.</para>
<para>A very proud teacher, Keith Holledge , the head of Industrial Technology and Design at Bundaberg State High School , has been there inspiring th ese types of students for at least 25 years. He's a former woodworker. He's been involved in STEM programs since 1990 . In fact, he started the CO 2 —carbon dioxide— dragster cars 35 years ago. He secure d a $330,000 grant to supply a state - of - the - art computer-aided design facility in 2004 , and became involved in the Australian Space Design Competition 14 years ago. Mr Holledge, as I said, is a very proud teacher. What did he have to say about his students? He said :</para>
<quote><para class="block">Their dreams will become our reality. Our kids are the ones who will be fixing all our problems.</para></quote>
<para>I think that's a great quote. It's a great reflection on th os e kids who are coming from regional Australia, who are coming from regional towns like Bundaberg and like yours, Mr Deputy Speaker, who are out there having a crack. They're doing really well in science , technology, engineering and mathematics — and they find themselves at NASA. We couldn't be prouder, and I think everyone is parliament should be proud of that type of performance. It couldn't happen without help, and sponsors included David Batt, the state member for Bundaberg. My office provided support , along with a range of other local businesses.</para>
<para>Quite simply, this is about regional kids having a go and being successful. We should support that type of success at every single opportunity. Let's talk about the good things in our regions: o ur kids who are out there trying hard. I think this is a great reflection on all of us , and I congratulate them on their success.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Live Animal Exports</title>
          <page.no>111</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KATE ELLIS</name>
    <name.id>DZU</name.id>
    <electorate>Adelaide</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It has now been some 12 years since I first rose in this parliament to put forward my concerns about the issue of live exports and the concerns of the constituents that I represent here— 12 years , a number of speeches, countless letters , c onstant lobbying, to put forward the very deeply held concerns that so many residents of Australia have. It has been 12 years , but still it falls on the deaf ears of this government, who is committed to only doing the bare minimum at best. The constituents that I represent and I as the person who has the privilege of putting forward their concerns in this parliament are not going to give up. We will keep putting forward our concerns. We will keep advocating for change.</para>
<para>I wanted this morning to share the words of some of the residents of the Adelaide electorate who have written to me. Like, I'm sure , every member of this parliament, we've had thousands and thousands of letters. But two of them that I received recently particularly stand out. One of them comes from Evie. Evie is six years old and , at six years old, she decided it was time that she wrote her first letter to her local MP. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… I watched a small part of video about how sheep are treated while aboard large transportation ships. I felt really really shocked and sad to see this. I also felt very angry. I actually ran around the kitchen table stomping my feet.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I wanted to yell at the people who ran the ship b ut my dad told me that all I'd get would be a red face.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Please can you stop this terrible treatment of sheep. It might mean changing some of the rules in Canberra and I don't know how to do that by myself.</para></quote>
<para>Evie, we will do that.</para>
<para>I also heard from Molly, who is 12 years old. She sent me a poem. I won't read all of it, but it states:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… some things on this world are too evil to be true</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The end of these things can be achieved by you</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Please end these terrors before it's too late</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It's up to you to decide their fate …</para></quote>
<para>I know the member sitting alongside me, the member for Lalor, as a former school principal would be very impressed with the efforts of both of these young women from the Adelaide electorate. I tell them and the thousands of others who have contacted me that, whilst the government are once again occupied only by themselves, speaking to each other and lobbying each other to try to protect their own jobs, we hear you. I have stood up for these concerns in this place for 12 years. I will continue to do so. Labor will take action while the government just sit back and play political games.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forde Electorate: Bethania Lutheran Primary School</title>
          <page.no>111</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a pleasure to rise and speak today about the wonderful work being done at the Bethania Lutheran Primary School. Bethania Lutheran Primary School is just one of the many great primary schools in my electorate of Forde. I would like to take this opportunity to mention the great work of their teachers, who are working together to develop a culture of innovation, motivation, collegiality and trust. Because the school have identified that their students are contemporary learners, they understand that they need teachers who embrace the importance of aligning effective learning spaces with relevant, high-quality learning to promote positive outcomes for students. The school achieves this by incorporating agile learning spaces with experiences that use a variety of digital technologies and progressive approaches to teaching to transform the way students learn.</para>
<para>Every year I go around to the various schools in my electorate and meet with all the principals. It is an opportunity to touch base with them and speak to them about the terrific work they're doing in their various schools. At one of these visits to the Bethania Lutheran Primary School we talked about how the teachers are engaging with students and looking for these new ways to learn. If we want our next generation of leaders to be creative thinkers, to take risks and to be problem solvers, we need teachers prepared to give them the tools, the resources and the environment to do that. Bethania Lutheran Primary School has successfully created this culture of collaboration, collegiality and continued professional growth. The teachers have become role models for their students as they demonstrate how they never stop learning.</para>
<para>This is one of the many schools where we see from the teachers this shared vision of learning and growing as professionals. The greatest benefit of this goes to the students. The students win in developing their capacity. We see the opportunity for them to develop their full potential, which is what we always want to see for our kids. I spoke the other day about the new pod at Coomera Anglican College. As part of that new building there is an indoor dome to fly drones. We see many schools across our electorates taking these innovative steps. The best part of it is that it is tailored for each school community in accordance with what their student cohort needs.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Richmond Electorate: Hospitals</title>
          <page.no>112</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ELLIOT</name>
    <name.id>DZW</name.id>
    <electorate>Richmond</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to update the House and expose the full extent of the shameful New South Wales Nationals' disastrous plan for overdevelopment and the destruction of state-significant farmlands at Cudgen on the New South Wales North Coast. There is widespread suspicion surrounding the true motivation and the real agenda of Tweed Nationals MP Geoff Provest and the New South Wales Nationals, who are blindly rushing ahead to impose a hospital on an inappropriate site on Cudgen farmlands. This is one of the most productive food bowls in New South Wales, and the National Party would rather see bulldozers digging up our farms for their developer mates than tractors ploughing our fields.</para>
<para>From the outset, it's very important to note that former Nationals state MP Don Beck has a large financial interest in a very large parcel of protected farmland which is situated very close to the Nationals preferred hospital site at Cudgen. The choice of The Nationals' selected site will seriously multiply the value of all nearby lands, including Don Beck's investment. So now we have the National Party abusing the New South Wales state significant development planning instrument to deliver rezoning for their developer mates and benefactors. It's a disgraceful use of state planning laws to rezone farmland for the benefit of prominent National Party identities. The public record shows that the Becks have been trying for the last decade to get their Cudgen land rezoned—first as a site for a police station and then as a seniors housing development—but all these have failed because this land is zoned state significant farmland. It is protected.</para>
<para>Aside from this dodgy deal, we know the Nationals have plans to close and sell off the existing Tweed Hospital, and we know they want to shut down the Murwillumbah hospital. We know they want to sell off the Tweed Hospital because Geoff Provest's office officially confirmed this in an email to a constituent. We know that they want to close the Murwillumbah hospital because they've been downgrading it for years.</para>
<para>We know this state government likes to sell off anything it can. In this term the New South Wales government has sold more than $50 billion worth of public assets. All these plans are devastating for our region, and they show the New South Wales government and the New South Wales Nationals and Geoff Provest can't be trusted with the healthcare needs of locals on the North Coast. They've abandoned those residents by imposing a hospital on a totally inappropriate site. These farmlands need to be protected, not developed, but the National Party have ignored the community and not listened to it. The community view is very, very clear. Of course we want a new hospital. We need a new hospital. But we also want to protect the rich Cudgen state-significant farmlands and we want to protect the very unique quality of life at Kingscliff. It is a wonderful coastal village. We want to stop any Gold Coast style overdevelopment in Kingscliff. Labor stands with our community in wanting a new hospital in the best location, at Kings Forest, where it can be delivered and built much faster and on budget.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forde Electorate: Pacific Motorway Upgrade</title>
          <page.no>112</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to take this opportunity to speak about the work underway to upgrade the M1-Gateway merge. It's good to see my good colleague the member for Bonner here with me as I'm speaking about this, because he's been very involved in this project as well. I'm pleased to say the works, which have commenced in the past month or six weeks are progressing well. It's important for the community to see that the work is actually underway, because for the communities in Forde, and I know the communities in Bonner and others, along the M1 corridor this work can't come quickly enough. Earlier this month, I had the opportunity to inspect one of the construction areas at the Gateway-M1 merge. It's heartening to see the construction workers and bulldozers getting on with the job.</para>
<para>Equally, this is just the start of a much bigger project. We see that an estimated 150,000 cars use the M1 each day to travel through my electorate and access the growing regions of the northern part of the Gold Coast, in particular. This major roadway provides direct access to major arterial networks, international airports, freight rail and the Port of Brisbane, so it's a key lifeline for the south-east of Queensland. My community is one of the fastest growing regions in the country, and the federal government's commitment to this project is a priority to meet the demands of these motorists, residents and, importantly, the many businesses in our communities. The last thing we want to see tradespeople do is sit in traffic jams.</para>
<para>The coalition government has invested more than a billion dollars into this project, which in its first stage—which we're seeing done now—includes an upgrade to five southbound lanes from Eight Mile Plains to Rochedale South, the relocation of the existing bus entry from Eight Mile Plains onto the Pacific Motorway, the replacement of the Underwood Road bridge with a new four-lane overpass and the introduction of managed motorways technologies from Klumpp Road to Rochedale Road.</para>
<para>In addition, the project includes funding for the southern end of the Gold Coast, for the member for McPherson's electorate, through Robina down to Tugun. That will improve the quality of the road down there to a major highway standard, as we see now north of Robina through to Nerang. The other part of the funding is the remainder of the project from Rochedale South, or Springwood, to Loganlea Road, both northbound and southbound. That's a much bigger project— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>If no member present objects, three-minute constituency statements may continue for a total of 60 minutes.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Calwell Electorate</title>
          <page.no>113</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms VAMVAKINOU</name>
    <name.id>00AMT</name.id>
    <electorate>Calwell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Next Tuesday Coolaroo South Primary School, in my electorate, will hold its annual writers festival. This year's writers festival marks a significant milestone for the school, as it celebrates 10 wonderful years of this creative literary festival. At the same time—and it saddens me to say this—it will also be the last writers festival. It's been an absolute joy to attend the school's writers festivals over the years and to see how each and every student within the school and kindergarten community involve themselves in this very special event.</para>
<para>This year's festival, like the others before it, will showcase a bit of writing from every student, around the theme of fantasy. As it is the last writers festival for the school, each student will be asked to write under the title 'The Last Tale'. I look forward to reading the stories our imaginative young children create and I'm very much looking forward to being part of the festival next week, when I will get the opportunity to visit the exhibition and see for myself the 'final tales' come to life, as the stories do each time. Writers festivals in schools are an important tool to allow students to develop and nurture their literacy skills. Importantly, they encourage our students to read and to become more involved in their community and with their families by engaging and writing about what they see, who they talk to and what they learn.</para>
<para>While I'm on my feet, I'd also like to give a bit of a shout-out to another great school in my electorate, Gladstone Park Secondary College, who have nominated their Gladstone Park agricultural centre in the Victorian government's Pick My Project initiative.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 10:32 to 10:46</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms VAMVAKINOU</name>
    <name.id>00AMT</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Gladstone Park Agricultural Centre will be a learning hub where students and the wider community will be given practical, hands-on experience in horticulture, agriculture and sustainability. This is a wonderful holistic learning experience that will not only educate the students but teach the wider Calwell community, as it will also involve them. As well, the LifeHouse Church in West Meadows is in the running for a $175,000 grant as part of the Andrews Labor government's Pick My Project fund for its multisensory and learning room for children with special needs. The organisation will build Victoria's first community based multisensory room to support children with cognitive and physical disabilities, which will make our local community a much better place to live for children with special needs and their families. I'm very, very pleased to be supporting both the Gladstone Park Agricultural Centre project and the LifeHouse Church in West Meadows. Because these are 'vote for me' projects, I urge all my constituents to vote for these wonderful projects in our electorate, as they will benefit our community.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bonner Electorate: Organ and Tissue Donation</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VASTA</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last month we had DonateLife Week. I hope everyone had a chance to have that very difficult but necessary chat with their loved ones. Last week I met an extraordinary man from my electorate. Lachlan Wallace knows more than anyone how important it is to register as an organ and tissue donor. Lachlan was born with a disease of the liver meaning he'd always need a transplant. His condition worsened to the point his father, David, was preparing to donate part of his liver to keep him alive but, thankfully, a donor was found. Lachlan underwent a liver transplant at eight years of age. Thanks to the efforts of a complete stranger and their family who chose to give the gift of life, Lachlan survived. Now he is in his last year at Iona College.</para>
<para>Lachlan is a tall guy, taller than I am. He plays rugby and cricket at school and, looking at him, you'd never guess he was so sick as a child. That's what takes other sick kids and their parents by surprise when Lachlan visits them in hospital. Lachlan organises hospital visits in his spare time, where he helps young patients going through the same thing that he did. He tells me when these kids and their families see him, sometimes just after cricket practice when he is still in his gear, it shows them that they really can get better. Lachlan's parents also come along on these visits. They chat with parents and families, sharing what they went through to help other parents. What an amazing family.</para>
<para>I want to thank Lachlan for all the great work he has done in the community. I heard he wanted to follow in his grandfather's footsteps and become a police officer, so I invited him and his father, David, to meet the local officers at Wynnum police station as part of DonateLife Week. It was a great morning, and I was so pleased to meet this inspiring young man. Lachlan says it's so important to have a chat with your loved ones about your wishes to join the Australian Organ Donor Register and let your family know what you have done. DonateLife Week is over, but it is never too late to sign up to be a donor. You could save a life.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education Funding</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to congratulate St Pius X in Windale on their absolutely fantastic NAPLAN results. In the category of schools they are in, their year 3 students came first in the whole of Australia in reading, grammar, punctuation and mathematics, and second in writing and spelling. Their year 5 also excelled, coming first nationally in writing, spelling and mathematics, second in reading, and third in grammar and punctuation. I can't emphasise enough how truly remarkable these results are. St Pius is a very special school. The school and community at Windale face some very severe socioeconomic challenges. It's a small school of 50 students, with 57 per cent of the students being Indigenous. Windale is the poorest town in all of New South Wales. So for St Pius to have these results is an absolutely fantastic achievement.</para>
<para>Because of the needs based funding reforms that Labor put in place, the Catholic Schools Office has been able to allocate significant resources and has employed two extra teachers in this school of only 50 students. This is paying off right now. We can all appreciate the dramatically positive impact these additional staff are having in the school, and the life-changing impact on the children. This is what needs based funding looks like. I spoke to one of the additional teachers at an Anzac Day service earlier this year. She was adamant that having the extra teaching staff has been so helpful to the students and has contributed directly to the NAPLAN results.</para>
<para>Recognising the achievements of St Pius is a special occasion. I don't want to be overly negative but it would be remiss not to remind the House that this government is failing the needs based funding challenge. Yes, this is a political statement, but I have the privilege of representing Windale and the students and families of St Pius in the Commonwealth parliament and I must stand up and make sure they get the resources they need to achieve everything they can in life.</para>
<para>The current Prime Minister should visit St Pius and explain to the students and their families, some of whom come from really modest backgrounds, why he doesn't think they deserve these extra resources. He might explain the theory behind his radical right-wing neoliberal agenda and the economic and social outcomes he expects to achieve with his massive cuts to education. The Liberals are cutting a massive $17 billion from schools. Public schools bear the brunt of these cuts with 86 per cent, Catholic schools with 12 per cent, and independents with two per cent.</para>
<para>Over the next two years, we will see $17 million cut from my local schools. These aren't Labor figures. These are PBO and National Catholic Education Commission figures. At the same time, this government is giving $80 billion in tax cuts to the big end of town. There will be a clear choice at the next election: adequate funding for schools like St Pius X at Windale so their students can achieve the best in life, or more tax cuts for the top end of town.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bennelong Electorate: Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics</title>
          <page.no>115</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALEXANDER</name>
    <name.id>M3M</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to talk today about STEM in schools—or, to break down the buzzword: science, technology, engineering and mathematics. These are the fields which will create the jobs of the future in the future, cure our diseases, explore the next frontiers, solve our problems and improve our lives. In Australia, we enjoy a very high standard of living that has been made possible by the hard work of generations past, but if we are to continue to enjoy this high standard of living we must be ready and able to innovate and grow. This can only occur if we provide high-quality STEM education to our younger generations and afford them opportunities to develop their problem solving and lateral thinking. It is essential that our children be well versed in these subjects if we want to compete on the international stage.</para>
<para>Local students in Bennelong are fortunate to live in the innovation capital of Australia. We are home to Australia's first hydrogen filling station for the next generation of carbon neutral cars. We have a 'gamma knife', which can cure cancers. We have pharmaceutical companies which are at the cutting edge of both curing and preventing disease. Historic local inventions range from the Granny Smith apple to wi-fi. The future is being created in Bennelong. This has already had an impact on our schools. Many of my colleagues will remember the Bennelong Innovation Fair I held last year in the Great Hall to celebrate the innovation which drives my electorate. That event included representatives of local schools, including students from the enterprising Carlingford High School who had recently won the Subs in School competition by designing and building a miniature, fully functioning submarine. Others students there were winners in the inaugural Bennelong Schools' STEM Challenge. This competition pitted schools against each other to design something innovative. Winners included Epping Boys High School, for their HandiGlove, engineered to replace a laptop keyboard for people with spinal injuries; Carlingford High School, for their obstacle avoidance autonomous robot vehicle; and Melrose Park Public School, who developed a riverside guide app to help people to navigate the local Parramatta River.</para>
<para>Importantly, this STEM challenge will return this year. This year we are partnered with Re-Engineering Australia, an excellent foundation which creates STEM challenges for schools around the country. This year's task is for teams to design a medical centre for the surface of Mars, using 3D designed software—a fitting theme, given the recent announcement of the formation of the Australian Space Agency. The competing teams will present their designs on competition day, which will be held in late September and is being generously supported by Medtronic, who will be hosting their teams at their office in Macquarie Park. I recently participated in CSIRO's STEM in Schools event, which is an excellent innovation to encourage students— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Coalition Government</title>
          <page.no>115</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>What a ridiculous sideshow this government has become. Five long years they've subjected this country to, and then yesterday they made a mockery of our roles as representatives of our community and the institution of parliament itself—and it continues today. This is not a government; it is a circus. Like the member for Jagajaga, like people across Australia, we all want to know: who is the Prime Minister? This coalition of the unwilling, this 'no-alition' of the Liberals and Nationals cannot govern the country. They have wasted their time in government. They have wasted the great privilege of governing Australia. What have they delivered? Power prices are through the roof. Wages have flatlined. Penalty rates to the lowest paid workers of this country have been cut. There is chaos in aged care and in health care. There are cuts to health and cuts to education. They have sought to destroy the industrial relations system of this country and to demonise the great trade union movement. To top it all off, they have sought to destroy the most trusted institution in this nation, the ABC.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister stands for nothing—and it looks like no-one on the other side of this House stands for him. The PM is the incredible shrinking man of this ramshackle circus, and he is disappearing before our very eyes. Actually, I've changed my mind. It's not a circus; it's a horror movie, and a B-grade schlock horror one at that—so predictable and so stupid it makes you laugh out loud. But I tell you what: it's not funny. This performance of the Liberal-National no-alition is not what the people of Australia want to see and is not what the people of Australia need to ensure the continued prosperity of this great country. This government is selling this nation and its people short. They should be ashamed and, quite frankly, they should leave. We are sick of this. I know the people of Rockingham and Kwinana in my electorate are disgusted by it—indeed, all of Western Australia and Australia joins in on that. They are crying out for real leadership, and the Australian Labor Party stands ready to provide that leadership. Bill Shorten leads a united and hardworking team that is focused on the best interests of the people of Australia, and Labor is ready to govern. Labor has better policies, policies that are fair and policies that put people first.</para>
<para>In Western Australia, Labor is ready. In Canning, we have the wonderful Mellisa Teede, a strong advocate for regional funding and her community. In Stirling, Melita Markey's working hard, representing her community. Knocking on doors and talking to the whole community of Pearce is the strong, steady and brilliant Kim Travers. In Hasluck, long-serving local councillor James Martin is in touch with the community and has his ear to the ground. In Swan, Hannah Beazley is working hard and defending, always, defending the Australian public healthcare system that did nothing less than save her life. They are all brilliant Labor candidates who are ready to join me and the WA Labor lower house team of Ann Aly, Matt Keogh, Josh Wilson and Patrick Gorman. I urge all Western Australians to vote Labor and get rid of this rotten government.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Holt Electorate: Local Sporting Champions, Gerdes, Ms Vanessa, Maliki, Ms Erika</title>
          <page.no>116</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BYRNE</name>
    <name.id>008K0</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Friday, I was honoured to host the 2018 Holt Local Sporting Champions grant presentation at the Arthur Wren Hall at Hampton Park. As members will be aware, the Local Sporting Champions program provides financial assistance for, in this case, competitors aged 12 to 18 who are participating in state, national or international championships. At the ceremony I announced the 13 successful recipients from round 1 of the 2018-19 grants. The grant amounts vary between $500 and $700, depending on the distance travelled to compete in their respective sports.</para>
<para>I'd like to take the opportunity to mention some really special people who helped with the presentation at the Arthur Wren Hall. People who know Hampton Park know that Arthur Wren Hall is an iconic hall in Hampton Park. When we contacted the organisers of the Hampton Park Progress Association, Vanessa Gerdes and Erika Maliki, they provided this facility at no cost, and they stayed there and helped set up the presentation area. Why do I mention this? Because it shows the real spirit of Hampton Park and of the people of Hampton Park. Those two people are great people. They're great residents of Hampton Park. To show their community spirit on a night like that, when we awarded these 13 young people the Local Sporting Champions awards, says a lot about them. It says a lot about the fact that they took time out to give of themselves to provide this facility for the community. I'd just like to thank them for what they're doing for the Hampton Park community, and the support they provide to Hampton Park in challenging circumstances for them both. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank them for what they do for the Hampton Park community.</para>
<para>I will mention the people who were awarded the Local Sporting Champions awards: Putu Giri, Liam Trevillian, Jesse Thompson, Mitchell Shane, Daniel Van Hees, Melissa Woolf, Kurt and Koen Tchia—two very tall brothers who play volleyball—Mickey Mailelaa, Jamaine Sialau, Jeremiah Sialau, Tristan Little, Isopo Taunuu, Trinity Walter, Izaac Batey and Alanah Mison.</para>
<para>Too often we hear about the bad things that young people do. It was great to host this event with 30 or 40 people with their proud family members celebrating the diligence and the dedication these young people have to improve themselves and perhaps be future sporting champions. Hopefully, the local paper will run this story. They should do it. They were very respectful and decent young people who came together on a Friday night to celebrate receiving these awards. I thank them and their families for attending and, again, I thank those two very special people from the Hampton Park Progress Association for organising the event.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Moreton Electorate: Koala Habitat</title>
          <page.no>116</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Moreton is a city electorate. We have the Brisbane River to the north, but we also have large swathes of green, like Oxley Creek Common and Toohey Forest Park. It is 260 hectares that I try to walk through every day that I'm back in Brisbane. Toohey Forest abuts bushland owned and managed by Griffith University. Griffith Uni also has the world's No. 1 koala scientist, Darryl Jones. This forest is an amazing asset, just 10 kilometres from the Brisbane CBD. It has koalas, echidnas and a great variety of bird life. There are jet planes flying low overhead and dogs off leash, but still these koalas are surviving.</para>
<para>When Labor was last in government federally, the environment minister listed koala populations in Queensland as 'vulnerable' under our national environment laws. The effects of drought, climate change and disease continue to have a devastating effect on these koala populations, which are already very vulnerable. Urban expansion is threatening these precious koala habitats. The loss of vegetation, the impact of roadways and vehicles and the threat of domestic animals like dogs continue to threaten the very existence of our iconic furry friends. All three levels of government need to be conscious of protecting our koalas.</para>
<para>The Brisbane City Council, under the Liberal-National Party's Lord Mayor Quirk, should have regard to the vulnerable koala populations in Toohey Forest when it considers any planning applications in the region. High-density living close to the CBD is obviously convenient and make sense, but more people means more cars on roads like Orange Grove Road, which goes straight through this habitat. The domestic animals that live nearby normally have an impact on koalas as well.</para>
<para>Federally, we know the laws governments make—or don't make—to reduce climate change and limit emissions will have an impact on our vulnerable koala populations. Just this week, we heard the Prime Minister capitulate on his fourth energy policy, or is it his fifth? I can't keep up. Now, effectively, the Liberal and National political parties have no emissions target in their policy at all—not in legislation, not in regulation. There is none at all. The Liberals and Nationals have effectively abandoned the Paris commitment, which was a minimum commitment anyway. This is irresponsible and selfish and flies in the face of the realities facing this continent.</para>
<para>Labor has clear policies in place that we'll be taking to the next election, whenever that might be, which include ending national energy policy uncertainty and achieving a 50 per cent renewable energy target by 2030. Labor is committed to the conservation of our native animals. As I said, when we were last in government we listed koalas under national environmental laws. It is not only our precious native terrestrial animals we care about; we also care about the marine park network. The coalition government, fundamentally, does not care about conservation, it does not care about climate change and it does not care about protecting our precious native animals like the Toohey Forest koala population.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Turnbull Government</title>
          <page.no>117</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>People in the electorate of Lalor woke this morning and got on with their busy lives. They got up and went to work. The kids went to school. People went and worked in their small businesses. Others took a train journey or a car journey to university. Some are attending TAFE today. Some are going to the doctor. Some have a trip to hospital as an outpatient. Some are dropping the kids at child care. Others might be going to visit a relative in an aged-care facility. They are getting on with their busy lives, and they would like to know that there is a federal government in Canberra focused on policies to make their lives easier, focused on policies that they care about.</para>
<para>An issue I've received an enormous number of emails about is live exports. People in my electorate really do care about the humane treatment of sheep leaving in ships from Western Australia at the height of summer. They are concerned about those things and they'd like to know that they have a government here in Canberra working on finding the solutions to the things that they care about. They'd like to know when they're sitting in congestion that they have a government in Canberra planning infrastructure to make their lives easier. They'd like to know that they've got a government in Canberra who acknowledges that energy costs are spiralling out of control, but at the same time they want a government that's going to deal with climate change. Both of these issues need addressing.</para>
<para>The people in my electorate going about their busy lives today are absolutely going to be disappointed when they realise the parlous state of the parliament, where members of the government can't manage to get themselves onto speaking lists to talk about the legislation that they're bringing through or come in here and make constituency statements about the people they represent. They will be very disappointed to think that this place is falling apart around our ears because those opposite are so busy arguing with one another about who wants to be the leader rather than focusing on the people of Australia.</para>
<para>It doesn't matter what the outcome of the Liberal wars is. It really doesn't matter. Because whether it's the member for Wentworth or the member for Dickson, both of these people are Liberals who have been in government for five years. They've been spent five years avoiding the issues that matter. They've spent five years avoiding listening to the people in electorates like mine around the country—people who are getting on with their busy lives. They've been avoiding dealing with the economic issues that they're confronting. They've been busy looking after their mates and their own jobs, and they're continuing it in this place today. I call on this government to remember that they're supposed to be governing a country, that these chambers need speakers and they need people committed to the communities they represent. At this point, this government is absolutely failing. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Richmond Electorate: Police</title>
          <page.no>117</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ELLIOT</name>
    <name.id>DZW</name.id>
    <electorate>Richmond</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to raise a couple of very important issues in my electorate. First I'd like to tell the House about the inaugural Police and Community Charity Ball that's being hosted this Saturday by the Queensland Police Service, New South Wales Police Force and the Australian Federal Police. It's being held at Seagulls in my electorate. This charity ball will be in support of the Tweed Heads hospital's children's ward and the Gold Coast hospital's children's ward, with all profits going to these charities. I understand that many, many hundreds of tickets have been sold. I'd like to commend the organisers of this important charity event not only for raising all this money but also for coordinating such a large charity ball. It's a credit to them. I know many in the local police in Tweed Heads have been responsible for a lot of the coordination, and I would like to commend them for their great efforts.</para>
<para>On that note, I would like to add that, as a former police officer myself, I will always take an opportunity to recognise the outstanding work of our local police and acknowledge and thank them for the difficult job that they do throughout my electorate on the North Coast of New South Wales. One of the many issues that I have raised here, and Labor have raised in our region, is the New South Wales Liberal-National government's harsh cuts to our police numbers and how devastating they have been for our community. The police numbers in the Tweed-Byron Police District have dropped from 198 in 2012, to 165 in 2017. That is a huge drop, and our community has so many concerns right across the board in terms of the increases in crime.</para>
<para>I attend many different community meetings where they're worried about break-ins and car thefts. We had a whole suite of measures to address this, but what we really need is more police on the beat. But what we've seen from this government is constant cuts. So I would certainly continue to condemn them. Indeed, it's throughout my electorate. In the southern part of my electorate, Ballina, a beautiful coastal town, has recently experienced some crime waves. Again, police numbers there have been cut. We have a growing region with a large number of tourists who come to our area—it is indeed the most beautiful part of Australia—but we need sufficient police numbers to keep the locals and the tourists secure. But what have we got from this New South Wales Liberal-National government? Cuts, cuts and more cuts to our police numbers.</para>
<para>Do you know who we really blame for that? We blame the Nationals. Yet again they can't defend people in the regions. We've seen massive cuts. The Tweed Nationals MP, Geoff Provest, has been responsible for those cuts in Tweed. Thomas George, the Nationals MP in Lismore, cut police numbers throughout that state seat. Indeed, throughout the North Coast of New South Wales these massive cuts to policing are hurting locals, and they've had enough. They've had enough of the National Party cutting police numbers and putting people in danger constantly. We see police stations close all the time, and we blame the National Party for the lack of police on the North Coast.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Dunn, Mr Robert</title>
          <page.no>118</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FALINSKI</name>
    <name.id>G86</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to pay tribute to Robert Dunn, a well-known and hardworking member of the Mackellar community. Robert has had a long and distinguished career as a solicitor, business owner, local mayor and councillor. In 1973, following his time as a solicitor, Robert founded Dunn Legal, a law firm in Mona Vale that has become a trustworthy alternative to CBD law firms for northern beaches residents. Dunn Legal's practice areas include wills, estate planning, business sales and intellectual property protection. Robert's legal career has seen him protect the legal rights of many Australians, often at trying times in their lives, with Dunn Legal maintaining a reputation of client focused respect and diligence. Dunn Legal's success and longevity are a reflection of the hard work that Robert has put in and the poise with which he manages the firm. It is always inspiring to see local and small businesses not only form on the northern beaches but continue to thrive over the years. Small businesses are the largest employers of Australians and are most worthy of praise.</para>
<para>Robert has also left his mark on local politics. He served as mayor of the first elected Pittwater Council from 1992 to 1994, following a number of years as a councillor. In 2005 Robert ran as an Independent in the Pittwater state by-election following the resignation of John Brogden, with this effort showcasing his commitment to and passion for the local area. He also ran against my predecessor Bronwyn Bishop for the seat of Mackellar, in the 2004 federal election, scoring 7.7 per cent of the vote. It is my great hope that Robert does not choose to contest Mackellar again in the near future, or I may be in trouble!</para>
<para>An honourable member: Go, Robert!</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FALINSKI</name>
    <name.id>G86</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Hence I'm praising him so much in this parliament!</para>
<para>In 2013 Robert released <inline font-style="italic">Pittwater Uprising!: A Secessionist's View</inline>, his seditious personal memoir about the formation of Pittwater Council. The memoir goes into incredible detail regarding the events and dramas that went on leading up to Pittwater becoming a local government area. It serves as a great reminder as to Robert's involvement in Pittwater and northern beaches life.</para>
<para>Today Mona Vale is home to Robert Dunn Reserve, a park alongside Mona Vale Beach that stands as a tribute to Robert's work for the local community. It is a spot of great beauty, overlooking the vast ocean, and it encapsulates the great natural beauty that draws so many people to the northern beaches. I'm proud that the electorate of Mackellar is home to individuals like Robert Dunn who have spent years giving back to the community and making efforts to improve the lives of others. Robert's achievements in law, politics and community work make him an incredible role model, and I urge you all to learn from his example.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 193, the time for constituency statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>119</page.no>
        <type>MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lyons, Dame Enid Muriel, AD, GBE</title>
          <page.no>119</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I stand to pay tribute to Tasmania's Dame Enid Lyons, the first woman elected to the House of Representatives and the first woman to serve in a federal Australian cabinet—75 years ago this week. It is worth noting that, at the same election, Western Australia's Dorothy Tangney became the first woman elected to the Senate. My electorate is named jointly after Dame Enid and her husband, Joe Lyons, who to date—and I stress 'to date'—remains the only Tasmanian to hold the office of Prime Minister.</para>
<para>Dame Enid was, however, a formidable politician long before she was elected in 1943 to the federal seat of Darwin, which is now known as Braddon. That seat is held by my colleague Ms Keay, who will speak after me. For many years Dame Enid accompanied her career politician husband on the campaign trail, not just as a devoted wife but as a key confidant. In the days before politicians were gifted with paid staff and advisers, Enid played the role perfectly.</para>
<para>Dame Enid was born Enid Burnell in 1897 in a remote north-west Tasmanian timber camp. She grew up in Smithton, a nearby town. In her mid-teens she became a trained teacher. In 1912, while visiting the state parliament in Hobart, which back then was some distance away by train, Enid was introduced by her mother to Joseph Aloysius Lyons, who at the time was a state Labor MP for the seat of Wilmot. In 1915, following what has been described as 'decorous correspondence' between Enid and Joe, who was now state Labor Treasurer and education minister, the pair wed. Joe was 35 and Enid 17.</para>
<para>By 1922 Enid was mother to six children, but she took a leading part in election campaigning by talking to women about pots and pans, and children's shoes—what we call these days grassroots politics. While I hesitate these days to mention a working woman's family life, it's important to reference it in this context because the times were so different. There would have been an expectation and understanding in 1920s Australia that a woman's place was in the home and that her primary role was as a caregiver. Still in her mid-20s Enid was mother to six children and yet was also a significant party campaigner and key adviser to her husband. This was trailblazing stuff. Enid would go on to have 12 children by 1933.</para>
<para>In 1923 Joe became the Labor Premier and in 1925 Enid stood as a Labor candidate for the state seat of Denison, a Hobart based seat. She lost by just 60 votes. A whooping cough epidemic during the campaign attacked five of the Lyons' children and their 10-month-old baby died of pneumonia. In 1929 Joe Lyons was elected as the federal Labor MP for Wilmot, now Lyons, and Enid's political focus shifted to the national stage. She is reported to have played a critical role in Joe's decision to break with the Labor Party. We've got a term for that in the Labor Party, but, given the valedictory nature of this speech, I won't reference it. Enid had never been a true believer in Labor but she did retain a lifelong commitment to equality, security and social justice. These are traits we all share.</para>
<para>Ambitious for her husband, she was a political pragmatist by nature and she had been concerned by Labor's response to the financial crisis caused by the Great Depression. She had no problem urging Joe to jump ship. In 1931 Joe left Labor and he helped form a new party—the United Australia Party—which included in its number former Labor and Nationalist Prime Minister Billy Hughes, who was even then as old as Methuselah, and future Prime Minister Bob Menzies. Joe was the party's first leader. Of course, as we all know, the UAP later rebadged itself as the Liberal Party. I think after its formation it went on to win two or three elections, so it was very successful in its formative years. If Enid hadn't whispered to her husband, the first leader of that party, who knows where Australian politics would be today? She was a very significant figure.</para>
<para>Enid was an enthusiastic campaigner for the UAP, so much so that Menzies is said to have complained that she was stealing the men's limelight. She's reported to have later said, 'Together on a platform, Joe and I worked like partners in a game of bridge.' Everything that Joe and Enid did was done together. Upon winning the December 1931 federal election in a landslide, defeating the Scullin Labor government after just one term, Joe's first act was to write to Enid, 'Whatever honours or distinctions come are ours, not mine.'</para>
<para>I could go on about her life before her parliamentary career and talk about some of the issues that she cared about, but I want to say this. In 1938, and with the drums of war beating in Europe, Enid gave speech after speech on the subject of peace and disarmament. She was a staunch defender of Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement towards Europe's fascists, and she was not alone in that. At the time a lot of people thought the best way to avoid war was to appease the fascists. But after Hitler's treachery with Poland, she said, in her first speech, that she could 'never again advocate such a policy'. She became very much an ardent supporter of Australia being able to support itself militarily.</para>
<para>She suffered deep depression following her beloved husband's death in office. He remains, to date, the only Prime Minister to have died in office. For 24 years they'd been virtually inseparable. But she continued to be politically active. Enid stood for election for the federal seat of Darwin, which covered the Lyons's home in and around Devonport, and was elected in August 1943—the same year she was made a Dame by the King. In her first speech she spoke about the issues she'd always sought to advance: the need for a robust social security system, Australia's declining birth rate, housing, family, the need to extend child endowment and the importance of planning for a postwar future where hundreds of thousands of men would be returning from the front.</para>
<para>In the matter of social security, one thing stands out clearly in my mind:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Such things are necessary in order that the weak shall not go to the wall, that the strong may be supported, that all may have justice.</para></quote>
<para>These were the words of Dame Enid Lyons in her first speech. She also said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We go along, thinking always that we progress, but sometimes we have to pause and take stock. I think that every Australian should pause now and again and say to himself, "Only 150 years ago this land was wilderness. Now we have great cities, wonderful feats of engineering and beautiful buildings everywhere. And this is still a land of promise".</para></quote>
<para>In 1949, Dame Enid was elevated to sit in Bob Menzies's cabinet, though without portfolio, which she was very unhappy about. She retired from parliament in 1951, but certainly not from public life. She was an active newspaper columnist. She chaired the Jubilee Women's Convention in 1951 and was a member of the ABC from 1951 to 1962. She was a longstanding member of the Victoria League, the Housewives Association and the CWA. And it must be said: she was a beloved lifelong member of the Liberal Party in Tasmania, where she continues to be revered.</para>
<para>She also wrote articles and autobiographical volumes, and I think one title referenced Billy Hughes once saying of her that she was like a 'nightingale amongst the carrion crows'.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm the biggest crow they've ever seen! I think one of her volumes referenced that quote.</para>
<para>So while Dame Enid did leave the Labor Party, many of her principles and ideals continue to hold true to Labor ideals. And irrespective of her politics, she is a highly significant figure not just in politics in general but also for the advancement of women in politics. I think it's wonderful that, no matter which side of the aisle we're on, we stand here, we stake stock and we honour those women who did blaze a trail, whether it was Enid Lyons or Dorothy Tangney in the Senate. They all deserve recognition. I can't imagine how difficult it must have been for them just putting up with the nonsense that men must have given them, and to get through it all. So, my hat goes off to Dame Enid Lyons; she has my great respect. Vale Enid Lyons.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Lyons for those sentiments.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FLINT</name>
    <name.id>245550</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I, again, share your congratulations and acknowledgement of the member for Lyons's contribution. That was a lovely reflection on Dame Enid Lyons and her husband, Joseph Lyons, who were fine Tasmanians.</para>
<para>As we know, we're here to commemorate Enid Lyons's election to the House of Representatives. Yesterday, 21 August, marked the 75th anniversary of her election to the House of Representatives in 1943. She was the first woman elected to the federal parliament in the House of Representatives, and she went on to become Australia's first female cabinet minister.</para>
<para>Enid Lyons was a remarkable woman, and her career, her family life and her relationship with her husband, Joe Lyons, really reminds me of another remarkable woman, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. I think there are a lot of commonalities between them, with their strong family life and their dedication to serving the public throughout their lives.</para>
<para>As has been noted, Dame Enid was born in 1897. Remarkably, she first stood for the Tasmanian parliament in 1925 when she had six children, and she only lost the seat by six votes. She was married to Joseph Lyons, who became the Tasmanian Premier and, of course, became the Prime Minister of Australia between the years of 1932 and 1939. Between them, they had 12 children, one of whom tragically died at the age of 10 months from pneumonia. By all accounts, Enid Lyons and Joseph Lyons were a very close couple. They had a loving relationship, and they supported one another in their public lives and public roles.</para>
<para>I do want to quickly read from the <inline font-style="italic">Australian Dictionary of Biography</inline>, which notes, amongst other things, what was happening at the end of Joseph Lyons's life. He died at the age of 59 years, so he died at a very young age. Things had been very stressful for them around politics and his prime ministership. As the <inline font-style="italic">Australian Dictionary of Biography</inline> records:</para>
<quote><para class="block">His final months were miserable as his government became increasingly unstable. Apart from Menzies, there were other threats, particularly from Charles Hawker. According to Enid Lyons, Hawker was on his way to Canberra to challenge Lyons when he was killed in a plane crash in October 1938. … Although Menzies never issued a direct challenge, he made pointed public comments about lack of national leadership; through 1938-39 his claims were advanced in the newspapers of Sir Keith Murdoch, previously an enthusiastic supporter of Lyons. …</para></quote>
<para>The dictionary goes on to say that Sir Joseph Lyons:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… was able to thwart the implicit Menzies challenge in the final months of 1938. On 14 March 1939 Menzies resigned from cabinet because of the deferment of the national insurance scheme.</para></quote>
<para>Not long after, Sir Joseph Lyons died in Sydney in hospital on 7 April 1939.</para>
<para>This was an incredibly, understandably, stressful time for Dame Enid. She was 41 years old, she had 11 children, and her husband had just died at a very young age. As the <inline font-style="italic">Australian Dictionary of Biography</inline> also records:</para>
<quote><para class="block">When Joe Lyons died on 7 April 1939, Enid, exhausted and grief-stricken, plunged into a depression that only fully lifted when a daughter, noting that their Federal local member was retiring, persuaded her to stand for the House of Representatives.</para></quote>
<para>As we know, as I remarked, yesterday, 21 August, was the 75th anniversary of her election.</para>
<para>I have read Dame Enid Lyons's speech a number of times since I became a candidate, in my previous life doing research and, certainly, since I've been elected. Her speech is really remarkable and I want to reflect on that today. I think, for all of us who get elected to this place, your maiden speech is one of the most stressful. It's a stressful moment, but it's also very emotional and very personal. I had the great honour of doing the very first maiden speech for this parliament, the address-in-reply speech. There have been nine women in this place who have given the very first speech to new parliaments—I think five Labor and four Liberal women. I want to thank the Parliamentary Library for gathering those statistics.</para>
<para>You certainly do feel the pressure when not only is it your maiden speech but you are the very first speech of all of the maiden speeches, so I can only imagine how Enid Lyons felt giving her first speech to the parliament. It really was a remarkable speech not just because she was the first woman—and, as I'll read in a moment, she took that responsibility very seriously—but given the political circumstances and the fact that Robert Menzies was still in the parliament and that her husband had recently passed away. So there she was amongst her husband's colleagues and with people who had caused him great stress at the end of his life, and caused her, of course, great stress as well. She delivered the speech with wonderful humour and made a very serious policy contribution, but she really held her emotions in check, which I think is just a remarkable testament to the sort of woman that she was. It's a remarkable achievement and also a testament to the woman that she was.</para>
<para>As Dame Enid Lyons said in her first speech:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It would be strange indeed were I not tonight deeply conscious of the fact, if not a little awed by the knowledge, that on my shoulders rests a great weight of responsibility; because this is the first occasion upon which a woman has addressed this house. For that reason it is an occasion which, for every woman in the Commonwealth, marks in some degree a turning point in history. I am well aware that, as I acquit myself in the work that I have undertaken for the next three years, so shall I either prejudice or enhance the prospects of those women who may wish to follow me in public service in the years to come.</para></quote>
<para>As we know, not that many women have followed Dame Enid—not as many as we would like—into public service in the House of Representatives. I believe it's something like 115 women who have been elected since Federation, and certainly since 1943 when Dame Enid was elected. I want to recognise her today for the fact that she was an absolute trailblazer. She is one of my heroes and one of the reasons why I've worked very hard as a female member of the Liberal Party to do my bit to encourage other women to consider putting their hand up to become candidates for the party.</para>
<para>I'm grateful to my good friend and colleague Nick Cater for working with me and engaging me through the Menzies Research Centre on a 2015 report <inline font-style="italic">Gender and politics</inline>, which examines women in the Liberal Party and what we can do to encourage more women to get involved. Nick is a true champion of women in the Liberal Party. We revised the report in 2017, and I commend it to everyone, particularly people in the Liberal Party. Have a look at the suggestions we have as to how we can encourage more women to put their hand up for preselection and then support them to become elected, whether it is for the state or federal parliament. The most crucial message, though, I think, from the report is that the Liberal Party must always remain true to its principles when addressing the issue of female representation in the party. Robert Menzies really did put this very well back in 1943 and I want to read this quote because it's really important and it explains why the Liberal Party, certainly on my watch, will do everything to prevent quotas being introduced, because quotas are absolutely inconsistent with our principles. We need to find the best people for the job, which means that we can never support quotas. As Menzies said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Of course women are at least the equals of men. Of course there is no reason why a qualified woman should not sit in parliament or on the bench or in a professorial chair or preach from the pulpit or, if you like, command an army in the field. No educated man today denies a place or career to a woman just because she is a woman.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">But there is a converse position which I state with all respect but with proper firmness. No woman can demand a place or a career just because she is a woman. It is outmoded and absurd to treat a woman's sex as a disqualification; it seems to me equally absurd to claim it as a qualification in itself.</para></quote>
<para>This is the beauty of the Liberal Party. This is why I am a Liberal: it is about giving people equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KEAY</name>
    <name.id>262273</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>'The foundation of a nation's greatness is in the homes of its people.' That was something that Dame Enid Lyons said. I think that's very apt, a great way to sum up her life and her view not only of her as a female politician but as a participant in Australian society. In my first speech I actually quoted Dame Enid Lyons's first speech. I was proudly the first woman elected to the division of Braddon. It took 61 years for that to occur. The division of Braddon was formerly the division of Darwin. But I'm not the first female to represent the people of the North West coast of Tasmania. Sixty-five years on, I proudly follow in the footsteps of one other women, a member for the former division of Darwin, the first woman elected to the House of Representatives and the first woman in federal cabinet, Dame Enid Lyons.</para>
<para>In her first speech, Enid said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I hope that I shall never forget that everything that takes place in this chamber goes out somewhere to strike a human heart, to influence the life of some fellow being …</para></quote>
<para>It was very, very powerful. Indeed, as the member for Boothby said, our first speeches are not only a very important part of our career in politics and the way we communicate with people in our electorate; they have a long history as well, and Enid's first speech was absolutely remarkable. Dame Enid has left a rich legacy in my electorate and in my home town of Devonport.</para>
<para>As wife of Tasmania's only Prime Minister, Joe Lyons, Devonport is very privileged to have a Prime Minister's residence, Home Hill, just up the road from where I grew up, with Dame Enid's personal touches gracing every inch of this wonderful home. It was built for the family in 1916 in Middle Road, Devonport for a cost of £390 by Wilson Brothers. It is a very elegant homestead and remains largely as it was when Dame Enid last lived there in 1981. It is absolutely complete with original furnishings and memorabilia. You just have to walk through Home Hill to get a fantastic, wonderful sense of who Dame Enid actually was. She painted the walls. It was quite remarkable. She was a woman who did everything and anything. I don't think she ever sat down for a quiet moment. As you walk through, you can see wonderful drawings on the walls as they were in their original state. She made all the furnishings, all the upholstery and the curtains herself. Think about how busy her life was going around campaigning with Sir Joe, raising 11 children—one sadly dying in infancy—and her own political career yet she put her heart and soul in it to have such a homely house to raise her family in not only inside the property but the outside as well, which has the most remarkable garden that is still pretty much the way she left it. It's truly an amazing place.</para>
<para>I was very privileged to go on a tour with the National Trust, which has looked after the building very well in the time that it's been in their possession. I really hope that people when they do visit Tasmania go to my home town of Devonport, which is the sea gateway of the state, and visit Home Hill. It's a fantastic piece of not only Tasmanian history but Australian history as well. She has some fantastic mementos in that home.</para>
<para>A lot of volunteers volunteer at Home Hill. I commend their work and their passion for the Lyons family and for Tasmanian history. Enid had some little boxes of mementos that were very close to her heart—handkerchiefs of Sir Joe, some baby clothes of the infant that she lost—just truly touching bits of memorabilia from a remarkable woman. In a poignant letter penned in early 1939, Joseph noted that he was:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… always longing for the time when, if God spares us, we can be together in our beautiful home, forgetting all the problems of politics.</para></quote>
<para>I think we can all relate to that a little bit but, sadly, Sir Joe died not long after penning that letter.</para>
<para>From her election in 1943, Dame Enid, at that stage a widowed mother of 12 children—one of whom had died in infancy—successfully led the way for women in federal politics. As she said in her first speech:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I am well aware that, as I acquit myself in the work that I have undertaken for the next three years, so shall I either prejudice or enhance the prospects of those women who may wish to follow me in public service in the years to come.</para></quote>
<para>As a politician, Enid Lyons made a modest contribution to politics, with a particular emphasis on the role of women and progressive measures that paved the way toward gender equality, despite her very conservative moral views on issues such as abortion and homosexuality and her disapproval of early sex education. She led the way to increased welfare payments to women and children, such as the extension of child endowment. She also campaigned for an end to discrimination against women in the workforce and increases to the allowances paid to returned servicewomen and pensions for widows. Tasmanian Liberal politician Michael Hodgman—who we Tasmanians knew really well—knew Enid Lyons well and recalled:</para>
<quote><para class="block">She wasn't a stuffy person. She had strong ideas on social justice. And she wasn't your conservative at all. She was a reforming Liberal from good solid Labor stock.</para></quote>
<para>A good combination, actually! That's fabulous, coming from Michael Hodgman, whose son is now the Liberal Premier of Tasmania.</para>
<para>We have come a long way since Dame Enid in terms of gender equality, but I have to recall a photo in Home Hill, on one of the walls there, of the 1949 cabinet. It's a very stark reminder of how far we have come. It's an amazing photo, obviously in black and white. It's a sea of suits. The cabinet is standing outside Parliament House, but there's Dame Enid in her light-coloured dress and very wide-brim hat, standing out like a sore thumb. It's absolutely remarkable. What I encountered when I first came to this place was sitting on the opposition benches, surrounded by many fantastic Labor women, but, sadly, looking at the government benches and not seeing much of a difference since 1949. I'm pleased to hear the member for Boothby saying that they're looking at addressing—in a different way to ours—women's representation in parliament. But that photo reminded me that one side of politics has probably progressed a little bit more than others in terms of female representation.</para>
<para>I will finish off on this note. Television reporter George Negus signed off a 2003 documentary piece on Enid with:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It's fair to say they just don't make them like that any more. Dame Enid Lyons—despite poor health, the first Australian woman to burst through the political glass ceiling into the boys' club.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs MARINO</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On 21 August 1943, Dame Enid Lyons was elected to the House of Representatives. While in this day and age having women in parliament is nothing unusual, when she and Dorothy Tangney entered the white building down the hill, it caused quite a stir. Female toilets had to be designated. The procedure of the opening of the parliament had to be slightly amended—no more 'gentlemen members and gentlemen senators' in the Governor-General's opening.</para>
<para>Dame Enid first came to the public's attention as the wife of Prime Minister Joseph Lyons, and everyone knew that they were a true team. She took to the role of prime ministerial spouse at the time with great enthusiasm, using it as a platform to give speeches, write newspaper articles and generally promote traditional values. When her husband died in 1939, she withdrew from public life for a time. By the time of the 1943 election, she was convinced to run for the UAP for the Tasmanian seat of Darwin. She won and entered the House of Representatives, changing the House forever.</para>
<para>Dame Enid was the first woman to serve in the House and, subsequently, the first woman to serve in cabinet. She was an absolute trailblazer for all of the women who have followed her, including me. Her maiden speech to the House covered many topics, from the political situation in Europe to the employment situation here in Australia. But a common theme running through the entire speech was the central position of the family as the foundation stone of society. That is something that permeates in our party to this day. She quoted the late King George in her speech saying, 'The foundation of a nation's greatness is in the homes of its people.' For her, family was everything and provided much stability in her life. She and Joseph had 12 children. They were a great comfort throughout their lives.</para>
<para>She believed in hard work and the rewards that came from that. She believed that women should earn equal pay with men if they went out and worked. That was quite a radical idea at the time, considering that hers was an era and a time when women stayed at home. Dame Enid was instrumental in bringing in welfare payments for mothers as well as equal training for both men and women. She was a visionary. Dame Enid Lyons was one of the most highly decorated women of her generation. She was awarded the Dame Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire.</para>
<para>She was a household name across the country. She even wrote a column in <inline font-style="italic">The Women's Weekly</inline> and remained a commissioner of the ABC until 1962. As the first female chief whip of the Liberal Party in a sitting government, I'm one of those women who is very proud to follow in her trailblazing footsteps. We do need to keep celebrating the firsts in our party and in this parliament. Certainly Dame Enid has been honoured in many ways, from the naming of Dame Enid Lyons Place here in Canberra, to her being made a Dame of the Order of Australia in 1980. In the event that was held last night to recognise Dame Enid Lyons we saw so many of her family present. There was a re-enactment of her first speech, which was delivered so well and gave us a great sense not only of how Dame Enid would have spoken but of her feelings at the time.</para>
<para>I feel a great sense of pride in being in the same party as Dame Enid. Hers is a legacy that blazed a trail for women across all political persuasions, but I'm very proud that the first woman in the House of Representatives was Dame Enid Lyons. It is an absolute legacy that the women in the Liberal Party are proud to look up to and that we should never forget or stop celebrating. She placed her family and her country at the centre of her life, and that shone through in her contributions not only in the parliament but in the community during her three terms in this House. Three terms is a fantastic achievement.</para>
<para>It's absolutely a privilege to rise and speak on the legacy of this great Liberal woman. She paved the way for all women, including the women sitting in this chamber right now, who have followed her into this House. Her legacy is just as relevant today as it was in 1943.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I echo many of the comments of the member for Forrest. Dame Enid Lyons was the first. I cannot imagine how challenging it must have been for Dame Enid. Let's think about that time. Australia was at war. Darwin had been bombed. Our troops were fighting with the Allied forces on many, many fronts. On the home front, women were dealing with the consequences of war. They were managing children and family responsibilities alone. There were shortages of resources as well as fears for the future and the grief and trauma of losing young ones. Many women were also actively involved as nurses and many other active duties and contributed more actively to the war efforts through military service. At this time, quite extraordinarily, we had a woman in parliament—a widow, a mother of 12, a wife to a former member of parliament. I believe Dame Enid Lyons illuminated the way for all of the women who have followed her into the federal parliament, and now there is a long line of distinguished female parliamentarians. I'm so humbled and thankful to be a woman in this parliament and the first woman from my part of South Australia.</para>
<para>I will speak only briefly on this motion, but I would like to enter into my speech a small excerpt from Dame Enid Lyons's first speech, which was delivered on 29 September 1943. She commenced her speech:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It would be strange indeed were I not to-night deeply conscious of the fact, if not a little awed by the knowledge, that on my shoulders rests a great weight of responsibility; because this is the first occasion upon which a woman has addressed this House. For that reason, it is an occasion which, for every woman in the Commonwealth, marks in some degree a turning point in history. I am well aware that, as I acquit myself in the work that I have undertaken for the next three years, so shall I either prejudice or enhance the prospects of those women who may wish to follow me in public service in the years to come.</para></quote>
<para>I believe that Dame Enid Lyons did a great service to women in this parliament and to our great nation, so I think it timely that we remember her speech from September 1943, and I thank her for her contributions to this great place.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FALINSKI</name>
    <name.id>G86</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Can I first reflect positively upon the contributions of the members for Mayo, Lyons, Braddon, Boothby and Forrest, who all spoke of the significance of Dame Enid Lyons. The member for Boothby told me that she hadn't really had a chance to properly consider her speech, but it was probably one of the best researched speeches that I have heard given on a motion of this nature, in particular her reflection upon the emotional context in which Dame Enid Lyons would have given her first speech, which Dame Enid did in the chamber after her husband had recently passed away and in front of so many of those who, she probably felt, had caused his early death through the stress that they had caused him.</para>
<para>Dame Enid Lyons was a pioneer for women in politics in Australia. It is 75 years since Dame Enid was elected the first woman in parliament. She paved the way for so many women to follow her journey to public life. In today's parliament there are 76 women. Enid narrowly won the seat of Darwin in Tasmania for the United Australia Party at the 1943 election. At the same election, Dorothy Tangney was elected as a Labor Party senator representing Western Australia. She was the first female senator to be elected.</para>
<para>Dame Enid's election in 1943 was not her first stint at politics. She narrowly lost the 1925 election for the seat of Denison by only 60 votes. Enid also supported her husband, former Prime Minister Joe Lyons. Enid and Joe were Australia's first political couple, and their children were the first children to live in the Lodge. In fact, the Lyons children were famous across the nation, with Joe and Enid inviting the press into the privacy of their home to take pictures of what was then a very new thing in newspapers. Of course, we need to also consider that travel in Australia in the 1920s was not as easy as it is today. So for Joe and Enid there was only one practical solution, and that was to move their family to Canberra.</para>
<para>Enid and Joe campaigned together. Enid made speeches and radio broadcasts for her husband and also alongside her husband. They thought of themselves as a team, and a true team they were, sharing and advancing so many of the political ideals and ideas that formed much of early Australia. But when Joe Lyons died in office in April 1939, Enid's greatest contribution to public life was still to come. Enid was left a widow, a widow with 11 children. Her husband's death was tragic and a tremendous loss not only for her but for this nation, whose democracy, at that point, was less than three decades old. She made the decision to enter parliament in her own right. It was a decision that, at the time, could not have been taken lightly. Her maiden speech, which many of the speakers today have referenced, was one that, no doubt, would have had more poignancy than most other maiden speeches, given the circumstances in which it occurred.</para>
<para>The anniversary of her first speech occurs next month. She must have thought very long and hard about what she would say in the chamber, given the death of her husband, and given that many of the people who had known him so well and caused him so much angst would be listening. She was re-elected twice, and after those elections Enid became the first woman to be in cabinet when she became the Vice-President of the Executive Council in 1949. She was widely credited with the Menzies government's decision to extend child endowment beyond the first-born child. This was a significant advancement for Australian families. It was a significant advancement for the federal government at a time when most people looked to their state governments, not to the Commonwealth, for such measures. To take this measure, as the Menzies government did—at a time when many people presumed the role of the Commonwealth government was a very limited one—was significant, but it was also a reflection of Enid and her husband's view that the family was the core of our society and anything the government could do to help advance that institution it should do. She advocated fervently, sensibly and, most importantly, persuasively for the raising of allowances paid to returned service women.</para>
<para>She was outspoken against the debarring of married women from employment in the Public Service. I was amazed to read only the other day that it was the Fraser government that actually got rid of the provision in the Commonwealth Public Service Act that said that when a woman became pregnant she had six months before she had to resign her position in the Commonwealth Public Service. Such provisions, it is amazing to think, Deputy Speaker Gee, were still in force in our lifetime. When you think about those things it is important to remember the massive advancements that we have made in the provision of equality of rights for all people in Australia, including, in this instance, pregnant women who are employed by the Commonwealth Public Service. Dame Enid Lyons was talking about this in the 1920s and 1930s, and the fact that it was not acted upon for 40 years is, I think, a testament against apathy and inaction—things are not inevitable. There is a current generation of people who believe quite fervently that things just get better. But this particular instance shows that it took nearly 40 years for something that was one of the core issues of one of the most important parliamentarians in the history of our nation to actually get advanced and to take effect.</para>
<para>In this very emotional speech, Enid's first speech, she canvassed policy ideas on an absolute multitude of issues. These issues were very relevant at the day but, when we go back and look, there was extraordinary foresight in those speeches as well. It is incredible that, even back in the 1930s, Dame Enid was talking about decentralisation. That's something that, frankly speaking, we have continued to try, but it has not successfully happened. I had someone the other day talking to me about traffic congestion on the northern beaches in my electorate of Mackellar. They said: 'Didn't the Fraser government try decentralisation? Whatever happened to that?' In actual fact, I was amazed to find in Dame Enid Lyon's first speech that she'd been talking about it in the 1930s. She also said—talking about her political philosophy:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the problems of government were not problems of … statistics, but problems of human values and human hearts and human feelings …</para></quote>
<para>She also said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I hope that I shall never forget that everything that takes place in this chamber goes out somewhere to strike a human heart, to influence the life of some fellow being.</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The minister's time has expired. No other minister having risen, the minister may continue.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FALINSKI</name>
    <name.id>G86</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Dame Enid put it so beautifully—so beautifully, I felt. She went on:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… and I believe this, too, with all my heart: that the duty of every government, whether in this country or any other, is to see that no man—</para></quote>
<para>by which I presume she meant 'no person'—</para>
<quote><para class="block">because of the condition of his—</para></quote>
<para>or her—</para>
<quote><para class="block">life, shall ever need lose his vision of the city of God.</para></quote>
<para>Earle Page, the great National Party leader, nicknamed Enid 'the woman who wouldn't be sat down'. I think that that goes to the proud idea that she stood up for what she believed, and she stood up for what she believed at a time and at a place when often groupthink is too easy to accept, to know. Others referred to her as the 'lady member'. She was both literally and figuratively a lady, and the sole female member of the House of Representatives.</para>
<para>Dame Enid suffered from various illnesses and ailments during her life and, ultimately, it was her ill health that forced her early retirement at just 53. Of course in the 1920s and 1930s life expectancy was much lower and 53 was considered to be quite a senior age. Now I hear that 70 is the new 50—as I approach my 50th birthday, I hope that's true. We owe her and Dorothy Tangney, through their election to the parliament, a very significant debt. It was a very significant moment in our history. We honour their memory. I would like to thank all the members who felt it proper to give speeches on Dame Enid today, especially the members for Lyons and Braddon, and in particular the member for Boothby, who gave an incredibly eloquent and well-researched speech.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Seventy-five years have passed since Dame Enid Lyons gave her maiden speech in the federal parliament in 1943. She was the first woman ever to be elected to the Australian House of Representatives, and also the first woman to serve in federal cabinet. But these historical snapshots are among many of her achievements. Enid Muriel Lyons was the mother of 12 children, which even today might make thoughts of an additional occupation well-nigh impossible. She has been described as living life at a killing pace. Not only managing all of her family responsibilities, she was also actively involved in her husband's political career.</para>
<para>Long before Enid's election to the House of Representatives she was an articulate and persuasive speaker. Her mother ensured that she took elocution lessons and encouraged her to speak or perform whenever she had an audience. She also took her to the Tasmanian state parliament, where the fresh-faced 15-year-old first met Joseph Aloysius Lyons, Labor member for the state seat of Wilmot. They would eventually marry on 28 April 1915 at Wynyard. Joe was 35 and Enid just 17. After Lyons moved to the federal House of Representatives in 1929 Enid remained closely involved in his career. In 1932 several nationalists revolted and brought down the government. With Enid's encouragement Joseph Lyons was elected leader of a minority Labor government, before the United Australia Party split, becoming Prime Minister until his passing in 1939. His first act as PM was to write to Enid, noting, 'whatever honours or distinctions come are ours, not mine.'</para>
<para>After Joseph passed away, Enid fell into a deep depression, which, by her own admission, was likely caused by inactivity. She then decided to pursue her own political career. In her maiden speech she spoke on social security, a declining birth rate, the need for an extension of child endowment, housing, the family and the importance of looking ahead to postwar policies. She really did have a strong belief in the right of women to take their place in government. I quote from her maiden speech to federal parliament in 1943:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I believe, very sincerely, that any woman entering the public arena must be prepared to work as men work; she must justify herself not as a woman, but as a citizen; she must attack the same problems, and be prepared to shoulder the same burdens. But because I am a woman, and cannot divest myself of those qualities that are inherent in my sex, and because every one of us speaks broadly in the terms of one's own experience, honorable members will have to become accustomed to the application of the homely metaphors of the kitchen rather than those of the operating theatre, the workshop, or the farm. They must also become accustomed to the application to all kinds of measures of the touchstone of their effect upon the home and the family life …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I am delighted that the honorable member for Denison Dr. Gaha should have secured the honour of having introduced to this chamber, in this debate, the subject of population … I, like him, have pondered on this subject—not with my feet upon the mantle-piece, but knee-deep in shawls and feeding bottles … I consider that something more than decentralization is necessary if the population of Australia is to be increased.</para></quote>
<para>The response from politicians, the press and the public was overwhelming. She would note afterwards: 'In that place of endless speaking, no-one had ever made men weep, and I wasn't even trying to do so.' As a politician, Enid was a strong advocate for women, yet not necessarily a feminist, debating robustly on issues including population, immigration, international affairs, agricultural development, finance and energy.</para>
<para>Enid Lyons did not lead an easy life, suffering a host of medical conditions and recurring ill health. Her health was much improved after she retired from politics in 1951 to become a newspaper columnist and to serve as a commissioner of the ABC from 1951 to 1962. Remaining active, Enid published three sets of memoirs and was vocal always in family's and women's issues. She was made a Dame of the Order of Australia on Australia Day in 1980. She passed away the following year, late in 1981.</para>
<para>I encourage the women in our federal and state parliaments, who come to these places with a path much easier than Dame Enid had, to consider the example of Dame Enid and reflect on all the things she achieved. She's known today, but not well known, and I think she should be a lot better known. I really thank my colleague, the Minister for Revenue, Kelly O'Dwyer, for moving this motion and for highlighting the extraordinary life of Dame Enid. I will just quote from the Minister for Revenue's final remarks about Dame Enid:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Tonight we celebrate Enid's achievements and forge our future. Like Enid, we have a duty to our country to carry the lamp that she lit on that spring evening in 1943 and to ensure that many more women will follow in our footsteps to serve and contribute to our nation. Although she was famously described as a 'bird of paradise among carrion crows', I prefer to think of Dame Enid in far more sturdy terms as someone who was smart, energetic and determined, as someone passionate about politics, her husband, about her 12 children, and about our nation. She was seen and heard and she was magnificent.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm very proud to add my name to the list of speakers on this motion commemorating Enid Lyons's election to parliament, one of the pivotal figures in Australian history. I would also like to acknowledge my female parliamentary colleagues on all sides of politics. They truly do a wonderful job not only of representing their constituents but also exemplifying the opportunities that exist for women right around Australia. As we say, you can't be what you can't see.</para>
<para>I had the honour of attending an re-enactment of Dame Enid Lyons's maiden speech in Old Parliament House last night. It truly was a wonderful event. It was impossible not to be moved by the poignancy of the moment. The first woman to be elected to parliament and also the first woman to be elected to cabinet delivering a speech that would be etched into Australian history. And, of course, the words reflected a different era. Much has changed over the last 75 years but also a lot has not changed. In her introduction, Dame Enid captured the feeling of trepidation that accompanied a turning point in history, as she said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I know that many honourable members have viewed the advent of women to the legislative halls with something approaching alarm; they have feared, I have no doubt, the somewhat too vigorous use of a new broom.</para></quote>
<para>I can't recall her exact words but she did go on to talk about that she did know a bit about brooms given she had had 12 children and had to do her fair share of cleaning up. But she was a new broom in terms of the way that business was done 75 years ago in federal parliament.</para>
<para>In present day Australia, women in the parliament have become more commonplace. I and millions of other people believe Australia is a better country for that. The parliament and indeed the country is a much more inclusive environment in the modern world. Yet the work is far from over. Seventy-five years after Dame Enid entered parliament, women still make up less than half of this parliament. Women are still less likely to be promoted and are underrepresented in senior positions. And there is a persistent view that, when women do make it to senior positions in any workplace, not just federal parliament, there are finite positions available. There is also a view, and my own experience has borne this out, that a woman needs to be better than her male counterparts to get ahead. The idea that only a certain number of women can fit into the structure of a management or executive team or a board remains one of our greatest challenges, and it holds the nation back.</para>
<para>I personally don't support quotas, preferring that people are selected on merit, but that has its challenges. I do support targets, but they need to be taken seriously by the party, and we're not there yet—we are far from it. The Liberal Party has a target of preselecting women to 50 per cent of winnable seats by 2025. I think there are a few practical things that the party ought to do to be able to achieve that target. Firstly—and I think this is key—we need to work a lot harder to support the female members of parliament that we have and then to encourage aspiring MPs. We do need a formal sponsorship program that gets more women into the pipeline and exposed to preselectors, which is the key. The WA Liberal Party I believe are starting to take action on this front. I congratulate them for that. I'm doing my bit to support them.</para>
<para>We know that diversity is an asset. An equal, balanced workplace leads to better outcomes, higher productivity and greater efficiency. A McKinsey Global Institute report in June 2017, which investigated advancing women's equality in Canada, found that increasing diversity correlated with better business practice. That report suggested a more diverse workforce had the potential to add $150 billion to the country's incremental GDP by 2026. Similar studies have suggested that, globally, GDP could increase by $12 trillion by advancing gender equality.</para>
<para>We've some way to go, I'm sure you would agree. The reasons for pursuing such a goal are valid on a number of fronts. The economic arguments alone are worth pursuing. Why shouldn't we create a culture that encourages a diverse workforce and signals to young women all around the world that they can aspire to the highest level of their profession? This is a universal issue that requires a united approach from both men and women. It's not just a women's issue; it is a men's issue as well. Women of this parliament and female leaders across the nation share this responsibility. Dame Enid recognised it from the moment she made history with her inaugural speech, when she said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I am well aware that, as I acquit myself in the work that I have undertaken for the next three years, so shall I either prejudice or enhance the prospects of those women who may wish to follow me in public service in the years to come.</para></quote>
<para>It's a potent message that still resonates today. Strong female leaders are role models for their younger peers in this nation, and we must never lose sight of this. It is a huge responsibility for female politicians.</para>
<para>We've come a long way since Dame Enid gave her inaugural speech to the Australian parliament on 29 September 1943. Much of the progress we've made can be attributed to the foundations laid by Dame Enid and the Australian women who dismantled the stigma that women are unfit to be leaders of our great country. Our duty now is to continue this work so that future generations may reap the benefits that a diverse and accepting nation has to offer. Once again I would like to pay my respects to Dame Enid Lyons, a champion of women and a champion of Australia.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at 12:19</para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
  <answers.to.questions>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS IN WRITING</title>
        <page.no>129</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS IN WRITING</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Disability Insurance Scheme (Question No. 986)</title>
          <page.no>129</page.no>
          <id.no>986</id.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs Elliot</name>
    <name.id>DZW</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para> asked the Minister for Social Services, in writing, on 18 June 2018:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) What educational qualification or prior service experience in working with people with disabilities is required of NDIS planners and approvers.(2) Who (a) provides governance, oversight and accountability of NDIS providers, (b) determines the effectiveness of NDIS providers in delivering what they have been contracted for, and (c) can NDIS clients and their families discuss any concerns with about their providers.</para></quote>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp></time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tehan</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para> The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">1) Position descriptions contain a generic skillset the NDIA seeks when recruiting, and it is expected that successful applicants meet the required skillset. Most of the planners have worked in the disability sector in jurisdictions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   a) During the transition to full Scheme, providers are required to meet state and territory quality and safeguarding legislative requirements to become registered providers of NDIS supports. This includes meeting specific jurisdictional quality and safeguard, professional and expertise requirements.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 July 2018, responsibility for registration of providers in New South Wales and South Australia will transition to the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   b) Service agreements between providers and participants outline the expected outcomes, and the nature, quality and price of supports to be provided. Participants, and their nominees and family, can provide feedback to providers, and exercise their choice and control where services do not meet their expectations.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">NDIS-registered providers are required to act in the best interests of participants, abide by the NDIS Terms of Business and NDIS Price Guide and may have their payment requests tested as part of the NDIA's Provider Payment Assurance Program.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   c) From 1 July 2018, the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission began operating in New South Wales and South Australia. NDIS participants and their families in New South Wales or South Australia, can discuss any concerns regarding NDIS services with the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission by:</para></quote>
<list>Phoning: 1800 035 544 (free call from landlines) or TTY 133 677. Interpreters can be arranged.</list>
<quote><para class="block">BULLET National Relay Service and ask for 1800 035 544.</para></quote>
<list>Completing a complaint contact form, available at: www.ndiscommission.gov.au</list>
<quote><para class="block">For NDIS participants and their families not in New South Wales and South Australia, state or territory requirements for quality and safeguards continue to be in place. Concerns regarding providers can be raised with the relevant State or Territory body and may also be referred to the appropriate complaints body for investigation, including the relevant Ombudsman. The existing arrangements for making complaints remain in place, until the NDIS Commission begins operating from:</para></quote>
<list>1 July 2019 for the Australian Capital Territory, Northern Territory, Queensland, Tasmania, and Victoria</list>
<list>1 July 2020 for Western Australia.</list>
<quote><para class="block">Registered providers must notify the NDIA if they are in breach of any Commonwealth, State or Territory law, including any Commonwealth, State or Territory disability service standards. Registered providers must also notify the NDIA if they become subject to any investigation for breach of a Commonwealth, State or Territory law and/or quality and safeguard arrangements.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> </para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </answers.to.questions>
</hansard>