2019-09-19 46 1 1 House of Reps 0 1

Thursday, 19 September 2019

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Tony Smith ) took the chair at 09:30, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Public Works Committee 1 Approval of Work 1 09:32 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: Fit-out of leased premises for the Australian Taxation Office at 6-20 Gladstone Street, Moonee Ponds, Victoria. The Australian Taxation Office proposes to undertake a refurbishment of the fit-out at its leased premises in Moonee Ponds, Victoria. The proposed fit-out will provide the Australian Taxation Office with considerable advantages in terms of design and operating efficiencies, and proposes to provide contemporary, agile and cost-effective accommodation. The estimated cost of the project is $35.5 million, excluding GST. This includes management and design fees, construction costs, information and communications technology, furniture, fittings, equipment, contingencies and a provision for escalation. The project will employ a diverse range of skilled consultants and contractors. Subject to parliamentary approval, the project is anticipated to commence in late 2019 and be completed during 2020. The project was referred to the Public Works Committee on 31 July 2019, and the committee presented the report on the project to the House of Representatives on 9 September 2019 and to the Senate on 10 September 2019. The committee recommends that the House of Representatives resolve, pursuant to section 18(7) of the Public Works Act 1969, that it is expedient to carry out the project. On behalf of the government, I'd like to thank the committee for undertaking a timely inquiry. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Public Works Committee 1 Approval of Work 1 09:35 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston On behalf of the Assistant Treasurer, I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: Department of Defence, Point Wilson Waterside Infrastructure Remediation Project, Point Wilson, Victoria. The Department of Defence is proposing to undertake adaptive reuse and refurbishment of existing waterside infrastructure, the demolition of redundant and deteriorated infrastructure and the construction of infrastructure at the Point Wilson Explosive Area in Victoria. The 2016 Defence white paper identified the importance of key enabling capabilities of the defence estate, including logistics systems such as explosive ordnance facilities, and foreshadowed the upgrading of the Point Wilson Explosive Area to conduct and sustain explosive ordnance operations in Australia. This capital investment in infrastructure at the Point Wilson Explosive Area will bring economic benefits to the local economy, with the employment of a diverse range of skilled consultants and contractors during the construction phase to deliver and manage the works. The estimated cost of the project is $218.9 million excluding GST. The project was referred to the PWC on 31 July 2019, and the committee presented its report on the project to the House of Representatives on 9 September 2019 and to the Senate on 10 September 2019. The committee has recommended that the House of Representatives resolve, pursuant to section 18(7) of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, that it is expedient to carry out the project. The committee has also asked the Department of Defence to provide the committee with an annual progress report for the project as well as detailed reports which provide the final costs of each element once completed. Defence should also provide the detail of any commercial sharing opportunities or use that it has been able to pursue. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee for undertaking a timely inquiry. Subject to parliamentary approval, construction is scheduled to commence in September 2019, and completion is anticipated by late 2022. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. Public Works Committee 2 Approval of Work 2 09:38 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston On behalf of the Assistant Treasurer, I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: National Museum of Australia Proposed Gallery Development Stage 1: Life in Australia. The National Museum of Australia has a program of gallery renewal that will redevelop the current permanent galleries into three distinct spaces with a linked experience that will tell the story of Australia. These works are part of the National Museum of Australia's asset replacement program. The first phase of the program is the redevelopment of the current exhibition space, with a 1,500 square metre permanent exhibition of environmental history provisionally entitled 'Life in Australia'. The work will be within the existing National Museum of Australia building located on the Acton Peninsula in Canberra. The estimated total cost of the works is $20.5 million, GST exclusive. The project is not supported by funding from any specific budget measure and is entirely funded from the museum's capital reserves. The Public Works Committee has conducted an inquiry into the project and the committee was satisfied that the project has merit in terms of need, scope and cost. The committee has recommended that the House resolve, pursuant to section 18(7) of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, that it is expedient to carry out the project. On behalf of the government, I would like to thank the committee for undertaking a timely inquiry. Subject to parliamentary approval of the works, the project is expected to commence in late 2019 and be completed by 2021. I commend the motion to the House. Question agreed to. BILLS 2 BILLS Treasury Laws Amendment (International Tax Agreements) Bill 2019 2

Treasury Laws Amendment (International Tax Agreements) Bill 2019

First Reading 2 Second Reading 2 09:40 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Australia and Israel share a close friendship and have longstanding trade and investment ties. In 2017-18 total merchandise trade between Australia and Israel was worth over $1 billion, and Israel's investment in Australia was over $300 million. Behind these numbers are many real-world examples of this close economic relationship. This includes Australian start-ups using the Tel Aviv Landing Pad to access Israel's innovation ecosystem. It also includes two Israeli biotech companies that have established a physical presence in Australia to take advantage of our world-leading clinical research environment. Importantly, this bill and the treaty contained within will further nurture and strengthen this growing economic relationship. On 28 March this year the Convention between the Government of Australia and the Government of the State of Israel for the Elimination of Double Taxation with respect to Taxes on Income and the Prevention of Tax Evasion and Avoidance, as it is formally known, was signed by Australia and Israel. The first of its kind between our two countries, it brings with it a range of benefits. The convention will support new trading opportunities for Australian businesses by reducing withholding taxes, helping to create a more favourable bilateral investment environment and making it cheaper for Australian businesses to access Israel's capital and, importantly, their technology. The convention will also improve tax certainty for business by introducing antidiscrimination and arbitration rules as well as a range of rules to prevent double taxation. Importantly, the convention will strengthen the integrity of Australia's tax system and help detect and prevent tax evasion. It does this by authorising the revenue authorities of Australia and Israel to exchange taxpayer information on all taxes that are covered by the convention. Finally, the convention incorporates important integrity provisions from the G20/OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting project, known as BEPS. These provisions are designed to minimise tax avoidance opportunities and ensure that multinational corporations pay the appropriate amount of tax. The new convention will enter into force following the last notification that both countries have completed their domestic requirements, which in our case includes the enactment of this bill I'm introducing today. As well as amending the International Tax Agreements Act 1953 to give force to the convention, the bill amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 to introduce a new deemed source-of-income rule. This will ensure that Australia can fully exercise the taxing rights it has negotiated under this new convention and future international tax agreements. This is an outstanding achievement for the Morrison government, concluding this double tax treaty with Israel. I commend everybody who's had involvement with this. It is a culmination of the work of many people, many officials, and ultimately it will provide great economic benefits for both Australia and Israel. Debate adjourned. Currency (Restrictions on the Use of Cash) Bill 2019 3

Currency (Restrictions on the Use of Cash) Bill 2019

First Reading 3 Second Reading 3 09:44 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill establishes the cash payment limit and introduces offences for entities that make or accept cash payments of $10,000 or more from 1 January 2020. The Black Economy Taskforce final report found that large cash payments can be anonymous and untraceable allowing businesses to under-report their income and to offer consumers discounts for transactions that reflect the businesses' avoided obligations. This practice has a profound negative impact on businesses that do the right thing. The vast majority of businesses that diligently pay their tax and meet their other obligations are not able to offer the same unfairly discounted price for their goods or services. The cash payment limit sends a strong signal to the community that the government will protect the rights of honest businesses and their families from unfair competition from those who want to avoid their obligations. The cash payment limit not only targets those avoiding their tax, but more importantly, and more crucially, it helps to fight organised crime syndicates. We know that large amounts of cash are essential to the business model of criminal gangs. These gangs launder the cash from the proceeds of manufacturing and selling drugs and other serious crimes through the legitimate economy. The cash limit will make it harder for them to do so. The government is committed to providing our intelligence agencies with the tools and laws that enable them to disrupt these activities. This is not to say that consumers and businesses do not have legitimate reasons to conduct cash transactions, and the government recognises that cash remains an important part of the economy and a legitimate means of payment for individuals and businesses. The cash payment limit will apply only to businesses and individuals that make or accept payments that involve $10,000 or more in cash, as I have noted. The majority of businesses' and individuals' daily interactions involving cash are unlikely to exceed the cash payment limit. We are living in a time where a large majority of businesses now transact through electronic payment methods, which reduces their costs associated with the storage, transport, loss and monitoring of cash. Importantly, the cash payment limit does not apply to private transactions (excluding real property transactions)—for example, the sale of a private car to another person. All Australians will continue to be able to deposit and withdraw cash in excess of $10,000 into and from their accounts, and to store more than $10,000 of their money outside a bank. Black economy activity is not simply a matter of under reporting income or tax evasion. It is a criminal matter. It can involve criminal activity to hide income through the exploitation of people, processes and systems. Therefore, the government is sending a strong message to the community, and to criminal syndicates, more importantly, that using cash to avoid obligations and potentially engage in criminal activity is a serious matter that requires a sufficient level of deterrence. Contravening the cash payment limit carries with it a criminal offence provision, as noted earlier. The penalties provide a balance between monetary penalties to deter the use of cash transactions to avoid tax obligations and jail for individuals and businesses involved in organised crime. I would also like to acknowledge the work of Michael Andrew AO, whose passion and dedication to combat the black economy was instrumental in the introduction of this legislation. Unfortunately, Michael recently passed away, and I wish to pass on my condolences to his family. The government shares Michael's commitment to tackle the black economy to ensure a fairer environment for all Australians. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. 09:48 The SPEAKER 00APG I would very much like to associate myself with the remarks the Assistant Treasurer made with respect to the late Michael Andrew, who performed a very important role, and with dedication, for a long period of time. For those of us from Melbourne who knew him well, I'm glad that the assistant minister took the time to make those remarks. Debate adjourned. Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Cessation) Bill 2019 4

Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Cessation) Bill 2019

First Reading 4 Second Reading 4 09:50 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Governments must ensure that Australia's counterterrorism laws remain strong, targeted, and effective. There is no room for complacency in this endeavour, and our national security and counterterrorism laws are under constant review to ensure that Australia's law enforcement and intelligence agencies have the powers they need to prevent terrorist attacks and to deal with those individuals who would commit them. Recently, the government introduced the Counter-Terrorism (Temporary Exclusion Orders) Act 2019, adding to the suite of measures to manage Australians who present a threat to the community, and today, the government introduces the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Cessation) Bill 2019 to amend the terrorism-related citizenship loss provisions in the Australian Citizenship Act 2007. The terrorism-related citizenship cessation provisions were first introduced in 2015 in response to the threat of foreign terrorist fighters returning to Australia from Syria and Iraq. Since 2012, around 230 Australians have travelled to Syria or Iraq to fight with or support Islamic State, and around 250 Australian passports have been cancelled or refused in relation to the Syria-Iraq conflict, and others, as we know, who have fought for, or otherwise supported Islamic extremist groups, remain in Syria and Iraq and may seek to return to Australia at some time in the future. The terrorism-related citizenship cessation provisions have been effective since their introduction. They have been able to result in the removal from the Australian community of dual citizens who fought in Syria and Iraq and who would have sought to return home with new skills, combat experience, and lethal intent. These provisions have protected the Australian community. The Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Cessation) Bill 2019 continues the coalition government's effort to address the threat of terrorism and to deliver on our commitment to keep the Australian community safe. It's central reform and it provides for ministerial decision-making with respect to the cessation of Australian citizenship, replacing the current automatic operation of law provisions. Under this model, the Minister for Home Affairs can cease a person's Australian citizenship if satisfied that their conduct demonstrates a repudiation of their allegiance to Australia and that it is not in the public interest for the person to remain an Australian citizen. The overarching purpose of this bill remains the same as when the provisions were first introduced in 2015. The parliament recognised then, as it does now, that Australian citizenship is a common bond, involving reciprocal rights and obligations. Citizens may, through certain conduct incompatible with the shared values of the Australian community, sever that bond and repudiate their allegiance to Australia. A citizen's duty of allegiance to Australia was not created by the Australian Citizenship Act 2007, but it is recognised by it and this bill reinforces that obligation. The current citizenship loss provisions were recently reviewed by the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor (INSLM), who has made a number of recommendations as to how the provisions can be improved. The bill presented here today implements the majority of these recommendations. In his report, the INSLM states 'the notion of allegiance by citizens to Australia is thought by some to be outdated; however, there can be no doubt of its current legal relevance in international law, the law of Australia, and the law of other countries'. In recognising the importance of laws to cease a person's citizenship, the INSLM recommends that sections 33AA and 35 be replaced with a ministerial decision-making model. This is the central amendment incorporated in this bill. The bill retains three mechanisms for an individual to be considered for cessation of citizenship if they repudiate their allegiance to Australia: First, a person can cease to be a citizen if they engage in specified terrorist conduct. Second, a person can cease to be a citizen if they fight for, or are in the service of, a specified terrorist organisation overseas, and the bill retains provisions that a person is not in the service of a declared terrorist organisation if acting unintentionally, under duress, or providing humanitarian assistance. Finally, a person can cease to be a citizen if they have been convicted of a specified terrorism offence by an Australian court. In accordance with Australia's international law obligations, the bill retains provisions that no persons will have their citizenship ceased unless the minister is satisfied they are a citizen or national of another country. As an additional safeguard, the bill includes a provision whereby if a court finds the person was not a national or citizen of another at the time of the determination, their citizenship is taken never to have ceased. In considering whether to cease a person's citizenship, the minister must have regard to certain public interest criteria. This, amongst other things, includes the degree of threat the person poses to the Australian community, Australia's international relations and the person's connection with the other country of citizenship. This enables the minister to consider a person within their specific context. The inclusion of the public interest criteria aligns with one of the INSLM's recommendations. Once the minister has decided to cease a person's citizenship, the minister must inform the person in writing as soon as practicable. However, the minister retains the right to withhold notice if satisfied that giving notice could prejudice the security, defence or international relations of Australia, or Australian law enforcement operations. Similar to the existing provisions, a decision to withhold notice can remain in place for five years. However, the new provisions require the minister to review this determination every 90 days. Additionally, at the conclusion of the five years, the person is provided notice unless the minister extends the determination once for a year. Withholding notice does not prevent a person from seeking judicial review if they become aware of the cessation of their citizenship through other means. Once a person is provided notice, the new provisions give them 90 days to apply to the minister in writing for a revocation of the determination to cease their citizenship. Natural justice is afforded to the person so they can make representations on their case. This provision also aligns with a recommendation made by the INSLM. In addition to applying to the minister, the bill contains several other avenues for a person's citizenship to be reinstated. Firstly, the minister may reinstate an individual's citizenship if it is in the public interest to do so. Secondly, in certain circumstances, a person's citizenship is taken never to have ceased and it is automatically reinstated. Finally, a person can access judicial review in relation to the minister's decision to cease their citizenship or reject their application for reinstatement. The bill retains existing accountability and transparency measures. The minister must report to the parliament and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) on the use of the provisions. In upholding transparency, the bill also amends the Intelligence Services Act 2001 to provide the PJCIS until 30 June 2021 to review the new provisions. The bill includes transitional provisions to manage those persons whose citizenship may have ceased under the existing provisions, but whose circumstances are yet to come to the attention of the minister. There are two additional measures that expand the operation of this new model. Firstly, the bill amends the conduct provision so that behaviour dating from 29 May 2003 onwards can be taken into consideration when the minister determines whether to cease a person's citizenship. This enables the government to take into consideration and address a person's historic conduct that is incompatible with the shared values of the Australian community. Secondly, the bill amends the conviction provision to allow the minister to cease a person's citizenship if they are convicted from 29 May 2003 onwards of certain terrorism offences for a period or periods totalling three years. The current requirement is a sentence of six years for a conviction from 2015 to now, or 10 years from conviction from 2005 to 2015. This amendment reflects the seriousness of a criminal conviction for a terrorism offence. The date of 29 May 2003 is pertinent, as it is the date on which relevant offences were fully enacted under the Criminal Code Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2003. These amendments build on, adapt and modernise the citizenship cessation provisions. They strengthen the operation of the measures in response to the increasingly complex challenges facing the national security, defence and international relations of Australia. They further establish citizenship cessation as one of a suite of measures—which includes control orders, prosecution, temporary exclusion orders, the Commonwealth high-risk terrorist offenders scheme and deradicalisation programs—that can be applied appropriately and proportionately on a case-by-case basis. Australia is a united and cohesive country. It is something we pride ourselves on. In recognising and protecting this unity and cohesion, it is essential that we continue to monitor, update and amend the way in which we deal with those who would threaten it. Behaviour that harms, or seeks to harm, our community—whether that be in Australia or offshore—is in clear opposition to the common bond and shared values that underpin membership the Australian community. This bill is designed to protect the integrity of Australian citizenship and to ensure we have the necessary powers to keep Australians safe. It reflects the government's strong approach to combating terrorism, and protecting the sovereignty and safety of this country and its citizens. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. MOTIONS 6 MOTIONS Standing Orders 6 10:00 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the standing orders be amended as follows: (1) standing order 218 to be deleted; (2) the following sub-paragraph to be inserted into standing order 222A after sub-paragraph (a)(v):    (vi) consider and report to the Speaker on matters relating to the provision of facilities in Parliament House affecting the House, its committees or its Members; and the subsequent sub-paragraphs to be renumbered accordingly. Question agreed to. REGISTER OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS 6 REGISTER OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS 10:01 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the resolution of the House relating to the registration of Members' interests be amended as follows: (1) Registration of Members' interests That— (a) within 28 days of making and subscribing an oath or affirmation as a Member of the House of Representatives each Member shall provide to the Registrar of Members' Interests, a statement of—    (i) the Member's registrable interests, and    (ii) the registrable interests of which the Member is aware (a) of the Member's spouse/partner and (b) of any children who are wholly or mainly dependent on the Member for support, in accordance with resolutions adopted by the House and in a form determined by the Committee of Members' Interests or by the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests from time to time, and shall also notify any alteration of those interests to the Registrar within 28 days of that alteration occurring, and (b) the statement to be provided by a Member shall include:    (i) in the case of a Member who was not a Member of the House of Representatives in the immediately preceding Parliament, interests held at the date of his or her election and any alteration of interests which has occurred between that date and the date of completion of the statement, and    (ii) in the case of a Member who was a Member of the House of Representatives in the immediately preceding Parliament, interests held at the date of dissolution of the House of Representatives in the previous Parliament and any alteration of interests which has occurred between that date and the date of completion of the statement. (2) Registrable interests That the statement of a Member's registrable interests to be provided by a Member shall include the registrable interests of which the Member is aware (l) of the Member's spouse/partner and (2) of any children who are wholly or mainly dependent on the Member for support, and shall cover the following matters: (a) shareholdings in public and private companies (including holding companies) indicating the name of the company or companies; (b) family and business trusts and nominee companies—    (i) in which a beneficial interest is held, indicating the name of the trust, the nature of its operation and beneficial interest, and    (ii) in which the Member, the Member's spouse/partner, or a child who is wholly or mainly dependent on the Member for support, is a trustee (but not including a trustee of an estate where no beneficial interest is held by the Member, the Member's spouse/partner or dependent children), indicating the name of the trust, the nature of its operation and the beneficiary of the trust; (c) real estate, including the location (suburb or area only) and the purpose for which it is owned; (d) registered directorships of companies; (e) partnerships indicating the nature of the interests and the activities of the partnership; (f) liabilities indicating the nature of the liability and the creditor concerned; (g) the nature of any bonds, debentures and like investments; (h) saving or investment accounts, indicating their nature and the name of the bank or other institutions concerned; (i) the nature of any other assets (excluding household and personal effects) each valued at over $7,500; (j) the nature of any other substantial sources of income; (k) gifts valued at more than $750 received from official sources, or at more than $300 where received from other than official sources provided that a gift received by a Member, the Member's spouse/partner or dependent children from family members or personal friends in a purely personal capacity need not be registered unless the Member judges that an appearance of conflict of interest may be seen to exist; (l) any sponsored travel or hospitality received where the value of the sponsored travel or hospitality exceeds $300; (m) membership of any organisation where a conflict of interest with a Member's public duties could foreseeably arise or be seen to arise, and (n) any other interests where a conflict of interest with a Member's public duties could foreseeably arise or be seen to arise. (3) Register and Registrar of Members' Interests That— (a) at the commencement of each Parliament, and at other times as necessary, Mr Speaker shall appoint an officer of the Department of the House of Representatives as the Registrar of Members' Interests and that officer shall also assist the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests in relation to matters concerning Members' interests; (b) the Registrar of Members' Interests shall, in accordance with procedures determined by the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests, maintain a Register of Members' Interests in a form to be determined by that committee from time to time; (c) as soon as possible after the commencement of each Parliament the Registrar of Members' Interests shall publish online the completed Register of Members' Interests and shall also publish online from time to time as required any notification by a Member of alteration of those interests, and (d) the Register of Members' Interests shall be available for inspection by any person under conditions to be laid down by the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests from time to time. Additional resolution adopted 13 February 1986 That any Member of the House of Representatives who— (a) knowingly fails to provide a statement of registrable interests to the Registrar of Members' Interests by the due date; (b) knowingly fails to notify any alteration of those interests to the Registrar of Members' Interests within 28 days of the change occurring, or (c) knowingly provides false or misleading information to the Registrar of Members' Interests, shall be guilty of a serious contempt of the House of Representatives and shall be dealt with by the House accordingly. Question agreed to. BILLS 8 BILLS Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Extend Family Assistance to ABSTUDY Secondary School Boarding Students Aged 16 and Over) Bill 2019 8

Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Extend Family Assistance to ABSTUDY Secondary School Boarding Students Aged 16 and Over) Bill 2019

Returned from Senate 8 COMMITTEES 8 COMMITTEES Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law System 8 Appointment 8 10:02 The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E The Speaker has received a message from the Senate transmitting a resolution relating to the proposed establishment of a joint select committee on Australia's family law system. The Senate requests the concurrence of the House on the resolution. Given the length of the resolution, I do not intend to read it to the House. Copies have been placed on the table, and the terms will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings and incorporated in Hansard. The resolution read as follows— (1) That a joint select committee, to be known as the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law System, be established to inquire into and report on the following matters:    (a) ongoing issues and further improvements relating to the interaction and information sharing between the family law system and state and territory child protection systems, and family and domestic violence jurisdictions, including:       (i) the process, and evidential and legal standards and onuses of proof, in relation to the granting of domestic violence orders and apprehended violence orders, and       (ii) the visibility of, and consideration given to, domestic violence orders and apprehended violence orders in family law proceedings;    (b) the appropriateness of family court powers to ensure parties in family law proceedings provide truthful and complete evidence, and the ability of the court to make orders for non-compliance and the efficacy of the enforcement of such orders;    (c) beyond the proposed merger of the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court any other reform that may be needed to the family law and the current structure of the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court;    (d) the financial costs to families of family law proceedings, and options to reduce the financial impact, with particular focus on those instances where legal fees incurred by parties are disproportionate to the total property pool in dispute or are disproportionate to the objective level of complexity of parenting issues, and with consideration being given amongst other things to banning 'disappointment fees', and:       (i) capping total fees by reference to the total pool of assets in dispute, or any other regulatory option to prevent disproportionate legal fees being charged in family law matters, and       (ii) any mechanisms to improve the timely, efficient and effective resolution of property disputes in family law proceedings;    (e) the effectiveness of the delivery of family law support services and family dispute resolution processes;    (f) the impacts of family law proceedings on the health, safety and wellbeing of children and families involved in those proceedings;    (g) any issues arising for grandparent carers in family law matters and family law court proceedings;    (h) any further avenues to improve the performance and monitoring of professionals involved in family law proceedings and the resolution of disputes, including agencies, family law practitioners, family law experts and report writers, the staff and judicial officers of the courts, and family dispute resolution practitioners;    (i) any improvements to the interaction between the family law system and the child support system;    (j) the potential usage of pre-nuptial agreements and their enforceability to minimise future property disputes; and    (k) any related matters. (2) That the committee consist of 10 members:    (a) 3 members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips;    (b) 2 members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips;    (c) 1 member of the House of Representatives to be nominated by any minority party or independent member;    (d) 2 senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate;    (e) 1 senator to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate; and    (f) 1 senator to be nominated by Pauline Hanson's One Nation. (3) That participating members may be appointed to the committee, may participate in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee, and have all the rights of a member of the committee, but may not vote on any questions before the committee. (4) That every nomination of a member of the committee be notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. (5) That the members of the committee hold office as a joint select committee until the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires by effluxion of time. (6) That the committee elect as its chair a member nominated by the Government Whip or Whips. (7) That the committee elect a non-Government member as its deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee, and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting. (8) That, in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, has a casting vote. Ordered that the message be considered immediately. 10:03 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce I move: That the resolution of the Senate be agreed to. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the resolution of the Senate be agreed to.

The House divided. [10:07]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 73 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Haines, H Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharkie, RCC Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Steggall, Z Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Young, T Zimmerman, T 63 NOES Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Chesters, LM Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Mulino, D Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE Owens, JA Payne, AE Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 Privileges and Members' Interests Committee 10 Report 10 10:13 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash I present the report of the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests concerning an application from Mr Leo Zussino for the publication of a response to a reference made in the House of Representatives. Report—by leave—agreed to. BILLS 10 BILLS Migration Amendment (Strengthening the Character Test) Bill 2019 10

Migration Amendment (Strengthening the Character Test) Bill 2019

Second Reading 10 Third Reading 10 10:14 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill 2019 10

Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill 2019

Second Reading 10 10:15 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I rise on behalf of the Labor Party to support the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill 2019, and I move the amendment circulated in my name: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1)notes that the Paid Parental Leave scheme helps close the gender pay gap by allowing mothers and fathers to look after their children in the most critical years of their development, while staying in the workforce; and (2)calls on the Government to recognise the importance of equality for women and access to leave for families, by: (a)guaranteeing it will not make any cuts to Paid Parental Leave; (b)increasing paid family violence leave; and (c)working with business to close the gender pay gap". Australia's national Paid Parental Leave scheme is a proud Labor legacy, introduced by the Labor government and now in its eighth year, having commenced on 1 January 2011. When the Paid Parental Leave scheme was introduced, Australia was one of only two OECD countries without a national scheme, the United States being the other. The purpose of the Paid Parental Leave scheme is to provide financial support to primary carers of newborn and newly adopted children in order to, firstly, allow those carers to take time off work to care for the child after the child's birth or adoption; secondly, enhance the health and development of birth mothers and children; thirdly, enable women to continue to participate in the workforce; and, fourthly, promote equality between men and women and a balance between work and family life. The scheme provides two payments: parental leave pay, and dad and partner pay. This includes 18 weeks of payment for the primary carer, who can be either parent, at a rate based on the national minimum wage of $740.60 per week. This comes to a total of $13,330.80. Partners can also access two weeks of dad and partner pay at the same rate, worth $1,481.20. Paid Parental Leave signals to employers and to the Australian community that parents taking time out of the paid workforce to care for a child is part of the usual course of life. It also enables participation of women in the workforce. A high workforce participation rate is important in the context of an ageing population and helps to address the gender pay gap, particularly for women on low and middle incomes, who have less access to employer-funded parental leave. Almost 150,000 parents a year benefit from Australia's Paid Parental Leave scheme, which, as I said, was introduced by Labor. Nearly half of all new mothers benefit from the scheme. Parents—mothers or fathers—shouldn't have to sacrifice their career or their career progression simply because they want to look after their children in the most formative and critical years of their development. Paid parental leave plays an important role in closing the gender pay gap. We know that women are usually the primary carers of children, but we need to make sure that men are supported, empowered and encouraged to take more time caring if we are going to close the gender pay gap. One of my colleagues, the member for Jagajaga, will be speaking about that in just a moment. In August, KPMG released a report that found that stubborn gender stereotypes continue to harm the careers of women, especially those who opt to care for children and elderly family members. The gender pay gap remains a problem in Australia. Women in Australia still earn 14 per cent less than men, on average. It is a fact that the gender pay gap in Australia has remained stubbornly high over the past two decades, with any minor changes being widely attributed to the ending of a mining boom. Closing the gender pay gap requires fundamental culture change and it requires genuine leadership. It requires actually acknowledging that there is a gap. I note the Treasurer's recent contention in question time on 9 September 2019 that the gender pay gap has closed. It says to me that the Treasurer has absolutely no idea about the gender pay gap and is completely out of touch with reality. Labor, on the other hand, has a proud record of fighting for equal pay for all Australians. When we were last in government this included ensuring businesses with more than 100 employees prepared and lodged a report containing information relating to gender equality indicators. Labor also delivered funding to support the equal pay case for social and community service workers, delivering pay rises to 150,000 workers. The Morrison government, on the other hand, after six years still does not have a genuine or substantive reform to close the gender pay gap. If the Treasurer and the Prime Minister were genuinely serious about fixing the gender pay gap, they would oppose cuts to penalty rates. The vast majority of workers who will have their penalty rates cut will be women. The cuts to penalty rates are exacerbating the gender pay gap as well as making it harder for women to pay the rent and cover the bills. Paid parental leave also enables mothers and fathers to look after their children in their most critical developmental years, not only without sacrificing career progression or the ability to work but also without eating into their savings. Parents should be able to care for their children as well as make ends meet. We know that families are doing it tough, especially young families, and yet the government has absolutely no plan to help them. The cost of living is going up, and our young people are wondering how, or if, they will be able to start to support a family. This month, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare released a report which painted a very anxious and uncertain future for younger Australians. The report showed—and this shouldn't come as any surprise, except maybe to the government, which seems oblivious to the struggles of everyday Australians—that homeownership is more out of reach for younger Australians than ever before and that one million Australians are now living in housing stress. It is little wonder that our young people are struggling to own their own home. It is not only because housing prices continue to soar. It is not only because they haven't seen a pay rise in so long. It is not only because wages are stagnant. It is not only because they're spending more and more of their income on rent. It is because our young people are also finding it harder and harder to get a job. Youth unemployment is more than double the national average. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report, new apprenticeships are at their lowest in two decades, and many Australians, especially young Australians, are finding that when they do find a job they're simply not receiving enough hours at work to get by. In fact, almost one in five, or over 130 Newstart recipients, do have a job but do not receive either enough hours or enough income to get them off the payment. I also want to take this opportunity to talk about the importance of domestic violence paid leave, because when we are talking about the gender gap in the workplace we cannot ignore the significance of the prevalence of family violence and how it impacts on women in the workforce. It is especially relevant today in light of the comments made by the government's newly appointed deputy chair of the family law inquiry, Senator Hanson. The comments, which seek to dismiss and cast doubt on women experiencing family violence, are unacceptable. It's up to the government to explain how it can possibly support an inquiry whose deputy chair doesn't even acknowledge the prevalence and gendered nature of family violence. We know about the fear, anxiety and uncertainty of leaving a violent and abusive relationship: 'When should I leave? How will I leave? Will I keep my job? How will I pay for things?' No-one should have to make these heartbreaking choices between two fears: the fear for their safety and the fear for their livelihoods. Family and domestic violence is the leading cause of death, disability and illness among women aged between 15 and 44 years in Australia. Two out of every three women who experience domestic and family violence are in the workforce. The workforce is an important component of the family violence policy area. We know that one of the most dangerous times for a woman is when she is leaving a violent relationship. She will need to work out a time to leave. She will need to find a new place to stay. She may have children and she will need to ensure her children have a place to stay and that their education is secure. She may need to prepare for and attend court to seek a protection order. She may need to attend the police. She may need to seek treatment for her injuries. All of this can take a lot of time, effort and resources. It is essentially turning your world on its head. It can be costly, both financially and mentally. This is a dangerous and incredibly anxious and stressful time. We acknowledge that last year this parliament passed five days of unpaid family violence leave. Labor said it back then and we reiterate our position now: this is not good enough. We are calling for 10 days of paid domestic violence leave. This bill will improve the paid parental leave work test by extending eligibility for women who work in dangerous occupations or have irregular employment. The bill will enable more working parents to be eligible for paid parental leave by expanding the work test to include two parent groups: firstly, women who are unable to continue their job because of the hazardous nature of their employment, with no safe job alternatives; and, secondly, mothers with a work gap greater than eight weeks between two working days during the work test period. Currently, to meet the paid parental leave work test, a parent must have worked 330 hours across 10 of the 13 months before the child's birth, and a parent can only have a break of up to eight weeks between two working days during this period. This bill changes the work test in two ways. Firstly, for pregnant women in unsafe jobs, such as jockeys, the work test will be moved to the 13-month period before the pregnant woman ceases work. That will mean that mothers who need to finish work earlier because of the occupational hazards will not be disadvantaged by the work test. Secondly, for women with irregular work patterns, such as a casual teacher, the permissible break in the 13-month period will be extended to 12 weeks between the two working days. These changes will apply to parents claiming for parental leave for a child who is born on or after 1 January 2020. These changes will enable an extra 180 mothers to receive paid parental leave each year, according to the government. However, these changes have been very slow in coming and too many Australian women and their families have missed out on the benefits of paid parental leave as a result. In 2013, the Australian Jockeys Association publicly identified the problem and called on the Abbott government to fix its legislation. The community has been campaigning for these changes for many years. Labor supports the changes in the bill. We hope they will enable more women to consider careers and roles historically dominated by men. The Paid Parental Leave scheme is a proud Labor legacy. We will always support improvements to it that increase the support for parents who need it. We will always support improvements that close the gender gap and make it easier for young parents to raise and care for their families. But the reality is that young families are doing it tough. And they are right to ask: why doesn't the Prime Minister and his Liberal-National government have a plan; and why doesn't he have an agenda or a vision to make things easier for young families? The Prime Minister is more obsessed with devising new ways to humiliate and harass proud, younger Australians simply trying to enter the workforce and build a life for their families. Last week this out-of-touch government introduced legislation to pursue its ideologically driven, ineffective, indiscriminate and very expensive cashless card, which will make it more difficult for young people trying to re-enter the workforce to purchase essential items and basics at affordable prices. Last week this out-of-touch government introduced legislation to force young people trying to enter the workforce to eat into their savings more before they can access income support. Last week this out-of-touch government introduced legislation to make it more difficult for single parents to access the education entry supplement to undertake further study. This Prime Minister is obsessed with urine tests, saliva swabs and cashless cards, and young Australians and their families are right to ask themselves: 'Where is the evidence to support these policies? How will this help me find a job? How will it help me pay the bills? How will this make things easier to raise and build a good and healthy life for my family? Why isn't this government doing anything to stimulate a weak economy that is only getting weaker?' And, finally, what is the point of the Morrison government? This Prime Minister and his Liberal-National government and their refusal to stimulate the economy are creating an economic environment that is making it so difficult for young Australians to raise and build a life for their families. Of course, Labor supports this bill. As I said, it is part of a proud Labor legacy. But there is much more that needs to be done, which is why Labor has moved a second reading amendment calling for the government to guarantee it will not make any cuts to paid parental leave, to increase paid family violence leave and, finally, to work with business to close the gender pay gap. The government has absolutely no reason not to support this amendment. I commend it to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the amendment seconded? Mr Josh Wilson 265970 I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. 10:32 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin I speak today in support of the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill. The Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill introduces changes to the work test for paid parental leave, aimed at better supporting working mothers to access the paid parental leave scheme. In our society today we have a tendency to focus on what's wrong, on all that is dire. While there are many things we can do to improve our lives, and we must always be looking out for them and act when necessary, there are also times where we should reflect on some of the good progress that we've made. Support for women in the workforce is one of them. In the 1960s, when my mother had her first child, in 1963, she was forced to resign upon becoming pregnant. In the early 2000s, when I had my children, there was no paid parental leave. I did benefit from the baby bonus for two out of the three children. That was definitely a good initiative. But it is something that we always have to continue to monitor and continue to look to improve. Times for parents of newborns are stressful enough. We have come a long way. Today there are around 300,000 births in Australia each year, with nearly half of all new mothers accessing paid parental leave. The scheme provides eligible working mothers, or parents, with 18 weeks of payment at a rate based on the national minimum wage—currently $740.60 per week; a total of $13,330.80 over 18 weeks. This government understands the important role of paid parental leave in supporting the health and wellbeing of mothers and babies and in encouraging workforce participation. As I said before, there are enough stressors with a newborn without adding unnecessary financial stress. But we can always do more, and to this end the measures in this bill are designed to support more working mothers to access paid parental leave. The government considers that working parents should be entitled to be paid leave to spend important bonding time with their newborn or newly adopted children in those important early months. This bill provides for a more generous work test to make it fairer for women who have a long and genuine working history yet still often fail the work test because of the industry in which they're employed. At present, to meet the current paid parental leave work test, a parent must have worked 330 hours in 10 of the 13 months before the child's date of birth. A parent can have a break of up to eight weeks between two working days in this period and still satisfy the work test. This is good, but it has meant that some people in some professions miss out because there is a legitimate reason as to why the gap is longer than eight weeks. One such example is in the teaching profession, and I've mentioned particularly casual teachers. The government believes that these working mothers should be entitled to paid leave to allow them time to recover from the birth, bond with their baby and receive the health and developmental benefits that the Paid Parental Leave scheme can help facilitate. Hopefully these women will return to work sometime in the future, and, in the case of teachers, that hope is even stronger—that they will return to the important role of educating our children. To address circumstances such as those faced by casual teachers, the permissible break between two working days will be increased to 12 weeks. This change will make sure that more women with a genuine connection to work are able to access the government's Paid Parental Leave scheme. It's estimated that this change will enable up to an additional 180 mothers to receive paid parental leave each year. To further enhance the fairness of the paid parental leave system, the work test rules will also be modified to take into account circumstances where pregnant women are in occupations where it would be unsafe for them to continue working throughout their pregnancy. The rules will be changed so that they will be able to get paid parental leave too. Under the new rules, the work test will begin 392 days immediately before the day on which the mother ceased work because of the hazards in her job—hazards in jobs such as mining or construction. This will mean that more women in dangerous jobs will now be eligible for paid parental leave. These important changes to the Paid Parental Leave scheme, to commence on 1 January 2020, are about improving the fairness of the current system and providing support for more working mothers. They address some legitimate concerns which have arisen in the current scheme. They improve the PPL scheme and the vital role it plays in supporting new parents. I commend this bill to the House. 10:38 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga I'm pleased to speak in support of paid parental leave. Of course, it was Labor that introduced Australia's national Paid Parental Leave scheme which started on 1 January 2011. At that time I worked for the minister responsible for its introduction, Jenny Macklin, and I had the opportunity to hear from women across the country about just how significant this change would be—women who worked in businesses and industries who'd never before had access to any paid leave when they had a baby; women in retail, in hospitality, in small businesses, who could finally take the time they needed to look after their baby without facing immense financial stress. Since that time when Labor introduced paid parental leave, I've had the experience of having my own baby, and that's given me a new understanding of just how life-shaking, world-turning-upside-down that is—the sleepless nights and days; the worries about whether she is being fed enough, is warm enough or too warm, whether she's hitting her developmental milestones, and everything else. It is overwhelming. So it is entirely appropriate that we have a scheme to financially support women through this period. When Labor introduced paid parental leave, Australia was one of only two OECD countries without a national scheme, the US being the other. Of course the purpose of paid parental leave is to provide financial support to primary carers of newborn and newly adopted children so that those carers can take time off work to care for the child and can enhance the health and development of their children, and so that, importantly, women can continue to participate in the workforce and we can promote equality between men and women and the balance between work and family life. Having paid parental leave as part of our national framework tells employers and the Australian community that parents taking time out of the paid workforce to care for a child is part of the usual course of life; and it is particularly important for those women on low and middle incomes, who have less access to employer funded parental leave. We know that this government's track record on paid parental leave has been shaky to say the least. Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott, while in opposition, promised a rolled-gold scheme designed to favour wealthy women. In fact, the former Prime Minister said this was a scheme designed to support 'women of calibre', which pretty much sums up the attitude of those opposite to women on lower incomes. Of course, when in government, Prime Minister Abbott failed to deliver on his rolled-gold scheme and his then Treasurer, Joe Hockey, began to accuse hardworking women of double dipping. Teachers, nurses and public servants were all essentially accused of being rorters because they wanted to take time to raise their children. With this attitude from those opposite, it's no wonder that the gender pay gap remains a problem in Australia. And, yes, that's despite the Treasurer's recent contention in question time that the gender pay gap has closed. Female workers in Australia still earn 14 per cent less than their male colleagues. The gender pay gap in Australia has remained stubbornly high over the past few decades, and the only minor changes we have seen are largely the result of male wages going down with the end of the mining boom. If the Treasurer and the Prime Minister were genuinely serious about fixing the gender pay gap, one of the things they could do would be to oppose the cuts to penalty rates. The vast majority of the workers who had their penalty rates cut are women, making it harder for them to spend time with their families, pay the rent, meet their payments and cover the bills. It is important that this bill will improve the paid parental leave work test by extending eligibility for women who work in dangerous occupations or who have irregular employment. Unfortunately these changes have been very slow in coming, and too many Australian women and their families missed out on the benefits of paid parental leave as a result. The Australian Jockeys Association publicly identified this problem with paid parental leave in 2013 and called on the then Abbott government to fix the legislation. As I said, the then Prime Minister was too busy vacillating between a rolled-gold scheme and accusing women of being rorters to do anything about it. The community has been campaigning for these changes for years. I do hope that they will enable more women to consider careers in roles that historically have been dominated by men. Of course, shifting gender equality shouldn't just be a task for women; we need men to be involved as well. I've spoken in this House before about the unusual situation my family is in when it comes to our community—a situation where my 18-month-old daughter has a full-time working mother and a part-time working father. The fact is that we need more men to feel like that they can be genuinely part of caring for our children—to the level where they take time out of the workforce to do so. It's not fair to our children or to our men that this role continues to be seen as one that is just for women. And it's certainly not fair for women, who end up on lower pay and with less superannuation for their retirement. The data shows us that women overwhelmingly remain the nominated primary carer—the person who takes leave after a child is born and who continues to work part-time after that, often for many years. Many men do not feel that workplace flexibility policies apply to them. Indeed, employers often assume that flexibility is a conversation about working mothers. And men can be trapped by traditional notions of what it looks like to be a provider and father. A 2014 Human Rights Commission report in Australia found that 27 per cent of fathers felt that they had experienced discrimination in the workplace during parental leave or upon returning to work—ranging from negative attitudes, to comments and threats of dismissal. As in many areas, the Scandinavians are ahead of us in this. Comprehensive childcare policies are one of the main characteristics of the Nordic welfare model, with an explicit goal of promoting gender equity. And the development of a dual-earner dual-carer model in these countries is supported by paid parental leave schemes and the provision of early childhood education and care. In Iceland, new parents leave allows for nine months leave, divided between the parents. Each parent is granted 13 weeks of non-transferable leave—that is, mothers and fathers both get leave that cannot be transferred between the two of them; it's referred to as the mother's quota and the father's quota—as well as a further 13 weeks leave that's open to parents to divide between them as they choose. The legislation, which was introduced in Iceland in 2000, is supported by all political parties, unions, employee organisations and the general public. Since the introduction of the father's quota, Iceland has seen an incremental and ongoing change in parents dividing their work and care more equally. Throughout our children's lives, someone has to be home to get them up in the morning, get them dressed and get them out the door, and someone has to do the dishes and the housework, so we need to look at how we divide that more equally. In Sweden, parental leave is even more generous, being paid out for no less than 480 days, or approximately 16 months, for each child. Of these 480 days, 90 are reserved for each parent, with only single-custody parents being entitled to take out the 480 days on their own. Again, there's an expectation that men will take leave and spend time as a carer for their children. The aim of this leave is to ensure that there is care from both parents and to enable women and men to promote gender equality at home and in the labour market, without financial stress. Research in both of these countries has shown that men who take longer parental leave also take more responsibility at home. To go back to the earlier point I made, it is not the case that we just have children and then they look after themselves. As many of us in this place know, and as Australian families know, children require ongoing love, care and support. Ms Wells interjecting— Ms THWAITES 282212 'Constant care and support', as the member for Lilley tells me. It is important that both men and women have the opportunity and the responsibility to be part of that. Importantly, men who spend more time caring for their child or their children alone are reported to establish a more fundamental sense of shared responsibility between the parents and stronger bonds with their children. These policies are not just good for women and gender equity; they're also good for our children and for the future generations we're raising. This is worth supporting. I'm pleased to support the bill that's before the House, but it's not the end of the work that we need to do to support women and men to raise their families and be part of the workforce. 10:47 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley It is time to renew our economy and the social infrastructure that supports it. We must have an economy that no longer distinguishes between full-time and part-time work or, indeed, even between paid and unpaid work, since the work of raising a family and caring for others is just as essential to human wellbeing as work that brings in a pay cheque. So, while I'm pleased to support the amendments being introduced to the House today in the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill 2019, because they make something easier for working women by extending eligibility for paid parental leave to women who work in dangerous occupations or who have irregular employment, I am disappointed that this opportunity to amend the act does not go further in addressing the imbalance between women and men when it comes to caregiving and opportunities to give care to their children. The gender pay gap remains a problem in Australia. I was very surprised to hear the Treasurer in question time last week tell us that it has closed. It was certainly news to me, and it was certainly news to all of my working-mother friends, because we know it hasn't closed. Female workers in Australia still earn 14 per cent less than their male colleagues. One of the reasons that the gender pay gap remains in Australia is that women continue to do a large percentage of unpaid work outside the house, caring for their children, caring for their parents and caring for their neighbours. Our society and our economy do not value care enough. We do not place enough value on the role of care in our community and the work of those who provide that care, unpaid. Our failure to place a high enough value on care can be seen in a number of different areas—for example, with early educators. You see it when our country only pays our early educators a minimum wage, despite the fact that they perform some of the most important work in our society, fostering and educating our littlest citizens. We know that all the evidence tells us that from zero to five years old is the most crucial time in a child's life, yet we pay these people some of the lowest wages in our country. You can also see it in how our country funds the care in nursing homes and in aged-care facilities. I worked in a couple of different aged-care facilities as I was paying my way through uni. I know that, there, personal carers can earn just over 20 bucks an hour in exchange for their responsibilities in caring for our oldest Australians. The impacts of that can be felt throughout society and the ripple effect is very clear, because what happens to compensate for where these gaps are in the system, where we fail to fund these things properly, is that people pick up the slack and provide that care for free and they do it on their own time. The flow-on effect of that is that they have to do reduced hours at work or they don't get to go for the promotions that others who don't have those care requirements are able to go for. Our economy benefits from the unpaid care that our citizens give willingly—which they do out of love, and we thank them for it—but our economy shouldn't be based on a system where people provide care for free and we don't do anything to value that care or support them in their work. Our economy also draws benefit from this work being provided so cheaply by dedicated citizens, despite this imbalance and despite this injustice. Our economy draws benefit from all that unpaid care that women do when they return to work part-time after having a child, or when they stop in at their neighbour's home after work to check that their neighbour has their dinner, wash the dishes and set their neighbour up for the evening, or the unpaid work that women do when they take their dad to his doctors appointment. They also take on the mental load of keeping track of all the scripts that need to be filled, all the follow-up appointments that need to be made, and what other care will be required in the months to come. There is a lot more to do in all of this space. It is a shame that, when we have an opportunity like this to amend the Paid Parental Leave Act, we don't do more to fix these gaps. Government data shows a woman's life is quite literally turned on its head when she becomes a mother—and the member for Jagajaga has spoken eloquently about this already. Her hours of unpaid child care increase from zero to upwards of 40 hours per week and her hours of employment plunge and normally never recover. Time devoted to unpaid household work also doubles—and it stays that way right through her children's primary school years. By contrast—and my friend Jamila Rizvi has written extensively on this topic, and I would like to acknowledge her work in this space—the hours for an average bloke don't change so much after becoming a dad. His parenting hours increase, but by not even as much as half of the increase that women experience. On average, his employment is pretty well identical to what it was pre-parenthood. There is also no significant change in the time spent on housework—on average. I repeat 'on average'; because I will honour my husband, primary caregiver to our child and extremely effective operations manager in our household, who keeps us all alive and not being human bin fires. Thank you, Finn. The same life event, the arrival of a baby, alters the course and nature of how a woman spends her time forever, but, based solely on the data, a man's life remains fairly similar. So what an opportunity we have to amend the Paid Parental Leave Act to better support and encourage men to participate in that caregiving work—an opportunity which we have failed to take today. Marian Baird, a professor of gender and employment relations at the University of Sydney, said that almost all eligible women take paid parental leave compared to about 25 to 30 per cent of men. Ten years on from the introduction of the Paid Parental Leave Act, we need to take stock and see where we need to make amendments to address some of the things that we set out to do in the first place. Ten years on, we now know that we are not achieving the goals that we set out in the act to achieve. We need to think about what we can do better and then we need to do it. I wish the government would address this space with a better plan and a better agenda. We have plenty of suggestions to offer—and I will offer some suggestions now. The member for Jagajaga has already spoken eloquently about some of the case studies from Scandinavia. It is almost compulsory to speak about the success that Scandinavia has experienced when it comes to policies like these—and people who are interested in this space probably know about these policies already. The use-it-or-lose-it scheme is something we seriously need to look at in Australia. We know that it works. We know that blokes want to participate more fully in caring for their children. We know that women want their partners, when they are men, to be able to step up and do that work so that they can participate more fully in the workplace. We need to be looking at the case studies more. Researchers at the ANU say that we need to be looking at amending our Paid Parental Leave scheme to mix up the incentives. It provides a much-needed helping hand for new parents, but it isn't doing much to shift the division of child rearing at the moment. If we want things to look substantially different by 2030, in another 10 and a bit years, then it is time to do some major tweaks. Employers also need to step up and play a role. Our current scheme isn't flexible enough to flip the stigma around dads who take parental leave. Annabel Crabb has written recently in the Quarterly Essay about that stigma and that culture that we need to address. It starts from the top. It starts from all of our national institutions. It starts from places like the chamber. Thank you to my party for supporting young mothers, like the member for Jagajaga and me, in being able to be here in this House whilst we have toddlers. We need to see more of that in both houses. Thank you. We acknowledge the young children and their parents who are here in the House today. You can stay. I honestly won't mind if they keep interjecting, as we just heard from the gallery. It's perfectly fine. We get far worse from the other side! It's seen as socially necessary for women to take leave, but it's not yet seen as socially necessary for men to take leave in this country, and we need to change that. Male breadwinner culture is still very strong in Australia, and it will take serious and directed efforts to shift that in a substantial way. So, while I support the amendments that are being made today, we can do better. Emma Walsh, who's the CEO of the advocacy group Parents At Work, says: We've got to get rid of this idea of primary and secondary carers, because no parent defines themselves like that. It is something that I think we do in this country at the moment. But what she says is that in countries that have better systems, that are acting more effectively for the goals that we all seek to achieve, they don't look at it like that. What they look at is managing work and family from the position of absolute equality. As the member for Jagajaga touched on a little bit earlier, Sweden is a very good example of where there are very generous paid family leave policies. It became the first country to introduce a gender-neutral paid parental leave benefit. They did that in 1974. We are so far behind where we could be. Today in Sweden, parents are allowed to take 480 days of paid parental leave per child. For 13 of those months they are entitled to up to 80 per cent of their income—up to a certain income level—and for three months they are given a flat rate of about 20 bucks a day, according to the Swedish embassy. They have also offered fathers incentives to take more of that paid leave—three of the paid months, as the member for Jagajaga has already spoken about. It can't be transferred. It's 'use it or lose it'. From 2008 to until 2017, families were also eligible for an equality bonus determined by the number of days divided equally between parents. The impact of these policies is evident. It's been recently documented by economists at Stanford University. They found that giving the father more work flexibility improved the mother's health and reduced her risk of experiencing physical postpartum health complications. Sweden is also a leader among advanced economies in female labour participation. As of last year, more than 80 per cent of women aged 25 to 54 worked—88 per cent. But in the US, which is the only industrialised country that does not guarantee workers paid leave, that figure is 74 per cent. Both countries have a similar fertility rate. They're both at about 1.7. Japan's government, who are concerned about the drastically declining birth rate, which is now among the lowest in the world, are now considering making parental leave mandatory. Annabel Crabb, who I referenced earlier—and she is one of our patron saints of the crusade to consider and to improve the work and care balance in Australian households—tells this great story in the Quarterly Essay where she was at a conference and the Norwegian ambassador was there to outline the parental leave systems and the childcare systems in Norway, which are 46 weeks at full pay, 10 weeks reserved especially for the co-parent, and childcare costs capped at 300 euro per month. It is a package so intoxicating that it provokes—I will quote Annabel here rather than use my words—'moans of frustrated longing in the crowd of Australian women'. I get that. I get that because I did the maths. We spend 300 euros on child care in less than a week here in Australia. In less than a week we spend that. They have that capped as a per-month cost. We also probably spend something like 300 euros in all of the raffle tickets, the donations to the cake stalls and the 'make your own spider lavender soap' that childcare centres need to do to fundraise to supplement the funding that they do receive. It's tough. It's tough to read. It's tough to read how far we could go and how well other countries do this. But the inspiration is there. We on this side of the House are committed to improving it. I welcome further opportunities to amend this act to get some of this stuff through so that our Australian families can benefit just the same. The facts are these: in 1991 the number of stay-at-home fathers was four per cent. It's now five per cent. So, as much as we've made progress, we have an awfully long way to go. While I support the amendments today, I note that there is a lot more work to do and that this is a failed opportunity to advance that work. While I am proud to be a member of the party that introduced the first federal paid parental leave scheme in this country, I note our commitment to ongoing work in this area. We're very pleased to be able to work with the government where we can to advance that work in this term of the parliament. I note that Prime Minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern's vision is for New Zealand to be the best place in the world to be a child. We're competitive; we like beating New Zealand where we can. I say we take up that mantle and try to make that Australia instead. But it shouldn't just be the best place in the world to be a child; it should be the best place in the world to be a parent, a carer and a family. We can do a lot more in that space. I welcome the opportunity to do that during my time in this House. 11:00 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo It's been said on this side that we're not opposing the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill 2019, which is before the House, but I do rise to speak in favour of the amendment and to put on the record how disappointing it is that it took so long for this fundamental change, which is bipartisan and non-controversial, to come before us. We know that the need to improve this part of the act was raised back in 2013. We had the Australian Jockeys Association publicly identify the problem that we're trying to correct in this bill by making improvements to the paid parental leave work test, extending the eligibility to women who work in dangerous occupations or who have irregular employment. You would think that in a country like Australia, where we have some of the worst gender segregation within our workforce, this would've been dealt with sooner. I'll get to that in a moment. The Australian Jockeys Association weren't the only organisation to raise this issue. We've had our netballers raise the issue, and we've had people working in manual jobs raise the issue. Just a few weeks ago a woman won a court case against her employer, who sacked her unfairly because she identified to her employer that she was pregnant and couldn't lift boxes over a certain size. She worked in a bottle shop. Her employer sacked her and said, 'I need someone who can lift those boxes.' The employer did not take a scope of work to see if there was an alternative way to move stock around the bottle shop or discuss with the other employees whether they were willing to take on that work; the employer simply sacked her. Not only was there the loss of income; there was also the uncertainty for that family as to what would happen after the birth of their child. Would she return to work? She clearly didn't have a job to go back to. What would happen next? We have a situation in our country where women are working in dangerous occupations and are working in irregular employment. I'll focus on irregular employment first. We have one of the most insecure work environments ever faced in this country. What do we mean by insecure, irregular work? People are casual. You can be sacked on the spot as a casual. The employer doesn't need to give you a reason. They just have to say, 'Sorry, there are no more hours for you.' Unfortunately, that's just how our industrial relations system works. But increasingly it is women who are being trapped in this insecure, irregular employment. As for dangerous occupations—we have a very diverse labour market, absolutely. But, as I mentioned before, gender segregation is a big challenge. What do we mean by that? Women work women's jobs; men work men's jobs. We have a high concentration of women dominated industries, like nursing, health care, disability care, early childhood education and teaching. On the other hand, we also have a high concentration of men in men's jobs, higher than in some of the other OECD countries. We have a quite high proportion of men working in industries like construction, stores, mining and so forth. What it means, though, is that women working in the industries that are dominated by men face greater challenges and barriers to receiving support, particularly when it comes to family and caring relationships, maternity leave and what we're looking at in these changes. If you're the only woman in a workplace who is going through a pregnancy and you are seeking help and your employer has no experience of this, there's very little support to turn to. Small businesses struggle in this space. A small business sought my support and said that a loved member of their staff fell pregnant and they wanted to do the right thing, but they just didn't know who to turn to. Their job was at a small manufacturing facility in Bendigo, so there was quite a lot of manual work involved and quite a lot of hazardous chemicals. They just wanted some support and guidance to ensure that they could have a safe workplace and a great return-to-work program, because they didn't want to lose this valued employee of 15 years. Hopefully, the changes that we're seeing put forward today will also trigger an education conversation, funding and support for businesses—support for employers who may want to do the right thing. Time and time again, far too often, despite the fact that we've had paid maternity leave and paid paternity leave—parental leave—since 2011, there's not enough support for employers. There's not enough support for people seeking the scheme to ensure that they've got decent and adequate return-to-work plans in place. Quite frankly, we're not doing enough, and we feel that acutely in the regions. It's just wrong that in our society, if you work for the Public Service or you work for a major employer, your experience through pregnancy and after the birth of your child is much better than for those in the private sector and small enterprise. I'm not picking on our small enterprises; I'm simply saying that they don't get enough support from this government to be able to deliver the same kinds of support we see in big business or the Public Service. I acknowledge that I am pregnant while making this speech. When you're a pregnant member of parliament, the number of women who contact you and share their experiences is amazing. What's also amazing is the number of women's partners who contact you to say, 'My wife works so hard and I'm really worried about the impact that could be having.' We have a lack of conversation out there about best practice and best support. Perhaps it's because this country took so long to catch up with the rest of the world. Prior to the former Labor government introducing the first Paid Parental Leave scheme, there were only two OECD countries in the world that did not have a proper paid parental leave scheme: the US and us. Today, whilst we have a scheme, I acknowledge, like others, that it is still well behind what exists in the rest of the world. We are particularly behind what is happening in Scandinavian and other European countries. We are behind what is happening even in countries like Japan. We have to do more. What is disappointing is that, after six years of this government, this is the best it's got. This is all they're putting forward. They've let down the partners of women having children. Many partners want to take on the role of caring and being at home, whether that is to care for other children or to give support through the recovery stage of birth and pregnancy. We just haven't done enough work on this. We've got a lot of work to do to partner with the not-for-profit sector. Whilst we have good schemes in place when it comes to the Public Service or some private large corporate enterprises, far too many women going through pregnancy in the non-profit sector still have 12 months of unpaid leave as an option. Outside of what they might receive from the government in a capped scheme on the award wage, the basic wage, a lot of women who work and dedicate their life to our community sector don't receive good parental leave after the birth of a child. Now, I don't hold them at fault for that; quite often it's because of a lack of funding. What's really hard in a lot of these organisations' EBA negotiations is the fact that they've had funding freezes from this government. They're not receiving adequate increases in funding to (1) be able to pay proper wages and (2) consider rolling out a top-up scheme—a scheme that would be on top of what they already receive in terms of a basic payment from this government. And that's what it is. While it is welcomed, while it is a good step forward, it is a basic payment when it comes to paid parental leave in this country. We need to increase it. We need to do more. We need to investigate how best to do that, how to partner with business, the not-for-profit sector and ourselves as employers to ensure that we are adequately supporting families through this stage and transition. Why? The research is in. We know the more that we support parents and families at this stage, the better the outcome for the children, the better the outcome for the parents and the better the outcome for the employers. You invest in your staff when they need support, particularly around the birth of a child. It's more than just loyalty. You retain those skills. You retain that experience, and those staff are able to transition back into work with properly structured programs. I've learnt from chatting to many of the new parents and parents-to-be in my electorate that one of the biggest stresses they have is how to balance work and a new family or work and a new child. What are they going do? Who will return to work? Who won't return to work? Is it worth returning to work with the cost of child care? Do they have grandparents or family in the area that can help? The person who is absent from this discussion on partnering in a decent way is the federal government. They've left the conversation and are literally sitting on their hands, saying, 'Not our problem.' This is disappointing, considering that we have people, both former and current members of this House, who are so vocal about other aspects of pregnancy. They just don't seem to really focus on families post birth that are really looking for support at this time. As I've said, more work needs to be done in this country when we look at industries that have a higher proportion of men, therefore fewer women, and we need to focus on greater ways to support them in their roles. We should be looking at best practice and seeing that sponsored and rolled out across our country. There are some great things happening in some businesses and some industries, but they're isolated. People don't get together and share this. There might be a token award where we recognise a business that might be doing well in the advancement and support of women, but it's just an award ceremony. It doesn't go further in developing and sharing best practice, and seeing programs sponsored. The community have been campaigning for the changes before us—and it's a broad range of groups that have been campaigning for them. Industry's calling for them, so there's certainty for them going forward. They can start to put structures in place. It will enable more women to consider careers in roles that have been historically dominated by men. It will encourage more women into those careers. And, just on that, I note a challenge in the mining industry, for example, just recently. The town of Moranbah—for those who know it—is a mining community that has a huge fly-in fly-out and a huge drive-in drive-out workforce. One of the reasons why so many people are choosing to drive in and drive out is that Moranbah doesn't have a childcare centre; it doesn't have childcare facilities. There is no place in Moranbah for people to place their children in early childhood education from the age of six months to preschool, which forces families in which both partners might be working in the mining industry to move out. One could be working in the mines and one could be working in administration, or both could be working in the mines. Families are being forced to move because of the lack of planning that exists. This country and this government need to focus beyond just paid parental leave. If we are genuine about supporting women and their families in relation to children and what happens post the birth of a child, we need to be doing more. Six years to bring about this small change is, quite frankly, not good enough. It has frustrated industry, employers and workers. There need to be significant bodies of work done and resources invested into this place so that we are supporting women and their families. 11:16 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I support the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill 2019. It is a step in the right direction and shows that the government is conscious of the barriers women still face in the workplace. However, despite numerous previous efforts, women still face a 14 per cent pay gap, retire with 40 per cent less super and still account for 68.7 per cent of all part-time employment. Working mums seeking to increase their own hours of work still face extraordinarily high effective marginal tax rates. In Warringah, where we have a high proportion of young working families and many dual-income families, the issues of closing the pay gap and increasing childcare subsidies are ones of primary concern when I speak to families. In Warringah, there are 38,000 families with children under 13 that would benefit from fixing these issues. One way could be to legislate increases in the childcare subsidy, which commenced in July 2018. The subsidy has been effective in improving workforce participation. The childcare subsidy is the main way the government assists families with childcare costs. Childcare subsidies work by overcoming the strong disincentives built into the system that penalise women who increase their participation in the workforce. The more that women work, the more they lose the benefit of several allowances, such as the family benefit and the Medicare levy. This makes little sense, because they still need this extra support when juggling both work and raising a family. When factoring in childcare costs, some find that working more hours costs more than it pays. The current subsidy works by giving a percentage of a cap of $11.77 per hour, according to the family's tax bracket, and it is phased out at higher incomes. But, importantly, this is based on joint family income. I call on the government to adopt a bipartisan approach by considering a policy of increasing the subsidy to 85 to 100 per cent of the hourly fee cap for householders earning between $70,000 and $100,000. For those earning between $100,000 and $175,000, it should be 60 to 85 per cent. The model effects of this make sense. According to the Grattan Institute, it would mean that child care would become free for families with incomes of up to $69,000 a year—and these are the quiet Australians who are struggling—up to the hourly cap of $11.77, or $118 a day, for 10 hours of care. For families earning between $69,000 and $100,000, the government would cover an extra 15 per cent of their costs. Those in higher brackets would save 10 per cent on childcare costs. Furthermore, these savings would provide a significant incentive for working women to increase their days of work. Increased workforce participation has not been specifically modelled for this exact policy, but the Grattan Institute and KPMG have approximated it with similar policies to show an increase in annual net GDP of $25 billion to $60 billion. The government should also consider increasing paid parental leave. According to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, it's during the years when many women are balancing paid work with unpaid caring responsibilities at home that the gender gap begins and widens considerably. By increasing the Paid Parental Leave scheme, we can increase female workforce participation and decrease the pay gap. Australians are currently able to access up to 20 weeks parental leave. This is below the recommended amount, as suggested by the World Health Organization, of 26 weeks, and it is well below the OECD average of 55 weeks. A 2013 global study found that increasing the duration of leave not only increased female workforce participation but also increased female working hours. Both would be huge boons to the Australian economy and would go to the heart of two major issues: savings for super and moving women from part-time to full-time work. Parental leave itself must be more equitable. One of the big problems is, of course, that 99.74 per cent of parental leave is taken by women. We need policies that support men who want to take time out to take care of their children. We should look to examples in other countries, like Iceland and Canada. In Iceland, the male parental leave participation rate is at 45 per cent. Since Iceland introduced its nine months of parental leave with three months dedicated for fathers, their parental leave participation increased by 50 per cent. That's opposed to the two weeks of leave that Australian fathers are granted under current policy. It's simply not enough. Other countries mandate bonus parental leave to both partners if, in the initial months following the birth of a child, both parents take their allotted leave. This has had demonstrable and positive benefits on measures of family cohesion and wellbeing and, in countries like Canada, has significantly increased male parental leave participation rates. We can't talk about this topic without acknowledging our own personal situations. On a personal note, I need to mention how lucky I am in having a true equitable partnership with my husband, Tim. I'm here because of the hard work that he's putting in at home—and this has to be acknowledged. We're interchangeable in our roles in our family, and I thank him deeply. Finally, while this bill is a step in the right direction, I look forward to conversations, and I hope this government will introduce more legislation to keep addressing this problem. Many families in my electorate, as well as around Australia, would benefit hugely from further support from this government along the lines outlined. 11:22 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes I'd like to thank the members who have contributed to this debate. The Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Work Test) Bill 2019 introduces reforms aimed to better support working mothers to access paid parental leave. The Paid Parental Leave scheme aims to provide financial support to parents of newborn children to allow them to take time off work after the birth. In order to be eligible, parents must meet a range of eligibility criteria, including satisfying the requirements of the paid parental leave work test. The amendments contained in this bill are aimed to expand access to paid parental leave by making changes to the work test that will allow more parents with a genuine attachment to the workforce to satisfy the work test requirements. From 1 Jan 2020, parents will be able to have a break of up to 12 weeks between work days in a 13-month work test period before the birth or adoption of their child and still meet the paid parental leave work test. Currently, parents can have a break of up to eight weeks. The changes will increase access to the Paid Parental Leave scheme for workers who routinely have breaks in employment of more than eight weeks, such as casual teachers on contracts. The changes would also allow mothers in dangerous jobs to use an earlier work test period. Where a mother is forced to cease work due to the hazardous nature of her job, such as construction workers, miners or jockeys, she may be able to meet the paid parental leave work test, despite the fact that she has a long work history. Under this proposal, women in this situation would still be required to meet the same work test requirements as all other mothers, but their work test period would be calculated from the day they cease work due to the hazardous nature of their occupations, rather than from the date of birth of their child. The new work test rule means that more women who have a genuine connection to the workforce will be able to meet the work test and access paid parental leave. This bill helps to expand the reach of the Paid Parental Leave scheme so that more women can be supported to take time off work after the birth of their child, while maintaining an attachment to the workforce. I commend the bill to the House. Question negatived. Original question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Third Reading 22 11:26 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Worker Screening Database) Bill 2019 22

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Worker Screening Database) Bill 2019

Second Reading 22 11:27 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill establishes the National Disability Insurance Scheme worker screening database to support a nationally consistent approach to screening people who work with people with disability in the NDIS. This bill aims to protect and prevent people with disability from experiencing harm from the people who work closely with them. The NDIS is one of the largest social and economic policy reforms in Australian history. It is transforming the lives of people with disability across the country. March 2019 marked a major milestone in the NDIS: nearly 280,000 Australians are now receiving support through the scheme. This number will continue to grow, as we progress the national rollout, to almost half a million Australians with disability over the next five years. This government is committed to ensuring the safety and wellbeing of all NDIS participants. In December 2016, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) endorsed the NDIS Quality and Safeguarding Framework. The framework is the result of over three years of consultation with people with disability, carers and providers. It sets out a new approach to regulation for the NDIS to protect NDIS participants. A key part of the framework is the implementation of nationally consistent NDIS worker screening. Worker screening is a way to check that people who are working or seeking to work in the NDIS do not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to people with disability. Current worker screening arrangements for disability workers are state based and of variable quality. Clearances are not recognised across jurisdictions. A national NDIS worker screening check is a major step forward from the variable arrangements operating in each state and territory. Nationally consistent NDIS worker screening will help create a safe and trusted workforce in the NDIS and minimise the risk of harm to people with disabilities. This bill is integral for the implementation of the NDIS screening check. Nationally consistent NDIS worker screening is a joint effort from all Australian governments. We have agreed to the Intergovernmental Agreement on Nationally Consistent Worker Screening for the NDIS. The intergovernmental agreement sets out the responsibilities of states and territories and the Commonwealth. States and territories, except Western Australia, will commence transitioning to nationally consistent NDIS worker screening on 1 July 2019. The new NDIS Worker Screening Check, simply referred to as the check, will be introduced in each state and territory over the next year, with all states and territories having a check in place by July 2020. Until the check becomes available in a jurisdiction, transitional arrangements will provide recognition of current state based checks, such as working-with-children or vulnerable-person checks. From 1 July 2019, existing workers with a current state based check will be able to continue to work, and new workers will need to apply for a recognised screening check in their state or territory. Once the NDIS check is operational, state based checks for existing workers will continue to be recognised until they expire, at which time a worker will need to apply for the new check. New workers will also need to apply for the NDIS check once it is available. The outcomes of the NDIS check will be stored on the national database to be established by this bill. This approach will provide for a gradual transition to the new system. Through this bill the Morrison government is delivering on our responsibilities under the intergovernmental agreement. We are getting on with the job of ensuring that participants and their families and carers can be satisfied with the quality of service that they receive and feel comfortable that necessary protections are in place to ensure their safety. To support the quality agenda, the government has taken strong, decisive action by establishing an independent national body, the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, to protect people with disability and prevent them from experiencing harm. The government has committed $209 million over four years to support the work of the NDIS commission. The bill will enable the NDIS commission to establish and maintain a national database for information about NDIS worker screening. This will provide timely and accurate information for employers and self-managed participants about NDIS workers' clearance status. The NDIS commission commenced operations in New South Wales and South Australia on 1 July 2018. By July 2020 the NDIS commission will be operational in all states and territories. As an independent statutory body with integrated functions and a range of investigative, compliance and enforcement powers, the NDIS commission is a responsive regulator that takes a proportionate approach to regulation, reserving the strongest enforcement actions for the most serious issues and breaches. The NDIS commission is responsible for registering NDIS providers, responding to complaints, managing reportable incident notifications and providing leadership to reduce and eliminate the use of restrictive practices in the NDIS. The NDIS commission will also lead the overall design for nationally consistent NDIS worker screening. This aligns with its responsibility to work will all governments and oversee the broad policy settings of the nationally consistent NDIS worker screening and recognises that the NDIS is the national point of contact for NDIS providers. This national leadership and consistency provides many benefits, but the NDIS commission does not act alone. Worker screening is a joint effort. All states and territories have been consulted on the content of the bill and are supportive. The NDIS Act currently provides for the screening of workers through the registration requirements for registered NDIS providers and the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Practice Standards—Worker Screening) Rules 2018. When the new NDIS check is fully implemented, these screening arrangements will be implemented by state and territory worker screening units within the nationally consistent framework. We know from our consultations that stakeholders have consistently supported this approach. They want to see a robust, risk-based worker screening check in the disability sector that is portable across jurisdictions. Worker screening checks will be mandatory for some NDIS workers. Those who have more than incidental contact with a person with disability, and work with a registered NDIS provider, must have a clearance. Worker screening will not be mandatory for workers with only incidental contact with participants. As part of the NDIS Worker Screening Check, worker screening units based in each state and territory will consider applicants' criminal history information, any relevant disciplinary and misconduct information, and information taken from the NDIS commission's complaints and reportable incidents system. Under this bill, the database will store information about NDIS workers who have applied for an NDIS Worker Screening Check, the status of their application, and decisions by the NDIS worker screening unit about their check, including whether the worker was issued a clearance or an exclusion. This means that NDIS worker clearances will be portable across jurisdictions and employers, including self-managed participants, reducing duplication and complexity for workers and providers moving between or operating across jurisdictions. Similarly, a worker who has been excluded by one state or territory will be excluded nationally. This represents a major step forward from the existing fragmented arrangements operating in each state and territory. The database will also include information about a person's employer, including if this is a self-managed participant. This will ensure that employers are appropriately informed if a worker they have engaged has had their clearance suspended or revoked or if their clearance expires. The bill provides for the minister to determine additional information to be included in the database through a legislative instrument. This provides flexibility to be responsive to future circumstances and is appropriate to accommodate the introduction of a new policy. For example, if there is a new application status required in future that is not currently envisaged by the bill, the minister may provide for this to be captured in the database. The protection of people with disability from violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation is a key priority for all Australian governments. A national approach, as enabled by the database to be established under this bill, eliminates the opportunity for people to make multiple attempts at gaining a worker screening clearance. It prevents people with adverse records in one state or territory from attempting to gain a clearance to work in the NDIS in another. The database will provide employers with an important tool for their recruitment, selection and screening processes and help with their responsibility to ensure people chosen to work in the NDIS are safe to work with people with disability. It also provides self-managed NDIS participants and their families with important information to help them make informed choices about workers providing their supports. Employers and self-managed participants will be able to use the database established under this bill to verify that workers hold a clearance. Importantly, nationally consistent worker screening will deter predatory individuals from seeking work in this sector. Participants and their families can be assured that workers with clearances have been assessed as not posing an unacceptable risk of harm to people with disability. The database provides for the ongoing monitoring of clearance holders' criminal history information. Ongoing monitoring provides certainty that unsuitable individuals will not remain in the sector if they do the wrong thing. Information in the database will be protected NDIS commission information and will be shared and used only for the NDIS commission's legislated functions and other purposes of the NDIS Act. Penalties apply for misuse or unauthorised disclosure. The Australian government is committed to a high-quality, sustainable NDIS. Ensuring people with disability, their families and carers, and NDIS providers know that workers have a clearance is an important part of having a trusted workforce. The database will provide timely, accurate access to this information for employers and self-managed NDIS participants, ensuring that they can make an informed judgment about who should work with people with disability. Our paramount consideration is the right of people with disability to live free from abuse, violence, neglect and exploitation. The Morrison government is committed to meeting this objective and ensuring people with disability are not exposed to harm from those who are there to support them. This bill is a major step forward in implementing nationally consistent NDIS worker screening. I commend the bill to the House. 11:40 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong I thank the minister for presenting the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Worker Screening Database) Bill 2019, although I do think the actual minister for the NDIS should turn up and do his day job. This bill establishes the legislative framework for the commencement of a national worker screening database for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. As we've heard in the explanatory memorandum read out, one of the principal purposes of a database for nationally consistent worker screening is to minimise the risk of harm to people with disability from those who work closely with them. Let me be clear—I am very grateful for the work of the paid workforce in the world of disability. There are literally hundreds of thousands of professional carers, who are by and large underpaid, who form deep bonds of emotional trust with the people they look after. I think this proposed legislation will actually help protect the reputations of the very many carers who do a marvellous and amazing job. But this legislation is necessary, because we know through bitter experience that people with disability are more vulnerable to violence, as a cohort, as a group of Australians, than many other groups. That is why Labor supported calling a royal commission into the issue of the abuse of people with disability in institutions and elsewhere. We called for this two years before the government did. But, anyway, the government finally got there. The rates of sexual abuse of women with disability are horrifically high. Children with disability are at least three times more likely to experience abuse than other children are. Sadly, and too often, this abuse can sometimes come at the hands of the people they should be able to rely upon and trust the most. The national worker screening database, implemented properly and in good faith, will make it more difficult for people with poor records in one place to move to another jurisdiction and continue to work with people with disability. We believe we need a national synthesis on information and standards for the National Disability Insurance Scheme, so we welcome this bill. This is a necessary administrative adjustment. But we caution the government that, whilst we're willing to rise above the fray of partisanship in the interests of evolving proper safeguards for people with disability, we're watching them and we'll keep them accountable. The scheme must be implemented properly. There must be no short cuts in funding. It is imperative, given the vulnerabilities of people at the heart of this scheme, that it's administered in good faith and that it is not bungled. We will be making sure there are no data breaches. We'll be monitoring to ensure that the information in the database is accurate. And we will be on high alert, once this database is created, that it is not put on the market, where the Liberals follow their siren song of privatisation and selling things off for profit. We will make common cause on sensible policies which empower the lives of people with disability and their carers. But this bill really does not even begin to touch the sides of what needs to be done. The sad fact is that we've learnt in the last hour that this government has taken an underspend of $4.6 billion from the NDIS. The Prime Minister comes into parliament, puffs himself up and says: 'Well, you know, this is a demand program. If we're not spending the money, we can take it to use elsewhere.' The problem is that this government is running the NDIS in such a way that the demand is not being met. The legitimate entitlement of people with disabilities to support is not being fulfilled, and instead the government is cutting the money from the NDIS and sending it elsewhere. It's been two or three months since this became my portfolio in opposition. I've done 10 forums so far around Australia and I've met with many more individuals more broadly. So it is early days to get my head around what has happened to the NDIS. It is a good idea which has not been run well enough. It has many success stories, undoubtedly. It's revolutionary. But too many Australians are not seeing the promises of the NDIS fulfilled. We hear very upsetting stories wherever we go. The government, yesterday in question time, said about the NDIS: 'It's fantastic. It's all going well. Nothing to see here.' But I have now seen countless examples of the consequences of this dramatically revealed $4.6 billion cut to NDIS and the effect it's having. There are families who can only get a response from the NDIA, or the Liberals, when they start a community campaign to expose neglect, like Angus and his mother in Queensland, who relied on a wheelbarrow for transport on the family farm because he couldn't access a suitable wheelchair; or Kayla in Penrith, who was born with spinal muscular atrophy, who had to start a GoFundMe page to get a car so she can drive to and from university—this was covered in TheDaily Telegraph and the Penrith Press. The earlier story about the boy in the barrow was covered in The Chronicle. We have Tim in Tasmania, who died while waiting for the NDIA to deliver vital medical equipment—this was covered in The Guardian. There's a wheelchair-bound man with progressive spastic paraplegia. He was initially told that he wasn't disabled enough—this was in TheCourier-Mail. There are hospitals all around Australia where we have people with disabilities in beds because they can't get timely, suitable NDIS plans. We see in Tasmania stories of inconsistent and inadequate transport arrangements, such as the cap on subsidies in Tassie, which is leaving people with disability isolated. The fact of the matter is that this legislation doesn't comprehend a number of fundamental features of the system which must be revisited. These stories that I've told are deeply upsetting, but what I've detected in the last two-plus months is a pattern of neglect and underfunding. The NDIS's underspend of $4.6 billion is not because the demand isn't there; it's because the system is not allowing the resources that the taxpayer allocates to the system to get to the people who need it. So it is rudderless. Let me go through some of the contributing features. The planners do a good job, but there is a lack of consistency in their decision-making. I meet families every day who say that they now realise that, when they present a plan for a package of support, they have to paint the very worst day that their child will have and make that look like every day because that's the only way to get support. One-year plans are too short; it's ridiculous. Can anyone imagine going for a package of support for someone who's profoundly and severely disabled with no prospect of cure? They're not going to get healed. This is not a Bible parable; this is life. What happens is they get a one-year plan and then at the end of that plan they've got to do it all again. If you are blind, you are still blind at the end of the year. If you are a quadriplegic, you are still a quadriplegic at the end of the year. Yet what happens is they have to apply all over again. We're also seeing a high turnover of staff at the NDIA. We're also seeing planners with different qualifications. Some really get the lived experience of disability, but others, through no fault of their own, come from totally different walks of life. And what families complain to me about is that they deal with planners, who haven't been raising their child for 20 or 30 years, making Solomon-like judgements about the future of their child. Many of the local area coordinators are very good, but these people are not necessarily consistent at decision-making. There is a turnover. Then we've got an appeals process. I think it would shock people to discover, as the government preens itself like the peacock of fiscal rectitude, that one of the reasons the $4.6 billion hasn't been spent and therefore has been cut from the NDIS is that more and more families are having to go to lawyers to get a government payment. How did we come to a set of circumstances where you've got to get a lawyer to help you navigate a system to get a payment for your severely and profoundly disabled child? It is madness! The number of appeals going to the AAT is increasing—over 1,000 matters. You shouldn't need a law degree to access disability support, but this is what is happening. What's happening also is that families are asked to get reports, and then there are delays and the planner changes. Say you want to put your child in a new wheelchair. Your child is 12 and has grown. You've had the old wheelchair for years. You get the occupational therapist who treats your child to write a report. You'd think, 'That's fair enough. I'll put in the report. Tick.' What happens is the planners will sometimes ask for another report from another OT. That's not what OTs in Australia want to be doing—writing reports upon reports to second-guess the first reports. Then what happens is that, by the time the second report comes in, the quote for the first wheelchair has expired and you have to do it again. This is Kafkaesque. I've discovered that you then have not just the whole challenge of planners, the LACs, the appeals and the increased number of matters going to the AAT but the whole question of assistive and adaptive equipment. In Bendigo, at a forum with the member for Bendigo, I had a vision-impaired lady stand up. She said, 'I can get adaptive equipment under one Commonwealth program at work but under this program I can't get it.' Hello! You're blind 24-7. How can one arm of the Commonwealth say you get it and another arm of the Commonwealth say you're not eligible? This is absurd. You have the issue around frames. Another lady I met in Bendigo wants a walking frame for her adult son. He is profoundly disabled. It's been three years. Why don't they just go down to Bunnings and buy a frame? Someone from the NDIA could grab a cab, stop off at the Coffee Club and have a cup of coffee even and still do it within an hour. Then we've got the issue of repeated delays and second guessing. I visited the minister's own electorate. It's not surprising the relevant minister is not at the desk, leaving the poor old member for Parkes to do the heavy lifting on this bill, which he did well. The minister, who's not even here, doesn't even visit people in his own electorate. I went to his electorate to visit a very impressive single mum who is raising kids, Shannon Manning. Her daughter is Meadow. She has hurt her back lifting her child in and out of the car. She wants a hoist and a wheelchair. It's been over 12 months. She can't get an answer on that. Now they're asked for another report. They're looking into it. The current Minister for the NDIS is the mirror man. He's looking into everything. But the problem is it's over 12 months and she has hurt her back. Another issue within the NDIS, why there's an underspend in the packages, is the transport. You're eligible to get one of three categories of transport funding. Say you live in the bush. Say you live in the Blue Mountains. I visited the member for Macquarie's seat and heard firsthand that there isn't public transport, so you have to get a cab. We don't want people just stuck at home to quietly just be forgotten. The problem is the funding we allocate in taxi packages in the packages scheme for the NDIS is inadequate. We say to people, 'Go out and have a go.' That's what the current Prime Minister loves to say. He would say: 'Have a go. How are you feeling today? Have a go.' The problem is that, under the NDIS packages, when you have a go you use up your taxi allowance within about six or eight weeks. What do you do for the next 10 months? Just have a go at home? Also there is the flexibility in terms of transport. Families would like to modify their vehicles. I have been met with an amount of argument from families about modifying their vehicles. They will drive their kids, but they have to modify the back of the van. We are making people jump through hoops in terms of transport. As for adaptive equipment, which I mentioned earlier, courtesy of Amazon and courtesy of global logistics, we can send anything in the world to just about anywhere else in the world. So why are wheelchairs so hard and take 12 and 24 months to sort out? There's no good reason. People are getting injured. Then there's respite. There is not enough support for respite for families and carers in NDIS packages. I was with the member for Cooper while visiting the northern special school. I heard a very tragic story of parents who couldn't cope. They had a child in their mid-teens with quite extreme autism who was very aggressive. The parents lost a couple of nights of respite, so one day they had to relinquish their child. They just left the child at the school—a terrible choice. Families in Australia should not be at breaking point where they relinquish their children, but it happens. They lost their couple of nights of respite. That was just the final straw. In the end, accommodating the child cost $700,000. They used a hotel on the other side of town. The teachers were there till 11 pm. And this government says it's a demand-driven package, and that's why it can take $4.6 billion. It is not demand-driven; it's bureaucratic delay. Imagine relinquishing your child for want of a couple of nights of respite each week. Shocking! Just shocking! The reality is that there are other problems with the system. The system doesn't adequately cope with people with psychosocial or mental health illnesses. Day services are under pressure. There's a quiet evacuation of some services out of the NDIS. I couldn't believe what I was hearing over the last 10 weeks. What happens quite often if you have a profound and severe disability is that you might attend a day service, so you're not at home. Everyone supports that: go to the shopping centre, go to the park, go to a centre and catch up with friends. But, with these NDIS packages, there's been no provision for day services which used to get block funding. There's been no provision to help them transition. They are up for the NDIS where the individual and the family have control of the package, but, if you're going to change the business model for the delivery of services, you need to have some money to help the change. Also, in an NDIS package, if you're in a day service but you're hospitalised for a month, the day service doesn't get the funding for it. You might have a day service in the bush looking after 10 or 14 kids or adults, but, if two or three of them are in hospital for a month—it can happen—there's no funding for the day service, yet the day service has the same fixed costs with staff. My God, this is bureaucratic! If a kid is sick from school, the school doesn't lose the funding, but, if you're sick under an NDIS package, the day service doesn't get the funding. Ms Kearney LTU It's crazy. Mr SHORTEN 00ATG What's even more crazy is that, when the person is in hospital, that's a health issue, so the NDIS doesn't cover that. I'm not making it up. I wouldn't have believed it, except that I'm now seeing it firsthand. The same goes with the health system, as I alluded to. You go into hospital and you have a carer. For many functions, the carer is not allowed to help you at hospital—it's up to the hospital—because there's a demarcation. I saw demarcations in workplaces when I was a union rep: the electrician couldn't pick up the hammer; the boilermaker couldn't flick a switch. We all said that was stupid. You should always do work for which you're safely qualified. I just want to say that to the electricians. I'm on your side. But what I would also say is that we see pointless demarcations now in the NDIS. There are silos. 'That's a health matter.' What? It's the same person. You are not a disabled person to the door of the hospital and then you're a sick person; and then, after you're wheeled out of the hospital, you're back to being a disabled person. That's really what is happening. No wonder there isn't $4.6 billion being spent, because the system's taken over. Then you have complex cases. Not everyone with a disability has one disability. Not everyone with an intellectual disability or a physical disability has a mental health condition. Then you have onset diseases: multiple sclerosis or muscular dystrophy. Your condition might have stabilised, but you aren't getting better. I met a man in East Maitland with the member for Paterson. Half his face has gone because of cancer. That is confronting. Sometimes, when some people have a cut on their face they feel embarrassed to go out in public. Losing half of your face is a challenge to your sense of self-identity. He's got a prosthesis which goes over half of his face—amazing technology, really. It lets him participate in life. He got skin cancer, but they had to fight the NDIA to get the funding for the prosthesis, because they said, 'That's a medical aid.' You couldn't make that up. Then they wouldn't fund his second prosthesis, because it wears off after 12 to 18 months. You might have got skin cancer, which is a medical condition, but, if half of your face is gone, that is a disability and it's a profound disability, and you have to fight for it? I'm not making this up. Take the prison system. Of course, it's not politically correct to say that people in prison might have disabilities and should get a package. Some people say that they are in prison and are therefore beyond the pale. Well, if you have a disability you still have a disability in prison, yet some people in prison get some NDIS support and others don't. Let's just have some consistency. There are uncomfortable truths in our system. Then, consider Indigenous Australians. As all rural members know, you have thin markets in the bush—not everyone can provide a service; you don't have a lot of choices—or, indeed, in some suburbs of our big cities. We have to be better at looking after the service providers who have been there through thick and thin. The issue of NDIS packages is where the rubber hits the road and the reason that perhaps some in the government think I am unfairly targeting this $4.6 billion underspend and why I am scathing of the cut. What is happening with NDIS packages? It is worth everyone hearing this: you might get a good package in the first year, but wait until you hear about this bit of a bureaucratic nightmare. I am hearing many reports that if you don't spend the package you have been allocated in your first year—and maybe you can't, because there just aren't the services—you lose the underspend. Sounds like the government is on steroids with the NDIS. If you can't get the services for the package you have, because there aren't enough speech pathologists, or enough OTs, or enough physios or enough respite, that doesn't mean that you shouldn't have the package that was allocated to you initially. We are now creating a culture—a sort of mystery games, not even a hunger games—where you get to the end of June and spend all of your package, because if you don't you will lose it. That is not what this scheme was designed to do. Then we have the government on employment and disability—you know, the 'have a go' mantra and that prosperity mantra of 'you have a go, you get a go'. But quite often in the NDIS packages there is no provision for support for employment. That is another portfolio, another responsibility. This is madness. Then we have the longer term issues with supported disability accommodation. This is a big issue and it is not easily fixed. What is happening is that we are taking so long to approve moving people into homes that we actually have a vacancy rate in supported accommodation, yet we have young people in nursing homes. We have to be much better at troubleshooting decisions. Then we have the screening of the workforce. I know a lot of professional carers who say that it is great if they have to be screened and have the checks, but how about they get paid properly on weekends with their penalty rates! How about having better conditions and better-recognised training! There will be a workforce shortfall in disability. And, of course, we are not really getting to grips with culturally and linguistically diverse communities—people who don't speak English. They are Australians, but we are not sorting out how they can access the NDIS. It is no wonder the government has an underspend. The thing is designed so that all too often you have to get a lawyer and you have to be very patient and articulate and have an immense amount of emotional resilience. Before someone says that I'm looking only at the bad cases, I will say that there are many good cases. But do you judge a system by the fact that some people are doing well or by the fact that there is such frustration and delay? People and families within the disability world tell me that dealing with NDIS issues risks becoming a full-time job for them. That was never the aim of the system. There are also problems with the NDIA, the actual authority. I know that the scheme is rolling out, but it has been without a CEO for more than 100 days. How can you have a $17 billion program without a CEO for 120 days or so? You couldn't imagine the Army without a general, the Navy without an admiral or government without a minister, so why is the NDIA so hard? Why have we had so many resignations at the top there? The NDIA is subject to a staffing cap. It is a great fiction of the government—you know, saying with a finger on the nose, 'Public servants, they're an easy mark to bag, so we are going to have a cap.' All it means is that we have more casuals, more labour hire and more contractors. Let's get some full-time workers and increase the numbers in the NDIA. People with disabilities, and their families, want consistency in who they deal with over the year. Also, in the upper echelons of the organisation there is a substantial lack of representation for and understanding of the lived experience of disability. This is a bill which we will support, but is this the key priority of the government and the NDIS—the screening? It's a good thing to do. There's not even a minister at the table. There's not even a minister for NDIS here. Ms Kearney interjecting— Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Sorry, there is a minister over in the corner, but it's not the right minister. This is a big program. It's a great idea. The idea that you have packages of support for people is a good idea. The idea that we turn charity into consumers is a good idea. The idea is that, when we look at people with disabilities, we don't judge them by their impairment but say, 'You're an Australian; we want you to have an ordinary life.' For me, the essence of the NDIS is the right to an ordinary life. These packages aren't giving special things to people already doing very well in life. This is about bringing people up. We love to say, 'People need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps,' but you've got to own a pair of boots to be able to pull yourself up by your bootstraps. The NDIS is a good thing, and I'm very proud to have been involved with its establishment. But too often it's becoming a bureaucracy. Too often it's becoming a maze. The money's not getting out the door to the people who need it. It shouldn't be too hard in this country to get a wheelchair within a couple of months. It shouldn't be too hard in this country to get some respite. It shouldn't be too hard for longstanding services to get some transitional funding. It shouldn't be too hard to get some assistance with employment. There shouldn't be vacancy rates in specialist disability accommodation, not when we have young people in nursing homes. It shouldn't be too hard to say to people in the bush, 'If you don't spend all your package in one 12-month financial period, because there's a lack of services, you won't lose the amount you didn't spend.' The philosophy we put forward in the NDIS is: if you trust Australians to make decisions that affect themselves and if you give them a modest package of support then they will make that money go further and they'll allocate that money with the love they have for their family member. It's true. But we're not doing that. Instead, we've got a bottom-covering, legalistic, inconsistent, incoherent, rudderless NDIS. No wonder they didn't spend $4.6 billion. It's taken me only 10 weeks to work out that the problem is that it's dysfunctional. The NDIA is constipated. The decisions just aren't getting through. That is why the money isn't being spent, and now the government's put it in its budget. The minister's a jolly enough fellow, a cheerful chap, but we've got to do better. I know Labor didn't win the last election. I'm very aware of that fact. I'm reminded every time I come to question time. I get it. But, on this area of disability, you don't need to have an election to make it better. We can make it better now. I've articulated a plan for work, which the government should work with me on. I care more about disability than I care about Liberal or Labor. He can be the minister; he can have the car; he can have the office in Melbourne. That's super. Let's fix the system. I care about this. I know members of this House, individually, would care about this. If government members could take away the fact that I'm the Labor guy saying this and listen to what I'm saying, I think they'd be equally appalled. In my opinion, the problem with the NDIA and the NDIS at the moment is that the lights are on but no-one's home. This is good legislation, but there's a lot more to be done. 12:08 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I'll just pick up on some of the comments that the member for Maribyrnong made on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Worker Screening Database) Bill 2019. The viability of the NDIS is something that is very, very important to both sides of the House. As the father of a disabled child, I can say that it is particularly important to me that we get this right—and we are getting it right; we are on the right path to getting it right. It is so important. It is too important not to get this right. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is a great force for good all over Australia. It is a once-in-a-generation, life-changing initiative. In my work in this place, in speaking to constituents at the four NDIS forums that I've organised in Fisher, and even in my own family, I've seen what a life-changing difference this scheme is making for some of our society's most vulnerable. Like any powerful force for good, the NDIS is vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. With $22 billion eventually set to flow through the scheme every year, the NDIS is vulnerable to unscrupulous operators more interested in making a profit than in making a difference. Protecting, as it does, many people in our society who cannot protect themselves, the NDIS has the potential to provide opportunities to those who would cut corners, do not care or would seek to exploit and abuse our most vulnerable. Statistics assembled by Disabled People's Organisations Australia suggest that people with intellectual disability are 10 times more likely to experience violence than people without disability. People with intellectual disability are three times more likely to be victims of assault, sexual assault and robbery, while 20 per cent of women with a disability report a history of unwanted sex. The institutional risks are particularly high in a scheme which will see a large number of new jobs created in such a short period of time. Over the next five years, the NDIS is expected to create more than 90,000 new full-time equivalent positions. This represents almost a doubling of the existing disability sector workforce and is a terrific benefit of the scheme for all Australians. However, in the years to come, it will mean that we will be seeing an unprecedented influx of individuals working intimately with people living with disability for the very first time, individuals without an established history in the sector. The vast majority of those people will, no doubt, do a fantastic job. Many will, no doubt, find their true vocation. However, a small minority will not live up to the standards that we expect and will do their fellow Australians more harm than good. This bill is a major step forward in keeping those individuals out of the NDIS and ensuring that those who we commission to work with our most vulnerable are safe and qualified and, therefore, there for the right reasons. As I have often said before, as a member of the parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, I must say that the vast majority of participants in the scheme are reporting an exceedingly positive experience. There are 99,537 people receiving support for the first time, and many thousands of others are receiving more support than they've ever had before. For a great number, getting an NDIS package has been a life-changing experience. In the latest report quarter to 30 June 2019, 90 per cent of participants in the scheme rated their satisfaction with the NDIS process as 'good' or 'very good', a figure which has been improving throughout the last three years. By their second year, almost 80 per cent of participants over the age of 25 in the scheme state that the NDIS has helped them in their daily living. However, we know that not everyone's experience is a good one. That is why the government amended the NDIS legislation in 2017 and established the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. The government created this commission, in close consultation with the states and territories, to register and regulate NDIS providers. The commission manages practice standards and a code of conduct and now has the responsibility for monitoring compliance as well as investigating and responding to participants' complaints and incidents reported by providers. In addition, the commission sets key quality policies and provides national oversight in relation to standards and practices in the NDIS. It provides NDIS participants with the potent watchdog they need to deal with any incidents of abuse or neglect. The government has showed its commitment to a safe and high-quality NDIS workforce by fully funding the organisation with a budget allocation of $209 million over the forward estimates. Though, as I've mentioned, the experience of most NDIS participants has been very good, what this new NDIS commission has discovered in the first months of its operation has been very concerning. In the six months to December 2018, when the NDIS commission still covered only South Australia and New South Wales, it had already registered 9,801 separate providers covering more than 117,000 participants. During that same six months, a disturbing 1,459 serious incidents and allegations were reported to the commission. It should be remembered that they, at this point in time, are figures about allegations rather than being proven matters. They included 62 allegations of sexual misconduct, 227 allegations of unlawful contact, 250 serious injuries and a shocking 496 allegations of abuse or neglect. During that period, the NDIA found it necessary to revoke the registrations of 39 providers for failing to meet the NDIS Code of Conduct. No figures are yet available, of course, for the six months from 1 July 2019, when the commission began operating in the ACT, Northern Territory, Queensland, Tasmania and Victoria. However, as at the publication of the NDIS National Public Dashboard on 30 June 2019, there were a total of 21,510 separate providers registered, providing support to 286,015 participants. At its height, the NDIS is expected to provide services to up to 500,000 people. Sadly, the number of complaints and reports received by the NDIS commission will no doubt increase with the expanded scale of the delivery workforce. The Prime Minister has responded decisively to the scale of complaints received so far and to the concerns of people living with disability by establishing a Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability. Critically, he's also secured the buy-in of all state and territory governments so that this will be a meaningful and comprehensive investigation. The Treasurer has allocated $527 million to the completion of this royal commission to ensure that it has all the resources it needs to get to the bottom of these disturbing reports and to make a real difference for people living with a disability all over this country. I think many of us will have felt mixed emotions this week as the first public hearing of this royal commission has got underway. No doubt the process will uncover a great many tragic and confronting personal stories. Our shock and sadness at hearing these stories must be joined with relief that the truth is finally being revealed and resolve that we will learn the lessons that I'm sure thousands of brave individuals and their families are about to teach us. However, the oversight provided by the NDIS commission and the investigations undertaken by the royal commission will ultimately fail to protect people living with disability if we are unable to prevent those individuals who do the wrong thing from providing services again in the future. Worse, without the ability to prevent the wrong people from becoming service providers in the first place, we will only continue to see more investigations, more inquiries and more revelations of abuse. That is what this bill helps to deliver. In short, this bill will help to ensure that unsuitable people have nowhere to hide in the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It will make sure that, whatever the service you provide, wherever you live, wherever you move or whoever you work for, you cannot escape the consequence of your actions. At present, of course, workers who wish to be registered to provide services under the NDIS are screened. However, they are screened under separate processes designed and delivered by each of the states and territories. Perhaps, surprisingly, these regimes are quite different from state to state. In New South Wales an individual must have a criminal record check; in Victoria, a national police check, a proof of identity check and a Disability Worker Exclusion List check; in Queensland, a yellow card; while in Tasmania, they must be preregistered under the Work with Vulnerable People Act of 2013. South Australia, the ACT and the Northern Territory have their own systems and legislation. These systems vary in rigour and they vary in some of the detailed exclusions applied. Equally, at present these screening processes are not valid in more than one state; and, in some cases, not all of the checks cross state boundaries. If you are registered in the NDIS as a worker in Queensland and you want to follow your family to New South Wales, as it stands, you must go through a new NDIS screening process before you can take up your career once more. But, more concerningly, if you are rejected in one state or lose your registration, this does not necessarily exclude you from being registered in another state or territory. At the moment, an individual who could not be registered in one state might, quite legally, be registered in another. At the moment, an individual who has been proven unsuitable in one state might be able to evade the system and take up NDIS employment again by moving to a new jurisdiction. As we've heard, the bill will end these loopholes by establishing the legal framework for a national database to record the results of a nationally consistent approach to NDIS worker screening. The database will keep an up-to-date register of everyone who is cleared to work as an NDIS worker and everyone who has been excluded—wherever that exclusion took place. It will ensure that employers can go to one place to check whether an individual is cleared or excluded, and help prevent any unsuitable person from being employed. Critically, on an ongoing basis, it will facilitate the monitoring of criminal histories to ensure that, where an individual allegedly commits a crime, they can be swiftly removed from the register if they are cleared. Finally, the database will also include the details of the individual's employer so that employers can be immediately informed when one of their staff becomes ineligible to provide NDIS services. All of our states and territories have agreed, through the COAG process, to introduce a nationally consistent check because they recognise, as the Morrison government does, that the protection of people with disability from violence, abuse and neglect is a key priority for us all. The check will be introduced in each state and territory over the next year. The national database enshrined in the bill before us is a missing piece in the puzzle. It will significantly improve the national NDIS worker screening program, which we need to minimise harm to people with disability and to ensure that they can feel safe. There is no program like the NDIS. This is a groundbreaking piece of legislation. This is a groundbreaking program. All members in this place and, in fact, all Australians should feel proud that we are giving people who are living with disability the opportunity to lead fulfilling lives. People who live with a disability are just like you and me. They want to get up in the morning, they want to have families, they want to go to work, they want to contribute to society and they want to play sport. What the NDIS does is not charity. It is a scheme sponsored by all Australians to enable all Australians who live with a disability to come together and lead fulfilling lives. That's all they want. There are entitled to that. I'm very proud to be part of a government that is delivering that for them. I commend the bill to the House. 12:23 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "the House: (1) notes that, while the National Worker Screening Database will be an important tool to prevent some abuse occurring in the future, it can never investigate the crimes of the past; and (2) welcomes the fact that there will finally be a Royal Commission into Violence and Abuse of People with Disability". The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Is the motion seconded? Ms Kearney LTU I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 12:24 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume This bill, the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Worker Screening Database) Bill 2019, establishes the National Disability Insurance Scheme worker screening database. The database will keep an up-to-date national record of information about NDIS worker screening checks. A clearance recorded in the database means the NDIS worker has undergone a background check and has been found not to pose an unacceptable risk of harm to NDIS participants. The NDIS is a transformational social policy that has been delivered by this government. It requires a new, nationally consistent approach to quality and safeguards. Stakeholders have consistently supported robust risk-based worker screening in the disability sector that is portable across jurisdictions. We are committed to meeting this objective and ensuring that people with disability are not exposed to harm from those who are there to support them. We have established the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and have provided $209 million over four years to support the integral work of the NDIS commission. The commission commenced operations in New South Wales and South Australia from 1 July 2018. It will be working in all states and territories by July 2020. The NDIS commission will lead the overall design and broad policy settings for nationally consistent NDIS worker screening. Under this bill, the commission is responsible for establishing and maintaining the national database as an accurate, up-to-date source of information about decisions made on NDIS worker clearances. This reflects the NDIS commission's role as the national leader in quality and safeguards. The cost of developing and maintaining the database over the next four years is $13.6 million. States and territories are expected to contribute $6.8 million of this, representing half of the total. The measures in the bill were funded as part of the 2017-18 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. The bill meets the government's responsibilities under the Intergovernmental Agreement on Nationally Consistent Worker Screening for the NDIS. Disability ministers from all Australian governments have provided in-principle support for the intergovernmental agreement, which establishes NDIS worker screening to help create a safe and trusted workforce in the NDIS and minimise the risk of harm to people with disability. To this end, all Australian governments are working together to establish the NDIS worker screening check. The new check will be introduced in each state and territory progressively over the next year, with all states and territories having the check in place by 1 July 2020. Until the check becomes available in a jurisdiction, transitional arrangements provide recognition of current state-based checks, such as working-with-children or vulnerable-persons checks. Once the NDIS check is operational, state-based checks for existing workers will continue to be recognised until they expire. This approach will provide for a gradual transition to the new system and provide continuity of service provision. Under a nationally consistent approach, working screening units in each state and territory will be responsible for conducting NDIS worker screening checks. They will consider applicants' criminal history information, any relevant disciplinary or misconduct information, and information taken from the NDIS commission's complaints and reportable incidents system. Information about the status of the checks will be stored in a single national database managed by the NDIS commission and be accessible for NDIS purposes. Worker clearances will be portable across jurisdictions and employers, reducing duplication and complexity for workers and providers moving between or operating across jurisdictions. The database enables this portability, meaning workers need only one clearance, and there will be one reference point for clearances. This represents a major step forward from the existing fragmented arrangements operating in each state and territory. It reduces duplication and complexity for workers and providers operating in more than one jurisdiction. Although recruitment, selection and screening processes are an employer responsibility, the database will provide a tool to ensure people chosen to work in the NDIS are safe to work with people with disability. Employers and self-managed participants will be able to verify that workers hold a clearance using the up-to-date, accurate information in the database to be established under this bill. Participants and their families can be assured that workers with clearances do not pose an unacceptable risk of harm. Nationally consistent worker screening will deter and prevent those who seek to do the wrong from entering the NDIS workforce. The national database eliminates the opportunity for people to make multiple attempts at gaining a clearance in different states or territories. It provides for the ongoing monitoring of clearance-holders' criminal history information, meaning unsuitable individuals will not remain in the sector. This sends a clear message to those who pose an unacceptable risk of harm to NDIS participants: you are not welcome. The Morrison government is committed to the right of people with disability to live their lives free from abuse, violence, neglect and exploitation. The central database to be established under the bill will support nationally consistent NDIS worker screening in pursuit of this objective. This is an important measure to ensure that people with disability have access to quality and safe supports and services under the NDIS and are not at risk of harm from people who work closely with them. I commend this bill to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG The original question was that this bill be read a second time. To this the honourable member for Lalor has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question before the House is that the amendment moved by the member for Lalor be agreed to.

The House divided. [12:35]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 63 AYES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Chesters, LM Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Giles, AJ Gorman, P Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Mulino, D Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ O'Neil, CE Owens, JA Payne, AE Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Thwaites, KL Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 73 NOES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Haines, H Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharkie, RCC Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Steggall, Z Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Young, T Zimmerman, T 0 PAIRS

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

 Third Reading 33 12:41 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020 33

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020

Report from Federation Chamber 33 Third Reading 33 12:42 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2019-2020 33

Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2019-2020

Report from Federation Chamber 33 Third Reading 33 12:44 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020 34

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020

Report from Federation Chamber 34 Third Reading 34 12:45 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Measures No. 2) Bill 2019 34

Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Measures No. 2) Bill 2019

Second Reading 34 12:46 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam In the consideration in detail stage, I will be moving the amendments that have been circulated in my name. This bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Measures No. 2) Bill 2019 includes two measures amending the Treasury legislation, the first being more significant and substantial than the latter. Schedule 1 of the bill extends the minister's regulation powers under the Corporations Act and the National Consumer Credit Protection Act. These powers will enable the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, ASIC, to provide exemptions from the Australian financial licensing regime under certain circumstances for the purposes of testing financial and credit products and services in what is described as a fintech sandbox. Schedule 2 of the bill amends the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 to make minor changes to venture capital and early-stage investor tax concession provisions. These ensure that the provisions operate as had been intended with regard to capital gains tax transactions and the early-stage investor tax offset. This is to address issues arising from the drafting of the Tax Laws Amendment (Tax Incentives for Innovation) Act 2016, which left loopholes in the operation of this measure. I won't be saying anything more about schedule 2 except to say that Labor supports the measure. However, I would like to address some comments to schedule 1 of the bill. That's the schedule that deals with the fintech sandbox. The purpose of schedule 1 is to facilitate the establishment and growth of fintech businesses in Australia by providing some relief from the regulatory regime at the start-up or proof-of-concept stage. This schedule contains two concepts that need to be explained. The first is fintech, and the second is the regulatory sandbox. Fintech, or financial technology, is a term much used but rarely defined. In this case it refers to businesses seeking to find new ways to use technology or to automate to improve or simplify the delivery and use of financial services. Financial technology is already a significant industry in Australia. Ernst & Young have estimated that 58 per cent of digitally active Australians are already using financial technology in their lives, whether they know it or not. It might be through the use of a buy now, pay later application on their mobile phone. It might be by using a payment platform when purchasing a product on an online marketplace. It might be by using a financial app to intermediate between their financial institutions or indeed to access their financial institutions or banks. Australians, famously throughout the world, are early uptakers of new technology, and it is no different in the area of financial technology. New Australian fintech firms tend to cluster in five areas: transfers and payments; budgeting and planning; savings and investment; borrowing and lending; and insurance. These are widely disparate areas, but Australians welcome innovation that leads to better outcomes in all of them. A regulatory sandbox is the second context that requires some explanation. It's a colourful term used throughout the world to explain regulatory relief provided by government for the purpose of supporting innovation and growth in an industry. This means that some firms—those firms granted access to the sandbox—will be provided with regulatory relief and specifically exempted from regulations that have been established by the government for the purposes of protecting consumers, in the case of this legislation, from predatory financial firms and practices. The only justification for exempting firms from regulations that this parliament has said are generally in the public interest and are necessary for regulating an industry or a sector is that there is some greater public interest in providing some relief from those regulations. The public interest, in the case of the schedule to this bill is ostensibly to grow our financial technology industry, thereby providing jobs, wealth and opportunity through the growth in that sector or, conversely, as a means of improving competition within a heavily concentrated market. Hopefully, both of these public interest issues will apply in this area. I'll address the public interest issue of developing an industry. Labor supports growing the financial technology industry and driving greater innovation in the financial sector. Australia is a leading global provider of financial services. It's a $4.6 billion export industry. Of course, we aspire to be a clever country, but I fear that this legislation won't do enough to support the financial technology industry. More needs to be done. According to Ernst & Young's annual fintech census, the key barriers to growth in the fintech industry are not regulatory in nature. Yes, there are regulatory issues, which are listed in the fintech census—this is a census of fintech companies that are already operating within the sector—but they are not No. 1 in the areas that they themselves have identified as obstacles to growth. Fintechs are facing key constraints in both skills and access to capital—77 per cent of fintechs have reported difficulties in finding trained software engineers, for example. So, if this is the No. 1 concern, or one of the top concerns, of the fintech industry, we have to ask: why is Australia so lacking in software engineers who could be applying for jobs in this sector? Is it because of the government's ongoing cuts to education, both technical and tertiary? Regulatory relief is not going to be the answer to this shortfall in skills. In fact, right across the economy, we have a skills shortage that this government, this third-term government, seems blind to and totally bereft of any plan to deal with. So, while we support the measures within the bill, we have doubts that they will go far enough to assist the fintech industry in the issues that are of concern to them. The language around fintech policy often tends towards the absurd. I've heard members opposite discussing their enthusiasm for fintech sandboxes, fintech boot camps, fintech launching points, fintech landing pads and fintech bridges. I hope that members opposite can extend that enthusiasm to measures that are actually going to make a difference. Beyond the fabulous flurry of fantastical fintech metaphors, innovation in financial technology is something that Labor absolutely supports. The fintech sector is emerging as a genuine competitive threat to major players in the financial sector and is providing consumers and small businesses with new channels to access the financial services they need. It's emerging very quickly. If we turn our minds back to the report on competition within the financial services industry, a report from less than 12 months ago, the ACCC found that, while there was potential for competition in the financial services sector through the operation of fintechs, more often than not, at the moment, fintechs emerged as collaborators with incumbents within that already concentrated market, as opposed to competitors. We want to see more small players grow into more big players within the financial services industry, including start-ups and customer owned banks. We want to see them using technology to challenge the stranglehold of the big banks and the big insurers over our financial services system because we think more competition in this space is good for consumers. In our banking sector, for example, the big four hold in excess of 70 per cent of the market. In the insurance sector, the large insurers control close to 80 per cent of the sector. So more competition is needed to drive better consumer outcomes. Fintech has the ability to be an enabler of more competition and a means of driving better access to existing services. But we want to see this potential actualised. We want to see new players in the financial market helping Australian businesses access the finance they need to invest in their operations because the government certainly won't be helping them to invest. According to KPMG, the fintech sector in Australia has already grown to be worth something in the order of $1 billion and this is an environment where the government has failed to provide fintech companies with the regulatory support that they need. We need only look back at the access to the existing mechanisms within the legislation which have existed since 2013. Only three entities have made use of the existing sandbox arrangements. We hope that the amendments that are the subject of this bill will create more flexibility and provide access to more innovation in the sector. When we compare the use of similar schemes in other jurisdictions, we see that in the United Kingdom, for example, over 146 companies have applied to use their sandbox. I know the United Kingdom has a much larger financial services sector, a much bigger population and a much bigger economy than ours, but that was in one operation—146 applications to use the sandbox in one year of operation. In Singapore, closer to home, there were 30 applications to use their sandbox in the very first year of operation as well. So if Australia has an aspiration to genuinely lead in the financial services sector then we have to lift our game in this area and we have to be able to work with industry to enable them to do the very same. Labor supports the objectives of the bill. We want to see a flourishing and expanding financial technology sector in Australia. We support the establishment of a fintech sandbox to provide some regulatory relief when needed, to allow innovative products and services to be brought to market. Having said that, we understand that consumer advocates like CHOICE have raised some concerns with this bill. We don't want to see regulatory relief provided through the mechanisms of this legislation for products that are not genuine innovations and have no prospect of providing substantial benefits for customers. This is why I foreshadow that, in the consideration in detail stage of this bill, Labor will be moving amendments to this bill—amendments directed at ensuring that access to the regulatory sandbox is limited to firms applying for genuinely innovative operations. The provisions of relief from regulations passed by parliament to protect the interests of consumers should be granted, when appropriate. This is why we are moving amendments to require companies accessing regulatory relief through the fintech sandbox to show that they are using it for products and services that are genuinely innovative and will benefit customers. It should be a very small hurdle to overcome. It harks back to the purpose of providing a sandbox and the public interest in this sort of regulatory relief, and that is to ensure that we create encouragement for firms to innovate, and not just provide a back door for firms to avoid the regulations that apply to the rest of the industry. With that amendment foreshadowed, we commend the bill to the House, and I look forward to hearing other contributors to this debate. 13:01 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein Sometimes in this place you see pieces of legislation that are incredibly straightforward. They are actually designed to underpin the growth in the Australian economy by supporting industry to be able to grow, to create jobs, to employ people, to take challenges, to dare, to risk and to push the boundaries for us to be able to become a better country. In sectors like financial services and financial technology, we want to back people to be successful. We want people to innovate, and that's at the heart of this legislation. But then you come into this place and you have somebody like the member who just spoke, who, out of a pointless and needless virtue-signalling exercise—I don't say that in the complimentary sense of there being any sense of real virtue behind it; I should just say 'signalling'—gets up and says, 'We are going to support only those things that are genuinely innovative, because apparently there is all this disingenuous innovation going on in Australian society that somehow is going to enjoy the benefits of sandboxing in a regulatory framework.' They say such things largely for the benefit of making themselves relevant in a conversation that they have had so little to do with. It is embarrassing and it's about time it was called out. This bill is important. The financial services industry is one of Australia's great employers and supports so many of the different sectors in the economy. Our great strengths in mining and agriculture cannot survive and be supported and helped to grow and drive the Australian economy without important sectors like financial services, which help them manage. We see opportunities for new and innovative approaches to financial services and financial technology to continue to support other industries and businesses as part of the complementary nature of the Australian economy. That is where our focus should be, and that is what this bill is about. This is part of the holistic package of this government's billion-dollar National Innovation and Science Agenda, in which we are focused on what we need to do to build the sectors to grow the economy and take it into the 21st century. It also sits, critically, at the heart of our trade and competitiveness agenda. If you look around the world at the industries in which we are going to be successful in the coming years, it is not going to be the ones in which we are trying to compete solely on the basis of labour costs. It will be in the ones that value and respect the knowledge, the skills, the capacity and the innovation of Australians, the ones that then go on to support existing primary and secondary industries—the manufacturing sectors—as well as the service based sectors in the economy. We know that a lot of these businesses—those that are innovative, or are doing the 'genuine' innovation, which apparently is the test benchmark being set by the opposition—innovate in spaces that evolve as they are going along. They are pushing the boundaries themselves. They are market-testing. That's why it is a challenge to attract capital. We know they face big hurdles in attracting venture capital, because people want the opportunity to back aspiration, hope, innovation and technology as it goes from idea through to practical application. The regulatory framework that is necessary to support these businesses as they grow has to grow with them. That's what we're seeking to do in the rather benign and anodyne Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Measures. No. 2) Bill 2019—support genuine innovation—and of course in the fintech sector there is an enormous amount of opportunity to do so. The regulations outline in the eligibility criteria the types of products and services that can be tested and conditions that can apply during testing in terms of the sandbox. And of course it's consistent in working with many of the regulatory agencies that operate to support these new and innovative businesses to create the jobs Australia so desperately needs in order to create the next wave of innovation and technological drive. We do so because we have a comparative advantage of a well-established, well-regulated financial services sector. That creates the environment for people to see the opportunity gaps and the power of technology to increase efficiencies, reduce costs and grow the Australian economy. And we don't just succeed in that here in Australia; we succeed in that in competing throughout the world. Of course there are many countries that also have big financial services hubs and have the same incubators and excitement around fintech and what it can deliver for their local populations and for the growth and the wealth creation of the future—through productivity enhancement, through efficiency. Countries like the UK and Singapore are at the edge, and we have to stay at the edge of regulation so that we can get ahead as well. That's what this bill is about. It's about those opportunities and about those jobs and about backing our entrepreneurs to be successful and to create a globally competitive environment for them to be successful so that we can attract more investment and more capital to grow that opportunity. That's why this bill, as trivial as it may seem to many people, is so critical and why it is absurd that the opposition are indulging the difference between so-called genuine innovation and what they argue is disingenuous innovation. 13:07 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith The Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Measures. No. 2) Bill 2019 achieves two aims: firstly, to create a regulatory sandbox that allows fintech companies to develop innovative financial products without the usual regulatory constraints and, secondly, to make minor changes to the venture capital and angel investor taxation arrangements. Of course Labor supports innovation and competition in the financial sector, and we've been pushing this government to do much better and to show more support for early-stage innovation and the start-up community for some years. In fact, when it comes to this particular sector—the start-up community, particularly in fintech—there's plenty of evidence that Australia is falling behind international standards and falling down the rankings when it comes to encouraging start-ups and productivity in our economy. In fact, on measures of Australia's most productive firms, the top five per cent—the productivity frontier, as they're known—Australia hasn't kept pace with other nations and the most productive firms globally compared with other nations. This is a point that was recently made by a Treasury official, Meghan Quinn, in a speech she gave in Australia about the OECD and the productivity agenda. Australia's productivity frontier has slipped back from the global productivity frontier by about a third. We all know that the Productivity Commission does a regular update tracking how Australia is performing in terms of our nation's productivity. Recently those reports have been painting quite a sorry picture. Many Australian businesses aren't keeping pace when it comes to innovation and productivity, and they're not investing in new technologies, particularly intelligent software in cybersecurity, which leaves them vulnerable to the threat of hacking. Aside from that, it's evident, based on recent economic data, that not only are Australian firms not investing in fintech and in the technology sector; they're not investing in anything at all. And that's quite evident from the recent national accounts and private capital accumulation figures from the ABS. It's quite evident that Australia is going backwards when it comes to growth in business investment in our economy. That's a handbrake on quite a few things. It's a handbrake on businesses growing. It's a handbrake on employment increasing, and we've seen again today a slight increase in the unemployment figures for the country. It's a handbrake on consumption, and we know that consumption has been in the doldrums for many, many years now under this government. More importantly, it's a handbrake on productivity and growth in our economy. We should be talking about capital deepening in Australia, about capital-to-worker ratios going forwards. Instead, in Australia at the moment we're talking about capital shallowing, where the economy is going backwards in terms of the amount of capital per worker and, indeed, our productivity as a nation. So there's plenty of evidence that this government simply is not doing enough to promote start-ups and to promote new productive investments in new opportunities and new businesses in our economy. It's hopeful that a measure like this will assist, but we certainly say that it doesn't go far enough and it represents the government not listening to not only the fintechs but also the start-up community. The sector that we're discussing here is often talked about, particularly in media announcements and report after report, but there has been little practical and concrete support for the fintech and start-up industry. While the government has sat on the sidelines, local fintech operators and the sector have already emerged as a real competitive threat to major financial services players, potentially providing consumers with greater opportunities for new financial products. We're starting to see this now in the banking and financial services industry, where you're starting to get a lot of the app based fintech companies expanding into the market, offering services that have been well received, particularly by millennials and the younger generation of Australians who tend to do a lot of their commerce on their phones these days. Some of these new products need to be tested in terms of a regulatory environment that lets companies determine if these products are going to be viable moving forward. This phenomenon is known as a regulatory sandbox, an environment in which fintech and other companies offer products that would normally come to market more slowly because of some regulatory impediment, and the benefit of a sandbox is that the innovative concepts can be tested in a more forgiving regulatory environment, bringing more consumer-focused offerings to Australia and overseas markets. Having said that, consumer advocates are concerned that some concepts trialled in the sandbox environment are not demonstrating a legitimate need for regulatory relief and that some concepts may not be as good as were promised to consumers. Nonetheless, this is a phenomenon, again, which has been a feature of other jurisdictions internationally, which has worked well. It provides a greater incentive, I think, for businesses and start-ups to test some of their products in the market with some regulatory support, rather than worrying about meeting regulatory conditions and therefore slowing development down. As I mentioned earlier, there are some concerns from consumer advocates about them not demonstrating legitimate need for regulatory relief, and these are concerns that Labor believes the government should be addressing in passing this bill. That's why we will be introducing, during the brief consideration in detail stage, some amendments that go to those issues. When it comes to regulatory sandboxes, similar rules are in place in other jurisdictions—the United States, Singapore and Hong Kong—which have seen significant successes and flourishing fintech sectors. These reforms have been supported by the local fintech sector here in Australia. In their submission to the Senate inquiry, FinTech Australia mentioned their support for these particular reforms when they said that they supported an official review process to ensure that only appropriate companies are able to enter the market and avail themselves of this regulatory relief. All in all this is a reform that is on the right track. Labor supports doing more to encourage and boost a flourishing fintech sector in Australia, but it is crucial to not just concentrate on this sector but be part of a broader productivity agenda encouraging businesses to invest, particularly in software, artificial intelligence and other reforms that are coming through innovation, and also deepening capital within Australian markets to ensure we are getting better value for the resources being invested by companies. It is crucial to ensure that innovation and growth in the fintech sector don't come at the cost of consumer outcomes, and that is something Labor will continue to monitor with this bill's passing and the establishment of the regulatory sandbox environment. 13:16 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar My voice is failing me at the moment, so I will keep it short. Mr Stephen Jones A9B There is a god! Mr FALINSKI G86 And you're not it, Jonesy, despite what you might tell everyone! The point of all of this is that what we have in Australia at the moment, I think, is a situation where we are doing consumers harm, because we continue to create barriers to entry due to regulations or red tape. Consumers are left to get products only from people who are already providing products in that market. It means they get a higher priced, less innovative product that is distributed to them in a way that may not be as convenient to themselves. It is a shame that in Australia we need regulatory sandboxes to begin with, because what it essentially says is that our regulatory system is so bespoke that, if you want to do anything innovative, you have to be put in a special sandbox. We picked up this idea from Singapore and other places, because we want to encourage fintechs into this market and improve consumer outcomes. It was interesting to listen to Rod Sims from the ACCC talk about the financial services sector yesterday. He said that the big four banks don't seem to compete on price and on product innovation, but when asked directly, 'Have you ever thought that all of the regulatory burdens you are placing on the market and producers are keeping them from competing with people currently in the market?' the head of the ACCC's response was to say: 'Yes, it might be that, actually; I hadn't thought about that. It might be that we, the regulators, have created the problem.' Recently I spoke to a financial services firm that does bespoke financing for people who want solar panels on their homes. As you would know, Mr Deputy Speaker McVeigh, the benefit of putting solar panels on your home is that you can sell electricity back to the network and have some return on what you are doing. This company came up with the ingenious idea of trying to match the cost of financing putting solar panels on someone's house to the feedback tariff that they get from selling electricity back to the network. This business has done very well, and so it should. It is benefiting consumers, industry, the electricity network, the climate, the environment—all of us. But, since then, these taxpayer funded consumer advocacy centres—the same people opposed to this legislation, because they don't care about consumer outcomes; they only care about getting themselves in the newspaper—have launched action using ASIC. This company has received 86 requests for information. They can point to no consumer that has been harmed. They can point to no market damage or behaviour. They are a small company of 80 people. They've had to hire an extra eight people and take nine people off their front line to gather all the information that ASIC is looking for. This regulatory warfare that has been commenced by a whole bunch of advocates in our community—usually funded by this parliament—is doing our country harm, is doing consumers harm and is doing harm to our innovation. We are the 14th most competitive economy in the world. But when you look at our IR system, it rates 115th out of 123 countries. When you look at Australia's red-tape regime, our regulatory regime, we are 122nd out of 141 countries. We are in the bottom 10 per cent. It is just a shocking state of affairs. And so we do things like this—a sandbox. Schedule 1 of this bill extends the regulation-making powers in the Corporations Act, so it allows the government to enhance the regulatory sandbox—that is, it enables the minister and this parliament to extend this sandbox to as many people as we possibly can. The bill says that we will outline the eligibility criteria. I can only hope that they are as broad as possible. I can only hope that the types of products are as broad as possible. I can only hope that the services that can be tested in this sandbox are as broad as possible, because it will bring benefits to our economy, to consumers and to ordinary Australians who are just trying to get ahead. A regulatory sandbox allows entrepreneurs to test new products without the inhibitive need to have a financial services or credit licence from the Australian Securities and Investment Commission. During the week, it emerged that Bendigo Bank has been seeking to be classified as an advanced bank under the APRA regulations. They have spent seven years and $100 million, and there is no end in sight to that application. What that means is that the big four banks have less competition today, because of regulations that we introduced and the way APRA is administering them. How is that good for consumers? How is that good for our economy? The government's enhanced legislative sandbox builds on ASIC's existing licence exemption. The enhancements will broaden the scope, expanding who can use it, what can be tested and how long businesses can test. The enhancements enable firms to test specified financial services, including financial advice, the issuing of consumer credit contracts and the facilitating of crowdsourced funding. These are incredibly important initiatives by the government—especially around crowdsourced funding, which is disrupting the way people can raise capital in the Australian marketplace. The government has been methodically progressing policies that will ensure Australia is a leading destination for fintech talent and investment. This is a competitive sector. Comparable countries like the UK and Singapore keenly look to attract Australian firms; and, if you go down to Darling Harbour in Sydney, you only have to throw a stone to find a fintech firm that has been offered concessional tax rates, concessional loans and special regulatory regimes by the Irish government. We are living in a very aggressive environment where people are seeking to attract to their shores the next big thing. We need to play in that game and very aggressively. The sandbox is expected to lead to greater competition and increased pressure on current financial providers, traditional and emerging, to be more responsive to consumer needs and to deliver better outcomes for Australians. Naturally, consumer advocate groups have said they are concerned about that and worried about this bill. That's what you get from taxpayer funded consumer advocate groups these days. This is one more step in the government's systemic approach to ensuring the policy settings are right to support Australian fintech businesses in order to succeed. The member for Kingsford Smith mentioned that this should be part of a broader agenda, and he's right. This is part of a broader agenda. This is part of the National Innovation and Science Agenda, which was announced by Malcolm Turnbull in 2016. This bill builds on the government's billion-dollar National Innovation and Science Agenda, and it highlights our commitment to support innovative businesses in Australia and build a culture of entrepreneurship and risk-taking. I would hope that the Labor Party would support that. Schedule 2 of this bill makes a number of minor technical amendments to early stage venture capital limited partnerships, venture capital limited partnership and tax incentives for early-stage investor regimes, which have been developed through ongoing engagement with stakeholders and the Australian Taxation Office. I would make the point, though, that in all of these things it is better to have 10 per cent of something than 100 per cent of nothing, and too often this parliament has made the decision to ensure that we take no risks whatsoever and we've ended up with the latter rather than the former. These amendments, despite being minor and technical in nature, will ensure these programs operate in accordance with their policy intent, providing certainty to stakeholders and helping to ensure that innovative Australian businesses can grow and flourish. I make this observation: the state of Georgia in the United States, for various reasons, decided, up until 2004, that it would not allow credit bureaus to operate. It was part of their longstanding suspicion of credit bureaus, which had run for over 100 years, and inevitably the Georgian parliament had never really got around to changing the law. In any case, in 2004 they decided that they would allow credit bureaus to operate in Georgia. The result of the introduction of things like the household expenditure model and benchmarks and the introduction of algorithms and credit scores was that in Georgia the total value of loans went from 10 per cent of GDP to 56 per cent of GDP. They created a massive amount of economic growth in Georgia. The second thing was that the interest rate margin between 2004 and 2014 fell from an average of 20.6 to 10.1 per cent. In other words, using benchmarks, using algorithms, using advanced AI technology—as the member for Kingsford Smith mentioned—leads to better outcomes for consumers, better access to capital and finance and lower costs of capital and finance, and makes all of us better off. These sandboxes are considered to be some of the best in the world, but, like the businesses they serve, we need to be agile and innovative as to the way that they operate and ensure that they do more to allow consumers to have better access to capital at better prices—and, indeed, producers, too. On that, I would hope that you would see consumer advocates praising rather than trying to stymie this bill, and I would hope that the Labor Party would ignore their siren calls and be on the side of ordinary Australians. 13:28 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt I thank the previous speaker for the absolutely superb timing of his speech today. It's been of such great assistance to the entire House. I do worry about some of the things that the member for Mackellar was passing on in his erudite comments in contribution to the debate just now, but I'm sure, while some of those comments did seem to come out of a hole in his head, he will, if anything, appreciate the fact that, for a critical piece of financial services legislation, I have worn my best financial services suit for this speech! The critical thing—in the brief amount of time that I've been given to make a contribution on the speech right now, before I make some more general comments, potentially, later—is that I can, in respect of this legislation, refer members to the speech that I gave on this legislation back in 2018. It does say a lot about this government that, a year later, the bill still hasn't passed. I don't know what this government is doing, but, given that this is the same legislation we dealt with a year ago, which was legislation to fix up the legislation they'd brought in a year before that, as the member for Mackellar rightly pointed out, this does rely on ASIC regulations. So I very much hope, if ASIC are listening, that if there is one thing they do it is to make sure, when this legislation eventually passes this parliament, that they have those regulations ready to go, because, quite frankly, it would be a very sad indictment on this government given the delay in bringing in these amendments— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 40 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Lyons Electorate: Bridgewater Bridge 40 13:30 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons The people of Hobart and Greater Hobart woke up the other day to the terrible news that the mayors of three big cities—Hobart, Kingborough and Glenorchy—want to get their hands on the money from the Bridgewater Bridge. The Bridgewater Bridge is a very important priority project for my electorate. I'm sick and tired of these three big-city mayors thinking there's basically $500 million or $600 million up for grabs that they can try and get their hands on. The big problem here is that this bridge has been long awaited but the state Liberal government has not got its act together and presented the business case properly, which leaves Infrastructure Australia saying, 'Hey, maybe this bridge doesn't pass muster,' which has these three mayors then saying, 'Well, hey, give us the money instead.' This bridge is a must. There's one lane going from Hobart into Bridgewater. We need it to be double lane. It's a very busy road. There's a growing area in Brighton, Bridgewater and Derwent Valley. People need this bridge to go ahead. The state government needs to get its act together. Present the business case properly. The message has to go out loud and clear to these three mayors of Kingborough, Hobart and Glenorchy: keep your hands off the Bridgewater Bridge. It's going to go ahead. I back it in. The people of Bridgewater back it in. The people of Brighton back it in. We need the Bridgewater Bridge built. Carter, Ms Deborah 40 13:31 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar And here I thought I was the only person with problems with mayors! Today I rise to acknowledge the work and achievements of Deborah Carter, the 2017 Pittwater Woman of the Year. Deborah has served the community of Mackellar with distinction over a number of years through her involvement in the Pittwater RSL Sub-Branch. In 2015 Deborah was elected as president of the Pittwater RSL Sub-Branch, and she is the first female to hold this position. She is currently the honorary welfare and membership officer at the Pittwater RSL, while also holding the position of vice-president of the Northern Beaches district sub-branch. Deborah has also worked as a nurse for a number of years at Manly and Mona Vale hospitals in areas such as cardiac stress testing, rehabilitation and patient education. This role included working as an educator at Manly Waters up until October 2016. Prior to her civilian nursing career, Deborah had a career in the Air Force, joining as a nursing officer in 1986 before being discharged in 1993. Since August 2015 she has been involved with the new Veterans Centre Sydney Northern Beaches at Dee Why RSL, advising on support services for veterans in our local community. I'm proud to represent an electorate that has hardworking individuals such as Deborah, and I congratulate her on her success. Thank you. Aged Care 41 13:33 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley The reality is the Morrison government has failed older Australians. Under the coalition, the waiting list for home care has grown to nearly 130,000 older Australians waiting more than a year to receive the home care package they have been approved for, and, once they finally receive the in-home care package they have been waiting for, there's no guarantee they'll receive the level of care they rightly deserve. Chifley resident Matthew has been dealing with ongoing issues with his parents' My Aged Care package for years. Once his parents finally had their plans processed, he experienced countless issues with his provider, Australian Unity. Matthew's dad, sadly, passed away just six months after finally receiving his Home Care Package. When he did pass away, Australian Unity charged a $400 exit fee for the termination of his package, and this isn't the only fee Australian Unity has charged Matthew's parents for their home care packages. His mum, Helen, is charged a monthly admin fee, an advisory fee and a management fee—fee after fee after fee, totalling $1,200 a month, on what is a $4,500 monthly home care package. It means a quarter of Helen's package is eaten up by fees instead of providing the services that she needs. Helen's and Matthew's story is one of many, and these are the stories of our mums, dads, brothers, sisters and friends. They are all Australians who deserve dignity and deserve better out of this government. Glenelg Football Club 41 13:34 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby This Sunday, 22 September 2019, the Glenelg Football Club will take on Port Adelaide in the SANFL grand final at Adelaide Oval. I'd like to congratulate the outgoing president, Nick Chigwidden; the incoming president, Peter Carey; the CEO, Glenn Elliot; the head coach, Mark Stone; and the captain, Chris Curran, on a fantastic season. Securing a place in the grand final tops off a truly impressive year by the club. Glenelg received the Stanley H Lewis Trophy for the best performed club, which is awarded on the combined results across the league, reserves and under-18 teams. Luke Partington won the prestigious SANFL Magarey Medal for his outstanding season, the first Glenelg player in 13 years to do so, as well as the coaches' RO Shearman Medal and Digital Pass Player of the Year—a huge congratulations to Luke on these achievements. Congratulations must also go to Liam McBean and Luke Reynolds, the league's top goal kickers this season, with 46 and 45 goals respectively. What a magnificent effort by Liam and Luke! We hope these incredible achievements will be followed by the club's first premiership win in 33 years this Sunday. I know everyone in our local community, particularly No. 1 Glenelg fan, Mayor Amanda Wilson, and my state colleague Steven Paterson MP, will join me in congratulating players, members and supporters of the Glenelg Footy Club on a tremendous season. We wish them all the very best for the grand final this Sunday. Go, Tigers! Dementia Action Week, Uniting Mayflower Village, Gerringong 41 13:36 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore This week is Dementia Action Week. In my electorate of Gilmore on the New South Wales South Coast we have the second highest number of people with dementia in Australia. I echo the words of Dementia Australia when I say that dementia doesn't discriminate. But we can change how we respond to and behave around people living with dementia. People with dementia are two times more likely not to see friends, compared with their carers and the general public, and three times more likely not to have a friend to call on for help. These are heartbreaking statistics. We need to stay connected to people living with dementia and find meaningful ways to engage with them so they don't feel isolated and alone. I want to talk about a wonderful event I attended last year at Uniting Mayflower Village, Gerringong. The incredible, passionate and professional staff at this facility held a 'colour day' and put in a lot of effort to make this a magical day for their residents. Local schoolchildren came to spend some time with the residents, and there were fun activities for everyone. It was amazing to see a whole-of-community event like this take place for the benefit of some of our most vulnerable. The day was all about inclusion, fun and happiness. There was even cake and plenty of colourful costumes. True community spirit was in the air, and I was pleased to meet with residents, aged-care workers, volunteers, the kids and their teachers to hear about how they are making this a wonderful home for residents. Global Climate Strike 41 13:37 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler I put to you this: what is it we want for our schoolchildren at school? I want them to learn about reading and writing and arithmetic. I want them to be taught how to think, not what to think. I don't want them to be pulled out for protests in school time; I want them to be at school. I want them to take every single opportunity to learn. I don't want them to listen to people like Tim Flannery and quotes like this, 'climate predators in our midst'. 'Climate predators' are the words he is now using, trying to ramp up the rhetoric. I think that is a terrible proposal. If you are a schoolchild, your job is to go to school. If you are a parent, you want them to be there. If you want to protest and join what is known as the Global Climate Strike, do it in your own time. Put it on a weekend; do it after school hours; take the opportunity. I say to those organising this: see how many individuals show up on a Saturday afternoon in the midst of netball, soccer, cricket and everything else. I recall, as a schoolchild, that any opportunity to get out of school was a great opportunity. It didn't matter what it was, but you took it and you got out really quickly. We want our schoolchildren to be academics, not activists. For those individuals who wish to protest about this issue: take the opportunity outside of school time. We don't want these students losing time from school when they could be learning, and that is what they are there for. Climate Change 42 13:39 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper Recently, the Australia Institute released their Climate of the nation 2019 report, which analyses how Australians view the state of our climate and environment. Their findings detail what I hear every single day—that Australians are deeply concerned about climate change. Eighty-one per cent of Australians are concerned that climate change will result in more droughts, flooding and fires. Sixty-four per cent of Australians believe that we should have a target of net zero emissions by 2050. Australians can see climate change happening around them. They see the images of farms decimated by drought. They see images of cities and entire countries being swallowed up in floods and rising sea levels. They understand the threat that climate change poses to their livelihoods, to their health and to their society, and they demand action. They want action, yet those who sit opposite are collectively burying their heads in the sand, with no desire or political courage to start to repair the damage. Unlike them, I stand with the millions of Australians who are committed to the cause of hope, which is made possible by climate action—hope for a just world, a fair world, a sustainable planet and the reshaping of our economies to meet these challenges head on. I demand action. The kids that are striking tomorrow—and I will be there with them—demand action. We'll see you there tomorrow, kids. You are doing the right thing by being activists, stepping up and taking strong action on climate change. Korman, Ms Rose 42 13:40 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt We often rise in this House and pay tribute to those in our community, but sometimes we overlook those closest to us.    Recently my wife, Yolonde, and I had the absolute pleasure of attending the wedding of my long-term employee Rose Korman to her partner Rick Sauve-De Rose. Rose and Rick have known each other for nine years, and Rick finally got down on one knee and popped the question last year during a getaway to Mission Beach. The wedding at Trinity Beach last month was amazing. It was exactly what the couple wanted—something low key but surrounded by family, friends and loved ones.    For those of us who are fortunate to know Rose and Rick, the beachside location was perfect and very much their style. I must say that Rose looked absolutely stunning on the day, and Rick scrubbed up okay himself. Rose and Rick are very much loved by their family and friends, and their love and respect for each other was very much evident on the day. I have had the fortunate opportunity over the years to watch Rose grow into a confident, respectful, caring and strong young woman and Rick grow into a hardworking, respectful, caring young man. I want to take this opportunity in the House to wish both Rose and Rick Sauve-De Rose the happiest of lives together, one that will be filled with fun, laughter, happiness and many cherished memories. The pitter-patter of little feet has already entered their lives in the form of their beloved pug, Chuck. I hope the pitter-patter of little human feet is not far away on the horizon. Warringah Electorate: Bear Cottage 42 13:42 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah Palliative care, respite care, end-of-life care—heartbreaking terms, but usually associated with elderly loved ones. But, tragically, for many parents across Australia these terms become familiar too soon in their family's life as they struggle with a terminal diagnosis for their child. Many of these families find solace, comfort and solidarity at the facilities provided at Bear Cottage in Manly. Bear Cottage is the only children's hospice in New South Wales. It's a special place that's dedicated to caring for children with life-limiting conditions. The cottage provides not only excellence in paediatric palliative care but also a loving, caring environment that nurtures the whole family. It's a special place, creating an environment that is surprisingly full of positivity, joy and love at a time when families need it most. With the help of the state government, our community is uniting to build a similar facility for young adults over 18: Big Bear Cottage. This will be Australia's first hospice for young adults. I commend the work of the local community, who have rallied in support of this cause. I especially thank Kylie Jones and Ryan and Karen Fowler for speaking at last week's inaugural fundraiser so bravely and passionately about their experiences at Bear Cottage. I also thank Kay Van Norton Poche for her generosity to Big Bear Cottage. I look forward to working with the community to deliver this much-needed facility. Moore Electorate: Higher Education 43 13:43 Mr GOODENOUGH 74046 Moore International education ranks as Australia's fourth-largest source of export income, exceeded only by iron ore, coal and natural gas exports. In 2018, expenditure by international students on tuition fees and living expenses totalled $35.2 billion, accounting for eight per cent of total export income derived from goods and services. Edith Cowan University in my electorate has nearly 6,000 international students, originating from nearly 100 countries, enrolled annually. These students contribute significantly to the local economy in Joondalup, as consumers of accommodation, retail, hospitality and services. Local businesses benefit substantially from market demand for goods and services created by a growth in student numbers. I'm pleased to join with the City of Joondalup and other key stakeholders in the Joondalup Learning Precinct to promote our regional city as an attractive destination for higher education on the international stage. I make the case for continued and increased federal investment to expand the Joondalup Learning Precinct by supporting research and development, including the commercialisation of Australian intellectual property. A key emphasis must be on continuing to develop our international reputation for quality and academic rigour in order to be successful in a very competitive environment. Petition: Climate Change 43 13:45 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills Today I'm tabling petitions on behalf of a very committed constituent of mine, Shannon Loughnane. Shannon walked all the way from Melbourne to Canberra during the election campaign to deliver thousands of signatures that he and a number of volunteers had collected. I saw him off in Coburg with my colleague, the member for Cooper, and he walked all the way here to parliament and was welcomed by the now member for Canberra. This petition highlights the existential crisis that we are facing and the actions necessary on climate change. The petition has 6,170 signatures and has been found to be in good order by the Petitions Committee. It's just an example of not just my constituents' concern but the majority of Australians who demand that the government acts on climate change, does something about climate change. And it is on behalf of all of my constituents, all the signatories and the vast number of Australians, that I speak in this place, as we all do here, about the need to act. Like Shannon and many others, I believe that action on climate change should be a key priority for any responsible government. There's no excuse for inaction, but there is hope. Australia can yet still be a leader in facing the challenge. The young people marching and protesting this Friday lead the way. We can invest in renewable energy, which is clean and creates jobs. We can act to reduce emissions. Instead, the government does nothing and we move further and further behind the benchmark set by people like Shannon. Well done, Shannon. To all the Australians, young and old, who care enough to take action: thank you. The petition s read as follows — Climate Change 43 Curtin Electorate: Surf Lifesaving 44 13:46 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin Summers on the Curtin coastline, stretching from Cottesloe to Scarborough, are idyllic, the stuff of poetry. Thousands of people from all over the world relax on the white sand, eating ice creams and fish and chips or having barbecues at sunset. They swim in the incredible blue waters and surf the waves when the swell is right. We in Curtin are very lucky that, over the summer months, we have over 1,900 volunteers patrolling our beaches for an extraordinary 41,000 patrolling hours. These volunteers belong to the six fantastic surf lifesaving clubs in Curtin: Cottesloe, North Cottesloe, Swanbourne Nedlands, City of Perth at City Beach, Floreat and Scarboro. As we approach the start of the patrolling season and the busy summer months, I want to acknowledge that our surf clubs and their members are a vital part of the fabric of our community. They provide advice and take preventive action to keep beachgoers safe. They provide first aid and deliver beach education programs. However, there is always more that we can do to keep people safe on our beaches. In 2018-19, there were 122 coastal and ocean drowning deaths in Australia, with 15 occurring in WA. We all know the multiplier effect: for every one of those 15 people, there are countless friends and families who suffer. So let's stick with the plan from the SLSA this year: Stop, look and plan. Thank you, Surf Lifesaving, especially the clubs in my electorate. Perth Electorate: Schools 44 13:48 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth Today is Australian Reading Hour. So, to all of the teachers and all of the young people who are out reading today, I just want to say: good on you. Reading is an incredibly important part of schooling and, whether it's the Practice or something a little bit lighter, we all love the skill and the benefits of being able to read. I want to give a shout-out to some of the schools in my electorate that are helping young people to read. Next year Bob Hawke College will open. Foundation Principal John Burke is doing a fabulous job at this school that will be an appropriate tribute to the former Prime Minister and fabulous for students in West Perth, East Perth, Perth, Northbridge, Leederville and Mount Hawthorn. To Gerard Richardson at Morley Senior High School and the Morley Leos: congratulations for all the fundraising you did, making sure that we have money for Mission Australia for their homelessness programs. It was great to be there for your sleep-out with Amber-Jade Sanderson, my state colleague. To Principal Craig Skinner at Bayswater Primary School—the real Principal Skinner: thank you for having me for your Book Week assembly. It was great to see the teachers and students all dressed up. To my old primary school, Lance Holt School, and year 3-4 teacher Christine: I can't wait to read your school history that you're working on. I'm so proud to have been able to contribute to that project. I look forward to the outcomes of your research. And, finally, to John Forrest Secondary College Principal Melissa Gillett and Mr Grzejszczyk: it was great to be there with the member for Whitlam, talking economics, talking in extreme detail about how the budget comes together. (Time expired) Canning Shakespeare Competition 44 13:49 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning Today I rise to congratulate the 20 finalists of the annual Canning Shakespeare Competition, which I held last month at the Mandurah Performing Arts Centre. The competition is an annual event I run for senior high school students interested in literature and drama. It's an opportunity for them to do something difficult in memorising a Shakespearean monologue and then performing it live in front of an audience. Importantly, it helps them engage with one of the greatest influences on the English language and our culture. It's great to see young people take a risk. Unfortunately, though, there could be only three winners this year. First place was won by Indi Thompson from Mandurah Baptist College, who performed as Phoebe from As You Like It; second place was won by Tom Crocker from Mandurah Catholic College, who performed as Benedick from Much Ado About Nothing; and third place was won by Ava Berryman from Mandurah Catholic College, who performed as Beatrice from Much Ado About Nothing. The performances were judged by three professionals from the WA artistic community: Glenda Linscott, Senior Lecturer in Acting at the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts; Julia Moody, an established actress in her own right, who recently returned from teaching at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art in London; and Hamish White, a young emerging actor from Tasmania, who is studying at WAAPA himself. I thank them for their time and for supporting young artists in the Peel region, and I look forward to students performing again next year. Helping Hoops Charity Shootout 45 13:51 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand Members will know that, whether it's in this chamber or back in Melbourne's west in my electorate, I always represent Australian ballers. That's why I'm excited to be joining hundreds of community-minded Australian basketballers at the Melbourne Sports and Aquatic Centre for the Helping Hoops Charity Shootout next month. Helping Hoops runs free basketball programs for over 1,000 underprivileged Aussie kids every year, including the Future Footscray program in my electorate, which is generously funded by the Ben Simmons Family Foundation and was lucky enough to be visited by the NBA superstar and pride of Australia on his recent trip to Melbourne. The program helps young ballers from a diverse range of backgrounds to build self-esteem and discipline, develop goal-setting and leadership skills, and promote a healthy and active lifestyle, all while promoting a sense of belonging and community and aiding social cohesion. The charity shootout is in its eighth year, and Helping Hoops is aiming to raise $150,000 for its program, on top of the hundreds of thousands of dollars it has raised in the past. I will be raising funds by asking people to sponsor me at charityshootout.com.au/timwatts to see how many free throws I can hit in 15 minutes. Even better, you can sign up for the free-throw comp yourself at a court near you. If you want a really good time, come along to the charity shootout all-star game and see me in action between 6 and 8 pm on Saturday 5 October. There will be plenty of entertainment on show. I want to thank all of Helping Hoops' sponsors: Nike, the Ben Simmons Family Foundation, New Era, Melbourne United, the Melbourne Boomers, Goalrilla and BxC, or Business Experience Consulting. Be there or be square! The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 I think I'm busy, but thanks. Nuclear Energy 45 13:53 Mr JOYCE E5D New England I'm going to do something that's rather unusual today. I'm going to rail in support of reducing carbon emissions and in absolute support of the union movement. I especially want to commend the Australian Workers Union. Have we got any members of the Australian Workers Union here? An opposition member: Yes! Mr JOYCE E5D Good stuff. I'm commending the Australian Workers' Union because they, like the USA, France, China, Russia, South Korea, Canada, Ukraine, Germany, the UK, Sweden, Spain, Belgium, India, Japan, the Czech Republic, Finland, Switzerland, Brazil, Bulgaria, Hungary, South Africa, Slovakia, Mexico, Romania, Pakistan, Iran, Argentina, Slovenia, the Netherlands and Armenia, support nuclear energy. Tomorrow, at the inquiry we are having, the AWU are coming as a witness. We know now that they are coming to re-endorse the position they gave in South Australia in support of nuclear energy. This should not be a divisive issue; this should be something that links both sides of the House—that we show we have the intuition and the nous to not only dig uranium out of the ground but use it ourselves to supply an abundance of electricity, to get even more people into jobs and to create a carbon-free alternative to coal. World Squash Day 45 13:54 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley 12 October is World Squash Day, and the organisers of World Squash Day have the ambitious plan to have one million new players in the next 10 years. Mr Laming E0H Close the gap on squash players! Ms MURPHY 133646 We need more squash players. It's the best sport in the world. I'm standing up here today to encourage everyone to get involved in World Squash Day. The theme of World Squash Day this year is 'The Big Hit'—for every squash club around the planet to open their doors and let people come for free to have a hit and try this great game. Squash Australia are on board, and they've asked: what are you doing to support World Squash Day? This is what I'm doing: standing up in the parliament, encouraging everyone to become familiar with the most dynamic, healthiest, best racquet sport you could ever play. I'm extending this invitation: in the next sitting week I'm inviting all members of Australia's federal parliament to join me on the two glass-backed squash courts we have here, have a go and find out how great this sport is. Tim Watts will never talk about basketball again, because he will be a squash player, as will everybody in this place. I look forward to the October sittings and every member of the Australian parliament joining me. I'll give you all a hit of squash, and you will fall in love with our magnificent game. Climate Change 46 13:55 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes I understand how persuasive peer group pressure can be for teenagers, with their desire to conform and fit in with the crowd. However, I would say to any student considering joining the so-called climate protest: don't be a sheep; think for yourself. You are being used and manipulated, and everything you are told is a lie. The facts are: there is no link between climate change and drought. Polar bears are increasing in number. Today's generation is safer from extreme weather than at any time in human history. There is no 97 per cent consensus. Such claims are a fraud. Crop yields have increased remarkably. Wildfires have declined 25 per cent over the past two decades. We are seeing fewer cyclones, not more. Cold weather kills many times more people than hot weather, including here in Australia. The sea ice is not melting away; in fact, where the ill-fated Franklin expedition sailed in the year 1845 is blocked by thick sea ice this year. Renewables ain't renewables, and they certainly don't make electricity cheaper. Mr Stephen Jones A9B You are completely bonkers! The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 The member for Whitlam will refrain. Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 And, if you are worried about sea level rise, I suggest that you get some old photos of Fort Denison, get the tide gauge data and go and have a look for yourself. Don't take my word; I encourage all students in my electorate to study the science and learn for themselves. National Week of Deaf People 46 13:57 Ms OWENS E09 Parramatta Auslan is a great language—30,000 people use Auslan—but Australia is also home to the world's oldest sign languages. There are 12 Indigenous sign languages still in use today. They are different from Auslan, though. For example, the word for 'possum' is this: Ms Owens spoke in Auslan— But, in the Ti Tree community in Central Australia, it's this: Ms Owens spoke in Iltyem-Iltyem— Nowadays some Indigenous sign languages incorporate some Auslan signs. So, to all the speakers of different Australian sign languages: happy National Week of Deaf People, and sign language rights for all! Illicit Drugs 46 13:58 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman Last week the Workplace Drug Testing Association conducted random illicit drug testing in this building. They did a great job. I tell you what—a few more swabs should be done on the other side! But it was done randomly on this side, because we know that, if it's good enough to drug-test the community, it's good enough to drug-test this building. It's a workplace here, just like every other workplace, and we do not set ourselves above those who receive welfare around the country. If we're going to drug-test them, we can drug-test politicians. We've done it. The ball is in their court. But there's another area of testing I'm not so bullish about: pill testing at music festivals. That's right: taking cowboy machinery, a tent and a white jacket and testing illicit drugs at music festivals. That's just plain dumb. That will do more damage than it would do to help. Although they're very well-meaning clinicians, the FTIR machine they use is just cowboy biochemistry. It scrapes the edge of the pill but doesn't tell you the dose. We know, from all the studies done, that dosage kills. Multidosing, mixing and polypharmacy is what kills. If you can't tell the dose of a pill, you might as well not give the information. You should be counselling and giving them a burger voucher. But don't use junk biochemistry and give a false sense of security. We don't want those dirty tabs going back out into the music festival and being onsold. That is simply irresponsible. There are too many young Australians in body bags. Telling people a drug is clean is false information, and you're heading for a massive multimillion-dollar lawsuit. The SPEAKER 00APG In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS 46 MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS 14:00 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I inform the House that the Prime Minister will be absent from question time today, as he is leading a delegation to the United States of America. I will answer questions on his behalf. The Assistant Defence Minister and Minister for International Development and the Pacific will be absent from question time today, as he is representing Australia at the official funeral for the late Prime Minister of Tonga. The Minister for Home Affairs will answer questions on his behalf. The Minister for Veterans and Defence Personnel will be absent from question time today, as he is representing Australia in Timor-Leste. The Minister for Home Affairs will answer questions on his behalf. STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 47 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Law Enforcement 47 14:01 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina The government welcomes this year's joint recipients of the National Police Bravery Award: officers Mark Turner and Linda Farrand from the Northern Territory police service. They have gone above and beyond in their everyday duties. They have put their lives on the line to protect a member of the community. They have demonstrated exceptional acts in exceptional circumstances. On behalf of all Australians: thank you for what you have done and what you will continue to do to protect our people and our communities. Today is National Thank a Cop Day. I would like to acknowledge all serving and former police officers, and those who have worn a uniform in any capacity. I would like to also acknowledge those former police officers who serve in our House of Representatives, including the members for Cowper, Dickson, Wide Bay, La Trobe and Richmond. 14:02 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I join with the Acting Prime Minister in acknowledging these great Australians who are with us in the gallery today. I had the opportunity earlier today to meet with Mark Turner and Linda Farrand to congratulate them personally on this wonderful achievement. They put their lives on the line to save someone who felt that living was not an option. I say to them: your patience, your compassion and your sheer courage through that longest of nights saved a life. You embody not just the highest values you can aspire to as police officers but the highest values any of us can aspire to as human beings. I join with the Acting Prime Minister in celebrating all those who serve in our police forces around the nation and, indeed, in our Australian Federal Police. We are about to celebrate the 30th anniversary of National Police Remembrance Day, remembering those who have lost their lives in the service of others. We acknowledge the families who have been left behind and their friends. It is a great decision, for anyone who makes a decision to go into our police forces, to live a life that is about assisting others. I pay tribute to each and every man and woman who is doing that today. I join with the Acting Prime Minister in acknowledging the members of this House who have served as police officers in the past and have gone on to far gentler duty in this chamber. Anyone who makes this decision is worthy of the thanks of the community. On behalf of the Australian Labor Party, I join with the Acting Prime Minister to ensure that all those who serve know that this is an absolutely bipartisan commitment—indeed, a commitment on behalf of every member of this House. 14:04 The SPEAKER 00APG Let me associate myself with the remarks of the Acting Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. To Mike and Linda, who are with us today, thank you so much for your service and for your bravery. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 47 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE National Disability Insurance Scheme 47 14:05 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. What is the value of the underspend on the National Disability Insurance Scheme in the final budget outcome? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left will cease interjecting. 14:05 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden Let me thank the shadow minister for his question. As he knows, today in the final budget update, the actual number for the NDIS was a spend of $8.5 billion. The great thing to remember about the NDIS is that, if we look at the cost per participant, in the 2018-19 budget an expenditure was estimated of $46,400 per participant; the actual amount spent per participant on supports was $46,800—a $400 increase. Not a single participant has seen a decrease. The way we explain the underspend— Ms Butler interjecting— Mr ROBERT HWT I'm getting to the underspend. The underspend figure of $4.6 billion can be explained as follows. When the bilateral estimates were put together, the bilateral estimates said there would be 302,172 Australians. Those bilateral estimates— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I'm just going to say to the member for Rankin and the Treasurer, please cease interjecting. I'm expected to hear the answer. The minister is not answering the question quietly, can I say, and it's still very difficult to hear. Mr ROBERT HWT It's very noisy, Mr Speaker. The bilateral estimates had 302,000 expected citizens, but, once the data arrived from the states and territories, only 199,000 citizens could be found; 100,000 people, from data provided by the states and territories, have not been able to be found or have been double-counted or, frankly, the data is wrong—100,000! However, on top of that, the bilateral estimates said that 69,195 new participants would come through. In actuality, 117,000 new participants have sought access. A 169 per cent increase in new participants has come through. And how is it that we've been able to fund this demand-driven scheme? Ms Butler interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Griffith is warned. Mr ROBERT HWT It's an uncapped, demand-driven scheme. The only way we've been able to fund it, not last year, not just this year, but for every year going forward—$17.8 billion this year, growing to $25 billion in 2022-23—is because this government, led by this Treasurer, has actually balanced the budget. Today's announcement was about balancing the budget for the first time in a long time—11 years, precipitated by those opposite. The budget is balanced this year and next year and the following years going forward. This government will not be lectured by those opposite when it comes to fiscal discipline and how we fund services. Mr Perrett interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Moreton will cease interjecting. Could he refer back to everything I've said during the week. Mr Perrett interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG No, don't talk! That's the point. I've been warning you all week. You know what will happen. Drought 48 14:09 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson My question is to the Acting Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, and Regional Development. Will the Acting Prime Minister inform the House how the Morrison-McCormack government is delivering stability and certainty for communities in regional Australia who are suffering through the drought? 14:09 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I thank the member for Dawson for his question. He knows that there are farmers out there who are suffering and who are experiencing the worst drought on record. I encourage every member of the House to visit a drought affected community to see firsthand the impact that it is having. Next month the government will launch the National Water Grid Authority. Drought is something that we should not ever play politics on. The authority is designed to avoid just that. It's a specialist body which will use the world's best minds, but, importantly, with local stakeholder engagement. That's significant, because, when you've got people like we have in the Granite Belt area of Queensland who are willing to back themselves, are willing to take that risk and are willing to invest $24.3 million into a water storage infrastructure project—that is, the Emu Swamp Dam Project—then both state and federal level governments should follow up that support and that investment. And that's what we're doing. We've put $42 million on the table for that, and another $5 million for enabling roads. We're pleased the Queensland government has come up with the tune of $18 million as well. This will provide a 12,000 megalitre rock-fill clay-core dam on the Severn River near Stanthorpe, in the member for Maranoa's electorate. It will include three pumped stations and a 117 kilometre pumped pipeline distribution network. It's going to inject almost $70 million into the local economy, but, most importantly, it will provide security and certainty for our farmers. We want to see shovels in the ground very soon on that project. I know that the National Water Grid Authority is going to make such a difference, but we're already making a big difference in the area of water security. The Myalup-Wellington project in Western Australia is backed by this government. We're already building—and it will be completed this year, all things being equal—the Scottsdale Irrigation Scheme in Tasmania and the South West Loddon Pipeline Project in Victoria. I talked the other day about the Mitiamo pipeline in Victoria as well. There's the Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme in South Australia, where Penfield grower Daniel Hoffman told me that this investment means that some farms will save up to $60,000 per year. That's just on water. He said: 'Previously we could never afford to water into the summer. This means we can grow produce all year round.' This is making such a difference for rural and regional Australia, particularly communities affected by drought. The Liberals and Nationals are delivering stability and certainty when it comes to the eight million Australians who live in rural and regional Australia and who back themselves every day. We're backing them as well. We're backing them through this drought and we're backing them for a better future, and we're doing it each and every day. It's good policy. National Disability Insurance Scheme 49 14:12 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. I refer to the minister's previous answer about demand in the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Is the government seriously suggesting that Australians with disability aren't out there waiting for care packages? And is the government seriously suggesting the National Disability Insurance Scheme can adequately meet demand with a $4.6 billion underspend? 14:13 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Funding for the NDIS is guaranteed. No Australian who is eligible for the NDIS will miss out. No Australian will miss out. I commend the minister for what he's doing. Ms Butler interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Griffith will leave under standing order 94(a). The member for Griffith then left the chamber. Mr McCORMACK 219646 We are strongly committed to the NDIS. As I said, and as the minister said in the first question in question time today, it is one of the most important social and economic reforms in our country's history. I'm proud to say that this reform was suggested by Prime Minister Gillard, who is in Parliament House today. I saw her this morning and commended her for the work that she's doing with Beyond Blue and other organisations in her post-political career. She has been a class act, I have to say. This was a good reform. I'm proud to say that I was the first New South Wales federal parliamentarian to sign up to the Every Australian Counts campaign, which happened at the time the NDIS was first mooted. For the vast majority of the more than 300,000 participants, the NDIS is delivering improved levels of supports, more choice and more control. Over 100,000 people are receiving disability support services for the first time ever, so it's good policy reform. I have to say that, when those opposite introduced this legislation, they didn't put in the amount of money towards the NDIS that was required. We are funding the reform. We are backing the NDIS. Again I say that funding for the NDIS is guaranteed. Economy 49 14:14 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer inform the House how the Morrison-McCormack government's stable and certain budgetary environment and management are guaranteeing essential services that Australians rely on, and is he aware of alternative approaches? 14:15 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Goldstein for his question. He chairs the House Economics Committee, he understands the importance of strong economic management and he has shone a light on Labor's retirees tax and the damaging impact it would have on retired Australians now. I am pleased to inform the House that the budget is in balance for the first time in 11 years, with a deficit of $690 million, which is equivalent to 0.0 per cent of GDP, a $13.8 billion improvement on what was forecast when the budget was handed down in May 2018 and a $3½ billion improvement on what was announced in April this year. The benefit of having responsible economic management is that you can fund and provide the services that Australians need and deserve, like record funding of $80 billion on health, like record funding of $20 billion for schools, like a record $19.8 billion for aged care and like $8.5 billion, a doubling on the year prior, for the NDIS, which the Labor Party never funded. That is the reality of strong economic management. I am asked if there are any alternative approaches. Let me tell you that the Labor Party had policies that delivered accumulated deficits of $240 billion. The Labor Party had policies that delivered, in their last three financial budget outcomes, a $70 billion deterioration in the bottom line. The Labor Party had policies that, even with a $180 iron ore price, could not deliver the four budget surpluses that Chairman Swan promised the Australian people. The Labor Party had policies that meant they couldn't afford to list drugs on the PBS, because fiscal circumstances didn't permit. The reality that the Australian people know all too well is that the Labor Party can't manage money, but the coalition can manage money, can create jobs and can reduce taxes for all hardworking Australians. National Disability Insurance Scheme 50 14:18 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer admit that the government's decision to understaff the NDIS is preventing Australians with a disability from getting the care they need? Why has the government propped up its budget by deliberately underspending $4.6 billion on the National Disability Insurance Scheme? 14:18 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I can confirm that there are 11,000 people helping to deliver the NDIS and that, in the last year, 115,000 Australians came onto the NDIS. There are now 300,000 Australians on the NDIS and, as the Acting Prime Minister said, more than 100,000 of them are getting support for the first time. The reality is that the NDIS has increased tenfold in the three years of transition, and everyone who has an approved program is getting support under a fully-funded NDIS. In 2018-19 we doubled the funding for and the spending on the NDIS to $8½ billion from $4 billion a year prior. The Labor Party knows all too well that only the coalition can deliver budget surpluses. Only the coalition can fund the services, like the NDIS, that Australians need and deserve. Mayo Electorate: Environmental Conservation 50 14:20 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo My question is to the Minister for the Environment. The Australian Walking Company has state government approval to build accommodation within the Flinders Chase National Park on Kangaroo Island. Development will clear several kilometres of remnant native vegetation in the national park. Minister, in your letter to me dated 9 September 2019, you advised that, on the direct advice of the developer, you will not review the proposal despite broad community concerns of environmental damage. Why are you only listening to the developer and not my community, and would you please reconsider investigating this proposal with respect to potential environmental damage in our national park? 14:20 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I thank the member for Mayo for her question, and she's a frequent correspondent to me on matters of concern to her in her electorate of Mayo. I'm always very happy—my door is always open—for her to have further detailed conversations about matters such as this. The matter to which she refers relates to an application for a development which was deemed not to be controlled under the federal government's EPBC Act. The process and methodology whereby actions are referred is well understood and longstanding, and I know that the member for Mayo understands it well. I want to make the point, Mr Speaker, through you to the member for Mayo that state governments have completely different approval processes, and sometimes people confuse the two, and reasons why they may not want to see a development are actually not matters of national environmental significance under federal law but relate to some totally different set of arrangements and approvals that belongs in the state jurisdiction. Having said that, I have conversed with my South Australian colleagues about this application, and I'm very comfortable that we are on the same page, and I'm very comfortable with the position that this government has taken, standing behind the current EPBC Act, on this matter. Employment 50 14:22 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby My question is to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer explain to the House how the Morrison-McCormack government's record of creating jobs has helped provide stability and certainty to the budget, allowing us to deliver the essential services that Australians rely upon? Are there any alternative policies? 14:22 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Boothby for her question. She brings to this place experience in industry, experience in the media and experience defeating a nasty campaign from GetUp!, a campaign which was backed and supported all the way by the Labor Party. The reality is that, when we came to government, unemployment was at 5.7 per cent, employment growth was at 0.7 per cent, the participation rate was lower than it is today and the gender pay gap was wider than it is today. But today the coalition is proud— Mr Brendan O'Connor interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Gorton is warned. Mr FRYDENBERG FKL to tell this House and the Australian people that the budget is back in balance for the first time in 11 years, and that 300,000 people got a job in 2018-19—100,000 more than was already expected by Treasury. This led to an increase in our receipts and a decrease in payments, as more people were in a job and fewer people were on welfare. The benefit of having a balanced budget is that you can deliver the services that people need and deserve, like the NDIS. In the jobs numbers that are out today, 35,000 people got a job in the month of August, and 36,000 people got a job in the month of July. That means that, since we got re-elected by the Australian people, more than 1,000 jobs have been created a day. I'm asked: am I aware of any alternative policies? The Labor Party still have $387 billion of higher taxes on their books. You don't balance budgets, create budget surpluses or create jobs with higher taxes—higher taxes on superannuants, higher taxes on retirees, higher taxes on homeowners, higher taxes on renters and higher taxes on workers, including those in Gladstone that the member for Maribyrnong confronted during the election. Paul Keating had it right when he said the Labor Party has lost the ability to speak to the aspirations of Australians. Paul Keating had it right when he said the Labor Party of today has lost the ability to fashion policies that speak to the aspirations of the Australian people. Only the coalition can manage the budget, only the coalition can create more jobs and only the coalition can lower taxes for all hardworking Australians. National Disability Insurance Scheme 51 14:25 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Treasurer. I refer to nine-year-old Angus, whose family were left to transport him around the family farm in a wheelbarrow because the National Disability Insurance Scheme could not approve and provide him with a wheelchair for 12 months. Isn't Angus just one victim of the government's $4.6 billion underspend on the National Disability Insurance Scheme? 14:26 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong The member for Maribyrnong would be aware that, in 2017-18, there was $4 billion spent on the NDIS. The member for Maribyrnong would be aware that, in 2018-19, there was $8½ billion spent on the NDIS. The member for Maribyrnong would be aware that everybody who has an approved program within the NDIS is fully funded by this government. The member for Maribyrnong would be aware that there are now over 300,000 people in the NDIS, over 100,000 of whom are getting support for the first time—115,000 people came onto the NDIS in the last year alone. As the former Leader of the Opposition, the member for Maribyrnong would also be aware—just like the member for Rankin, when he was learning at the feet of Chairman Swan—that the NDIS is a demand driven program, just like hospitals and the PBS. I announced in April this year an extra $1.9 billion for hospital funding because of the demand. In the numbers that were announced today there is an extra $700 million for the PBS because it is a demand driven program. But an inconvenient truth for the Labor Party is that, in their last budget, they had underspends of $500 million for carers and $400 million for veterans. In their last MYEFO, they had underspends of $1½ billion for schools and $1½ billion for hospitals. The reality is that NDIS funding has more than doubled on our watch, it is rolling out to nearly 500,000 people, and everyone who has an approved plan will get fully funded by this government. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 51 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 14:28 The SPEAKER 00APG I would like to inform the House that we also have present in the gallery this afternoon the South African High Commissioner. On behalf of the House, I extend a very warm welcome to you. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 51 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Education 51 14:28 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson My question is to the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison-McCormack government's stable and certain approach is encouraging the study of STEM subjects—science, technology, engineering and maths—in schools to ensure that we have the skilled workforce our businesses need in the future, especially apprentices in regional Australia? 14:29 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson I thank the member for her question. Mr Brendan O'Connor interjecting— Mrs ANDREWS 230886 Like all of us on this side of the chamber, I know that the member— The SPEAKER 00APG I would just ask the minister to pause. The member for Gorton has been warned. The minister has the call. Mrs ANDREWS 230886 Thank you, Mr Speaker. Everyone on this side of the House understands and recognises that the future of Australian industry depends on having the skilled workforce of the future. We understand that STEM skills will be required for about 75 per cent of the jobs of the future, and many apprenticeships and vocational education courses require significant STEM components and some STEM skills. This is particularly important in rural and regional Australia, where specialist mining, agriculture and space sector jobs are located. The promotion of science and STEM, particularly in our rural and regional areas, is vital for our economy. So, it was an absolute pleasure earlier this year to announce, alongside the member for Robertson, that the fun of science was going to be coming to Gosford and to Woy Woy, in her electorate, as part of the government's $8.9 million expansion of the Questacon Science Circus. And of course last week we celebrated Science Week, with close to 2,000 events across the nation and over one million Australians participating. I acknowledge the great work of Questacon and the corporate sponsors who joined with the government in backing Science Week. We understand how important it is to make sure that everyone is inspired about science and particularly that our young people are inspired about science. Let me say this: as a declared fan of The Bachelor, I really want to point out that there's been a heightened interest in STEM as a result of Australia's current bachelor being an astrophysicist. Reports this week suggested that there had been a significant increase in inquiries about the study of science and that Google searches for 'astrophysicist' had gone through the roof. I'm all for popular culture that gets people talking about science, and I note that one of the finalists vying for the bachelor's heart in the finale tonight is in fact a chemical engineer. So I say: go, Chelsie! For the sake of Australian industry and for jobs across our nation—and particularly for our jobs in rural and regional Australia—I encourage all young Australians to consider their STEM options. And as the bachelor said last night: science is sexy! National Disability Insurance Scheme 52 14:32 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin My question is to the Treasurer. Why won't the Treasurer admit that today's budget outcome would not be possible without making Australians with a disability wait for the care that they need and deserve and that they were promised so that he can add $4.6 billion to his budget bottom line? 14:32 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong Because the member for Rankin's claim is not true. Health 52 14:32 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey My question is to the Minister for Health—and let me thank him for having a wonderful visit to Grey only a couple of weeks ago. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison-McCormack government's stable and certain budget enables critical investment in health services in rural and remote Australia, including in my electorate of Grey? 14:33 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I'm delighted, along with the member for Grey, to be a member of the Morrison, McCormack and Frydenberg government on the day that the first balanced budget in 11 years has been delivered. As the great Peter Costello said, every year of Labor government needs at least two years of coalition government to repair it. We are only halfway to repairing the damage, and beyond that there's a lot more to be done. But, most significantly, as the member for Grey indicates and as we saw on the visit to his electorate, we have been able, because of a strong budget position, to invest in rural and regional health services. In a previous life the member for Grey was the head, the chair, of the local Kimba hospital. I was able to visit the hospital with him in Kimba, and we were able to see the sort of thing we are investing in as a government. In particular, one of the things many members of his community raised was the need for access to clinical trials in rural and regional Australia to give them access to immunotherapies, to breakthrough medicines, such as Spinraza for spinal muscular atrophy, and to other extraordinary developments. I am delighted that, because of the strength of the budget, we will be able to deliver a $100 million rural and regional clinical trials program. That will go around the country. It will give people in rural and regional Australia access to new medicines—at an earlier time—that they would otherwise never have been able to access. In addition, there's a $63.4 million regional radiotherapy program. That's about ensuring that, in 13 sites across regional Australia, patients with cancer will have access to new radiotherapy, which would otherwise not have been within reach of their homes. That will mean that patients have better access and earlier treatment, and sometimes patients who might not have sought that treatment will be able to get it. It makes a profound and important difference. In addition, the investment in headspace around the country, with 30 new headspaces, will make a difference to young Australians in rural and regional Australia. We know that the Port Lincoln satellite for headspace is coming on and builds on the opening last April of the Whyalla headspace, in the member's electorate. This matters to people on all sides. It also builds on what we are doing with men's sheds, with over 1,000 men's sheds, almost 80 per cent in regional Australia, making a difference to people who otherwise might not seek that help. All of these things are only possible because we have a strong budget—a budget that is back in balance and on its way to surplus. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 52 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 14:36 The SPEAKER 00APG I inform the House that we've been joined on the floor of the chamber this afternoon by members of the parliamentary delegation from the Japan-Australia Diet Members League, and they are accompanied by the ambassador from Japan. A very warm welcome. Also present in the gallery, from Japan we're joined by the 18th Australian Political Exchange Council visit. On behalf of the House, I extend a very warm welcome to you all. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 53 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Supermarkets 53 14:36 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. What is the government's position on extending the so-called 'big stick' legislation to supermarkets? 14:36 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I'll get the energy minister to add to my remarks, but I'll answer the question from the Albanese-Marles-Fitzgibbon opposition. The 'big stick' legislation is important legislation. It is very important, because we want to make sure that we have the most reliable and affordable energy for Australians. That's what we've always said and that is certainly what we have put in place. That is why, at last, energy prices are coming down. Under Labor, those opposite couldn't even explain how much the energy costs were going to be for average businesses and average families. The SPEAKER 00APG The Acting Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order? Mr Burke DYW Yes, and it goes to the issue of direct relevance as to whether someone can simply react to a trigger word or whether they have to deal with the context of the question at all. The context of the question is entirely about whether or not that legislation should apply to supermarkets, and the Acting Prime Minister is going nowhere near that issue. Mr Porter 208884 Mr Speaker, because there is no plan, the Acting Prime Minister is speaking to the only part of the question he can intelligently speak to, which is the 'big stick' legislation in relation to energy. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I don't know what it is about a certain group of members that they find the need to interject when both their Manager of Opposition Business and the Leader of the House have made points of order that they are expecting me to rule on. The question was very specific. It didn't contain a preamble. I was about to say to the Acting Prime Minister that he is of course entitled to a preamble on the issue, but I think the scope of a very specific question is very limited in this respect. The other thing I was going to say is that I thought I heard the Acting Prime Minister say that at some point he would refer it to the energy minister. There's a difficulty with that, unless he can convince me that the energy minister is responsible for supermarkets. That's the problem. He can certainly refer it to a minister who has portfolio responsibility for that area, and that, obviously, could be a number of ministers. But I think the Acting Prime Minister has been entitled to deal with the energy policy point up until now—which he has done—but he needs to either go to the specific part of the question or refer it, or we can move on to the next question. Mr McCORMACK 219646 We're taking on the energy companies, and we make no apology for that. Energy 53 14:40 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne My question is to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison-McCormack government is providing stability and certainty for Australian families by holding energy companies to account to their customers? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 14:40 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I thank the member for Lyne for his question. He knows, as a hardworking regional MP, that we are absolutely focused on the stability and certainty that Australians need and that Australian farmers need in order to balance their budgets, to make ends meet, including in their small businesses—and he has many, many small businesses in his electorate of Lyne. The importance of being able to make ends meet extends to ensuring we have fair deals on energy prices for all Australians—households, small businesses and the industry that supplies so many jobs in electorates like the member's. That's why this week we have brought forward the 'big stick' legislation, focused on the electricity industry. It's important because it ensures that the big energy companies pass on savings to their customers. When there are savings in the wholesale market, they must pass those on to their customers, not pocket the profits. It also ensures that the unacceptable and unsustainable conduct that has occurred in the industry comes to an end. It ensures that action can be taken against fraudulent manipulation and distortion of electricity markets. But there are some risks. Those opposite voted against this legislation 13 times in the previous parliament. They voted against lower electricity prices 13 times in the previous parliament. But now they're all over the place. Are they for the 45 per cent emission reduction target or are they against it? The member for Maribyrnong says he's proud of a policy which 50 times he failed to explain during the last election campaign. Meanwhile, the member for Hindmarsh says they need a ruthless and unsparing review of those policies. Are they for coal or are they against coal? The Deputy Leader of the Opposition one moment was saying he wished the coal industry would come to an end and a moment later was saying he was tone-deaf. And, finally, are they for the 'big stick' legislation or are they against it? Those opposite are all smear and no idea. Freedom of the Media 54 14:43 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the person currently leading the McCormack government. An honourable member: Ho, ho, ho. Mr ALBANESE R36 He wanted me to say that! No, the Acting Prime Minister, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER 00APG That's better. Mr ALBANESE R36 What is the government doing to ensure that journalism is not a crime? 14:43 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina As a former journalist of 21 years standing—11 as a daily newspaper editor—I of course believe in the freedom of the press. The government is committed to the freedom of the press. Freedom of the press is central to our democracy—always has been, is now, always will be. It's also the government's first duty to keep Australians safe. That's the first priority. These considerations have to be carefully balanced. The government has asked the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security to inquire into the impact— Mr Porter 208884 I thought that was bipartisan. Mr McCORMACK 219646 of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press. And, as the Attorney-General has just said, we thought that that was bipartisan. At the committee's request, and as agreed by the Attorney-General, the reporting date for this inquiry has been extended to 28 November. The search warrants executed by the Australian Federal Police go to investigations under old laws that the Liberal-Nationals government repealed and replaced with provisions that have strong protections for journalists. As this matter is now before the courts, it would not be appropriate to comment further. But operational decisions are a matter, as they have to be, for the AFP and are made independent of executive government. That's the way it should be. The warrants were executed without the knowledge or the instigation of any government minister. Education 54 14:45 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker My question is to the Minister for Education. Will the minister update the House on how our coalition government is providing stability and certainty to regional communities by delivering quality regional education, including to my electorate of Barker? 14:45 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I thank the member for Barker for his question. I know he's a passionate advocate for his electorate and for education, and in particular when it comes to regional study hubs. It was wonderful to join him for the opening of the Barossa Regional Study Hub. I know he is looking forward to opening another one next year. We've also seen one at Murray Bridge open. So well done to the member for Barker. We are providing record investment into higher education: $17.7 billion this year, $18.2 billion next year, $18.8 billion the year after and $19.1 billion in 2022. The reason we can do this is that we've got the budget back in balance. And can I congratulate the Treasurer for his announcement today. We're heading towards surplus. Well done, Treasurer. Not only are we providing record investment, but there are 1.5 million students now enrolled in higher education. We've got to make sure that all Australians can access higher education. Recently I publicly released the National Regional, Rural and Remote Tertiary Education Strategy, the Napthine review, with seven recommendations and 33 key action items. This strategy seeks to change the discrepancy between those in city areas who access higher education and those in regional and rural areas who access higher education. If you're born in the city, you're twice as likely to get a higher education degree as you are if you are born in a region or a rural area. We have to address this, and the government has already begun addressing it. Since 2016, we have committed more than $500 million in new funding to improve regional higher education. This includes $39.2 million to establish 21 regional study hubs. We are also providing $53.9 million in income support to ease financial pressure on families. We've got support for regional students through the Rural and Regional Enterprise Scholarships, and also $93.7 million for the Destination Australia program so that regional and rural Australians can capitalise on our international education market, a $35 billion market. We want to make sure that we can lift the attainment when it comes to regional and rural students. I know everyone is passionate about it on this side, and we want to improve it so that we get better outcomes and results for country kids. Infrastructure: Urban Congestion Fund 55 14:48 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. How many Urban Congestion Fund projects have commenced construction since the fund was created in May last year? 14:49 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston I thank the member for Ballarat for her question. I can confirm that there are 130 major projects underway right now, as we speak. These are projects going on right around our great country, and they include NorthConnex and WestConnex, and of course the Monash upgrades. We're just about to get going on the Tullamarine rail out to the airport— Ms Catherine King 00AMR Mr Speaker— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister might just try and— Mr TUDGE M2Y It's only been 28 seconds. The SPEAKER 00APG If the minister just takes a seat: there is not a time limit at which a point of order on relevance can be made, but he makes a reasonable point. But I'll hear the member for Ballarat on a point of order. Ms Catherine King 00AMR On relevance: it was a very specific question about the Urban Congestion Fund. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Ballarat will resume her seat. The minister has the call. Mr TUDGE M2Y I was mentioning that 130 projects are underway now. They're supporting 50,000 jobs. If the member would like me to go through some of those projects, I'd be happy to do so. There's the Pacific Highway, WestConnex, the Northern Road, the Bruce Highway, the Northern Connector, the Toowoomba second range crossing, NorthLink, the M80 Ring Road, the Monash Freeway, the Western Highway—I could keep going all afternoon in relation to the projects we have underway right now. There are 50,000 jobs going on. The member asked me specifically, in relation to— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will pause. Mr TUDGE M2Y the Urban Congestion Fund. Those projects, the 130 underway right now, are part of our $100 billion infrastructure pipeline. Our Urban Congestion Fund is also part of that—$3 billion to tackle those really congested pinch points in our suburbs and commuter carparks to ensure people can get home sooner and safer. The 166 projects we announced before the election— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order other than relevance. Mr Albanese R36 Yes—tedious repetition. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. Mr Albanese R36 The answer is zero! The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition well knows that that standing order does not apply to question time. He well knows that. What it tends to lead to, if it's repeated, is automatic ejection. That's what tends to happen—because I find it tedious! The minister has the call. Mr TUDGE M2Y There is work underway on 166 smaller-scale projects as well—on every single one. The first ones will be under construction by Christmas this year, and we expect the vast majority to get going within the next couple of years, many of which we have already announced. Let me say, though, that there is one project which is not underway. There is one very big project that is not underway, and the member for Ballarat knows this one absolutely intimately. It is the East West Link in Victoria. We have $4 billion on the table for this project, which is the entire government share required to get this project done. What it would do is finally connect the Eastern Freeway to the other side of Melbourne and support 80,000 commuters who get stuck on the Eastern Freeway every single day. I ask the member for Ballarat: why won't she step up and put pressure on the Victorian government to get this project going? She's constantly saying she wants more infrastructure projects going. Well, this is one where we've got $4 billion ready to go. Why won't she pick up the phone to the Premier, her Labor counterpart, and say, 'Get this project going.' It would create thousands of jobs, it would support 80,000 motorists every single day, and it would support the economy of Victoria and Australia as well. Water 56 14:53 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee My question is to the Minister for Water Resources, Drought, Rural Finance, Natural Disaster and Emergency Management. Will the minister update the House on the Morrison-McCormack government's stable and secure approach to addressing water security? 14:53 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa I thank the member for Mallee for her question and her deep understanding of the importance of water to sustain life and lifestyle in her own electorate. As we work our way through one of the most severe droughts in our nation's history, the importance of leadership and investment in water infrastructure is becoming more evident than ever. It's important to understand that it has never, ever been the responsibility of the federal government to build a dam or a pipeline. Since Federation, it has always been the responsibility of the states. They've enjoyed ownership of that resource. Sadly, since 2003 we have seen only 20 dams built in this country. Sixteen of them have been built in Tasmania because of the leadership of the Liberal government in Tasmania. More concerning, however, is that we will see, particularly across the eastern seaboard, a 37 per cent reduction in storage capacity per person by 2030 unless there is leadership. We as a federal government saw this in 2016 and started the National Water Initiative. We put $800 million out and took that to $1.3 billion. That was coupled with $2 billion from the Regional Investment Corporation, which those opposite voted against, I might add. Only last week the Deputy Prime Minister announced the National Water Grid, because we needed to show the nation the leadership that is required to build the water infrastructure to sustain life and lifestyle, not only in agriculture but in urban Australia. We were at a critical junction. It took leadership to stand up and to stand with the states and say it is time to act and deliver. Sadly, we saw Victoria today say, 'We don't want to build a dam, because we don't think it's ever going to rain again.' Now, when it's dry, is the time to build the infrastructure. It's important that leadership is shown. I advise the House that, after discussions with the New South Wales government this week, we will be working with them in partnership to prioritise a number of projects right across New South Wales to give security to regional New South Wales residents who are facing critical water storage levels. The Deputy Premier himself gave an undertaking that he will stand shoulder to shoulder with those communities to make sure that they do not run out of water. He has shown leadership, with this federal government, and said, 'We will build the water infrastructure of the future, to futureproof population growth and to futureproof our regional and economic growth.' This is an important milestone in our nation's history. We now have leadership from the states, which are going to work shoulder to shoulder in sustaining this precious resource for our lifestyles and our lives. Dams 56 14:56 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Can he confirm that when in opposition the coalition promised to build 100 dams and when in government the member for New England promised dams just about everywhere? But in six years the government has not built one dam. Isn't this because the Deputy Prime Minister has been bullied out of building any dams by his senior coalition partner? 14:57 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I tell the member for Hunter that I don't get bullied by anyone—no-one. I'm not scared of you. I'm not scared of anyone, Member for Hunter. Certainly, I'm pleased that I'm in a coalition government where the Prime Minister also believes in building dams. Liberal prime ministers have always believed in building dams, and that's why we're getting on and going to build a dam. We're going to do it with the Queensland government. We're also going to do it with the irrigators of the Granite Belt— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Acting Prime Minister will pause. Members on my left will cease interjecting. Mr McCORMACK 219646 They're very noisy today, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER 00APG No. I haven't called you yet. Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Hunter will contain himself, otherwise he'll be out of the chamber. Mr McCORMACK 219646 No, keep him here. He's a good fellow. We had a cup of tea yesterday. The SPEAKER 00APG No-one outside of the chamber can hear a word of what you're saying. Because I haven't called you, your microphone is not on. The Acting Prime Minister has the call. Mr McCORMACK 219646 We are getting on, as I said in my earlier answer, with building the water infrastructure to help further droughtproof this nation. There will be shovels in the ground for the Emu Swamp Dam—all things being equal—before year's end. That is going to be a very special day. August 3 was a red-letter day—you could call it a blue-letter day—for water infrastructure in this nation because that's the day Dr Anthony Lynham, the minister responsible for water in Queensland, signed on the dotted line, after perhaps years of negotiation, to get the Emu Swamp Dam project ratified. I commend Brent Finlay and irrigators in that area for having the confidence to back themselves to the tune of $24.3 million. Pastoralist and pioneering Riverina irrigator Sir Samuel McCaughey, of whom there is a statue near Yanco, was correct when he said in 1909 that water was more precious than gold. Of course he was right then and it is still the case today—water is our most precious resource. That's why we're going to get on with the job of building dams. I was delighted that the CSIRO last year identified in three catchments the potential for six dam sites. We're going to get on and build the water infrastructure that Australia needs. I remember when those opposite were in power and the member for Watson came to Griffith and they burned the draft of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, because they were so aggravated by his water resource ideas; they were so absolutely aggrieved by the position he took. If those opposite had won on 18 May, buybacks would have been back. They would have sent most of the water of the Murray-Darling—what little water there is—out of the mouth of the Murray, because that is their policy. Well, we're not going to do that, and we're not going to be deterred by the Victorian water minister, Lisa Neville, who today, ruling out dams in that southern state, said: New dams do not create any new water. They simply take it from somewhere else … I ask those opposite: do they agree with that position? Environment 57 15:00 Dr McVEIGH 125865 Groom My question is to the Minister for the Environment. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison-McCormack government's stable and certain approach to protecting our natural environment is leading to better outcomes in rural and regional Australia? 15:01 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I thank the member for Groom, from the great state of Queensland, for his question in the House today and congratulate him on his outstanding representation of the people in Toowoomba and the range and recognise his interest in farmers and the environment working together. It's interesting: members on this side who represent rural Australia and walk many miles in the shoes of our constituents, managing so much of our land mass, understand that it isn't about one versus the other, that it isn't about conservation over here and farming over there, or threatened species over here and agriculture over there; it's about getting the balance right. It's about working together and coming back to the fact that we can't do it without our farmers, who look after well over 60 per cent of Australia's land mass. In contrast, people think of national parks—sometimes great places for feral animals, unfortunately—but they amount to only about 18 to 20 per cent of Australia. It's rural Australians doing the heavy lifting and the hard yards, particularly in this time of drought. I want to reassure everyone involved in environmental approvals that the statutory review of the EPBC Act is due to be announced next month. That happens every 10 years, and we on this side of the House believe that it's an opportunity for real reform—clear and sensible reform—around environmental approvals, because the act is not really servicing too many people at the moment. It's taking too long to reach decisions, its process is frustrating and it's subject to an enormous amount of litigation. Whether you land on the side of the argument that would like to see an approval go ahead or you would like to not see an approval go ahead, you certainly want that decision to be made swiftly and efficiently, and that's what we're undertaking to do. We'll be announcing the review shortly. There'll be a lead reviewer. There'll be four panel members, one with expertise in agriculture, one with expertise in environmental law, one with expertise in Indigenous land management and another from our natural resource agencies. This is a really important review, and I know that everyone will want to have a say on it. Yesterday I wondered about the opposition's environment policy. I talked about one of our own, our communities environment policy. And I've been diligently searching through the paperwork to see whether there are any more environment policies from members opposite, and I have found one. It's got a $50 million price tag attached to it. Is it about feral cats? Is it about exclusion fencing? Is it about threatened species? No: it's about $50 million to create a new act of parliament, the Environment Protection Act. Well, I can tell members opposite that the work we will be doing—the clear, sensible reform under the stability and certainty of this government—will not cost a single cent. Infrastructure: Rail 57 15:04 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. Can the Acting Prime Minister confirm that the government has managed the delivery of the inland rail project so badly that it is alienating key support groups, including the New South Wales Farmers Association, AgForce, the Victorian Farmers Federation, the Country Women's Association and the National Farmers Federation? 15:04 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I just wish the member for Bendigo were perhaps a little more positive about the inland rail. This is going to be a transformational nation-building 1,700-kilometre corridor of commerce. It is going to get product, for the first time, from paddock to port within 24 hours. This is absolutely critical for rural and regional Australia. She and all the other rural and regional members on the Labor side, of whom there are not many, should get on board. In fact, every single member of the parliament should get on board. Members on our side are certainly in favour of inland rail, which will reduce rail freight costs by up to $94 per tonne. The business case for inland rail was originally predicated on a saving of $10 per tonne. The CSIRO report indicated that there potentially could be savings of up to $94 a tonne on post-processed food. But wait for this: there could be average savings of $76 per tonne—so a $76-per-tonne saving as opposed to a $10-per-tonne saving in the original business case. In my electorate, where the Parkes to Narromine section is rapidly underway, I can vouch for how many jobs have been created just in that particular area. Yes, I understand that there are concerns. I appreciate that there are people for whom inland rail will have an impact. That is why the Australian Rail Track Corporation is conducting community consultative committees. That is why I met this morning with the mayor of Goondiwindi on his concerns. There are people who are concerned about inland rail. But we don't live in a banana republic. I appreciate that those opposite do. They build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything! If you can remember that, you can use it! Inland rail is going to provide faster, safer and more reliable freight efficiencies. It is even going to have savings for the environment: 750,000 tonnes less carbon and a third less fuel than on the road. This is improving our rail network. This is nation-building infrastructure. You only have to look at some of the statistics: 480,000 cubic metres of ready-mix concrete. I have to say that on 15 January last year, when the first shipment of steel was dropped off at Peak Hill, the ARTC and the proponents of the inland rail, including Ken Keith, the mayor of Parkes, were absolutely delighted, absolutely thrilled, that the steel was from Whyalla steelworks, Liberty Steel—South Australian steel. That means Australian jobs. Many of those jobs are held by union members, so I would have thought that those opposite would have gotten on board with it. These are Australian workers and Australian jobs, and it is for Australia's future. Immigration 58 15:07 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor My question is to the . Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison-McCormack government's stable and certain immigration policies are supporting regional communities to fill crucial skills and workforce shortages and to grow regional economies? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 15:08 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks I thank the member for his question. The member makes a really good point about the importance of stability and certainty, because stability and certainty are important across all government policies, but nowhere more so than immigration, where it is so important that we have an orderly, stable and certain approach to immigration policy. We run an immigration policy that is sovereign, focused and fair, unlike those opposite, who presided over the worst public policy failure in Australia's postwar history, when they completely lost control of our immigration system—the extraordinary and appalling humanitarian catastrophe that we saw under those opposite. Our immigration program reflects the fact that different parts of Australia have different needs. In this year's program, we have had the lowest number in the permanent migration program for the last decade. That is to reflect the fact that we have seen significant population pressures, particularly in Sydney and Melbourne. So we have reduced the level of permanent migration in our nation. And, in the year to come, we'll see a further reduction as we further reduce the cap to 160,000. Within that, what we will see us an increased focus on regional Australia. In fact, in the year that just ended we saw a 44 per cent increase in a regional sponsored migration scheme that puts regional employers together with skilled migrants. This year we've created 23,000 new visas for people who want to work hard, play by the rules and commit to regional Australia for at least three years, and then they'll be eligible for permanent residency. We have also created seven designated area migration agreements, or DAMAs, including in the area of the member for O'Connor's electorate, in the mining industry, and in the member for Wannon's electorate, in the dairy industry, where there are so many local dairy families that do need support for a migration system to help them run their businesses so they can grow those businesses and support more Australians. We're also giving working holiday-makers an incentive to commit to regional Australia, because they'll get an additional year on their visa if they do so. It is the same with the international students: if they commit to regional Australia, they'll get an additional year on their postgraduate visa as well. These are all very important initiatives that are about backing regional Australia where migration is needed to help fill skills gaps and to help grow regional communities. In our humanitarian program as well, we see that through great examples like the Yazidi community, in the Deputy Prime Minister's own electorate, which have added so much to our community. Across the board in our migration program, we'll back regional Australia every step of the way. Mr McCormack 219646 I ask that further questions of the Morrison-McCormack government be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER 59 STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER Rees, Mr James, Parliament House Media Rules 59 15:11 The SPEAKER 00APG If members could stay for a second, I've got a couple of short statements they'll be interested in. James Rees, the current secretary to the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, will complete his final day at work on 11 October, before we resume back here. James commenced his public sector career with the government department of aviation in 1980. He is retiring after serving a long and dedicated career of 39 years in the Public Service, including the past 28 years in here with the Department of the House of Representatives. Since commencing work at parliament in the Bills and Papers Office in 1991, he's progressed through various roles, dividing his years of service almost equally between various chamber support and committee support offices, with approximately 14 years in each. For those members who have not worked with James on committees, he would be known to you from his role as clerk at the table in the Federation Chamber and deputy clerk at the table here in the House chamber. I'm sure all members would like to join with me in thanking James and recognising his service to the House and its members and committees, and wish him a very long, healthy retirement. James is with us in the gallery today. On a completely unrelated topic, I'd like to remind members that there are rules related to where images and vision are able to be captured within Parliament House and, indeed, rules related to the use of photos and footage that apply to all building occupants and their visitors. The media rules include a prohibition on photography and filming in the private areas of Parliament House, including, but not limited to, the chambers and adjacent lobbies, security screening areas, the staff and members dining rooms, Aussies, the corridor and link ways and other private corridor areas. These rules also prohibit the digital manipulation of photographs or footage of parliamentary proceedings, and the use or republishing of these for political advertising. In reminding members, I also ask that they remind their staff of these rules. I realise there's a natural predisposition for staff of parliamentarians to assume they can photograph or video and then publish whatever they want, but this isn't the case. There are, indeed, penalties for noncompliance with these rules, which include suspension of an individual's pass, and that penalty has been imposed on more than one occasion in the last 12 to 18 months. The media rules are available on the Parliament House website, and the link was emailed to members by the Serjeant-at-Arms on 23 July. But a hard copy of the media rules will also be distributed soon to all members. Any queries on where filming and photography can occur can be addressed to the Serjeant-at-Arms at any time. I thank members. DOCUMENTS 59 DOCUMENTS Presentation 59 15:14 Mr PORTER 208884 Pearce A document is tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the document will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 59 PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 15:15 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the member for Monash claim to have been misrepresented? Mr BROADBENT MT4 Most grievously. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Monash can proceed. Mr BROADBENT MT4 I have been misrepresented by Mr Phil Coorey in yesterday's Financial Review, where he called me a 'wet'. That's an old fashioned name, as you would be aware, Mr Speaker, for a protectionist as opposed to a free trader. I'd just like to mention to you, Mr Speaker, that I am a free trader—when it suits me! COMMITTEES 60 COMMITTEES Northern Australia Committee 60 Membership 60 15:16 The SPEAKER 00APG I have received a message from the Senate informing the House that Senator Green has been discharged from the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia and that Senator Dodson has been appointed a member of the committee. Selection Committee 60 Report 60 15:16 The SPEAKER 00APG I present report No. 6 of the Selection Committee relating to the consideration of bills. The report will be printed in the Hansard for today. Copies of the report have been placed on the table. The report read as follows — The report was unavailable at the time of publishing . MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 60 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Regional Australia 60 15:16 The SPEAKER 00APG I have received a letter from the honourable member for Hunter proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The Government's failure to look after the interests of regional Australia. I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:16 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter In regional Australia, our landscapes are burning, our dams are empty, our townships are out of water—or near to it—and our farmers are facing a calamity. Yet these farmers and, indeed, these rural communities have become the Prime Minister's 'forgotten people'. He said, on becoming Prime Minister, that he would make them his No. 1 priority. It was without qualification. It's not as if we didn't see the calamity coming. The Bureau of Meteorology has been warning since 2014 that this current drought was bound to be lengthy, bound to be severe and bound to be very, very hot. To prove just how out of touch the Deputy Prime Minister—currently the Acting Prime Minister—really is, last week he told Ben Fordham on 2GB that it's not as bad as I'm making out, because it rained in 2015! In fact, the Deputy Prime Minister told Ben Fordham's audience that, in some places in 2015, we received too much rain. That is how out of touch this government has become. In six years we've had a drought envoy, a drought coordinator, a drought task force and a drought summit. But what we haven't had is any action from this government on drought. You will recall that the current Prime Minister once led a campaign when he was with the tourism industry. He engaged Lara Bingle to ask the question, 'Where the bloody hell are you?' Rural Australians everywhere are today asking the Prime Minister the same question: 'Where the bloody hell are you in our hour of need?' I recently travelled to Stanthorpe, in the electorate of Minister Littleproud. There I saw empty dams. I saw a town nearly without water; in a few months time, in the absence of meaningful rain, it will be out of water. I saw apple trees pulled from the orchards. Growers told me that they were not planting this season because they were not confident that any rain would be available. Importantly, one or two of them told me that their next big concern is their workforce. They're concerned that their workforce will move elsewhere and, when they move elsewhere, they will never return. This has implications not only for the communities directly affected; this has implications for the country's food security—our very food security. Of course, it's not just farmers, their immediate customers and those who feed off the agriculture sector; this will now fuel the growing inequity between city and bush. It will widen the gap in health. It will widen the gap in education. It will widen the gap in telecommunications. It will widen the gap in infrastructure. I know everyone in this place, of all political persuasions, is having difficulty with the NDIS and this government's mishandling of it. I say to my city colleagues: I know you have plenty of problems, but, as the member for Maribyrnong said during question time, walk a mile in the shoes of a country member and see what a failing NDIS is really about. Again, these are the Prime Minister's 'forgotten people'. We ask ourselves the question: how could this possibly have happened? How could a coalition government so desert its rural and regional constituencies? I'm not sure, but I've got a few ideas. What I do know for sure is that it wouldn't have happened in Black Jack McEwen's day. It wouldn't have happened in Doug Anthony's day. It wouldn't have happened in Tim Fischer's day. The fact is: today's National Party and its leadership are being bullied by the current Prime Minister. They are being bullied into submission. There was a time, I believe, when the Nationals agreed to form a coalition because they wanted to represent the interests of the bush within the government. But, sadly, these days they only sign up to the coalition agreement to be in government. That's the big difference. They have well and truly deserted rural and regional Australia. We all remember that, when the current government first came to office in 2013, the member for New England was the agriculture minister. The first thing he did was to take a wrecking ball to the COAG drought reform process, the agreement reached between the Commonwealth and the states and supported by every farm organisation in the country. The member for New England literally tore up that agreement and abolished the COAG committee—can you believe it?—and that's where progress on drought reform stalled. Our farmers and our rural communities have now lost six years—six years we will never get back. As I pointed out during question time, they said they'd build a dam here, a dam there and a dam everywhere, and of course they haven't even turned a sod, let alone built a dam, in six years. Remember how they wanted the Australian community to know that they were going to be the government that builds dams? But now, having failed to do so, it's not their responsibility; it's up to the states and always has been! Then the member for New England produced an agriculture white paper. He wanted to let a thousand flowers bloom. But we know that the Prime Minister's office got hold of that white paper and produced a vanilla document—again, the National Party being bullied by their senior coalition people. After six years, where is their plan for regional Australia? We thought we'd found out just before the election, when the government decided to create a joint Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation. Remember? It was announced with such big fanfare. Finally we were going to get a strategy for regional Australia. What happened? After all the hard work by those committee members—including the member for Paterson and, I think, the member for Bendigo—the report is still just gathering dust. But don't worry; in this new parliament the Prime Minister has decided to form another committee. It's not called 'regional development and decentralisation' this time; it's just called 'regional development'. Now they'll kick the issue down the road for another couple of years while the committee does its work and then finally reports just in time for the next election so it can be kicked down the road again beyond the next election. The Treasurer is boasting today about the final budget position—a final budget position which I don't think gives this government any credit, particularly when it's coming at the expense of those who are relying on the NDIS. But there's another point to be made about that. What is the point of boasting a budget surplus when it comes at the expense of desperate people living in rural Australia? This government is currently taking farmers off farm household allowance; this government decided you can only get it for a total of four years. So now farmers are being forced of income support by this government—and this minister, in appropriations yesterday, justified that. He said, 'We had an expert review and we're going to follow the expert review.' But what he should have said is that in 2012, when these matters were first discussed and agreed, we could not possibly have conceived what was coming in terms of the severity of this drought. We should adjust, Minister; you can adjust. You can't go to farming families and say they no longer deserve income support notwithstanding the challenges they face. There is one other point to be made. This government went to the last election promising to do nothing. They said: 'Elect us and nothing will change.' Sadly, Minister, that is the one promise your Prime Minister has kept. He has delivered nothing. Mr Littleproud interjecting— Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Oh, the Future Drought Fund—which comes into effect after July next year. He should tell us when he gets to his feet how much of the Future Drought Fund will go to farmers. Minister, that's where you should start your contribution. You have failed rural and regional Australia. 15:27 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa I will not be lectured to by the Labor Party, who, in October last year, voted against the Future Drought Fund, in the lowest political act I have ever seen in this place, politicising the misery of Australian farmers. It took a change of leadership for the Australian Labor Party to support the Future Drought Fund. It is absolutely disgraceful that you would politicise the misery of Australian farmers. You have been hiding under a rock for six years, and it took a political near-death experience for you, in the seat of Hunter, where you lost your values—you gave up your values, your principles, not only for agriculture but also for mining. You went into hiding from the mining industry as well. The good people of Hunter found you on 18 May and they are going to come for you again. Now that you have had this near-death experience, you've had this epiphany that you're going to come back and you've got these morals and principles and you're going to take the Labor Party to where they need to be. Well you're too late, mate! Let me make it clear— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 I will make the point to the minister that he should address the chair. Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 I take that point, Mr Deputy Speaker, but I am making a very forceful point and one that needs to be made. Those opposite voted in this place against the Future Drought Fund—against it! And then they come in here and sanctimoniously say they are the saviour. Well blow me down! You are kidding me, my friend. That is an absolute disgrace. That is a fund that will give $100 million a year to the bush to help them prepare resilience for future droughts—$100 million a year. Let me make it clear: it will go to the agricultural sector to build resilience and the communities that deserve it. But you voted against it. It took a change of leadership for somebody in the Labor Party to finally grow a spine—because you'd been hiding under a rock, Member for Hunter. That takes our commitment to drought to $7 billion—$2 billion in the here and now—and not just in terms of farm household assistance but also— An opposition member interjecting— Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 You want to talk about loans? This is another example of those opposite—the Regional Investment Corporation gives concessional loans. Let me tell you what a concessional loan will do. It can save a farmer $67,000 in interest compared to the commercial rate—and those opposite voted against it. And I rocked his world. It was my first piece of legislation as agriculture minister. The member for Hunter was so smug; he felt that it was never going to get through the Senate, and we got it through. Now we are delivering concessional loans. We are going to deliver restocking and replanting loans of $200,000 to allow farmers to get back up on their feet, because it will rain, and they will need that support. But again those opposite decided to play politics rather than delivering. I'm proud to say that we continue to work on the Drought Communities Program, which gives a million dollars to councils, because it's not just farmers that drought hurts; it's also small communities. And I live and breathe it. My whole electorate, 43 per cent of Queensland, is drought stricken, so don't come in here and lecture me. The reality is that I see these people. I know them by face and by name, and I see the reaction that we are getting from the response that we've been able to put out through the Drought Communities Program, a million dollars that goes to help tradies, that builds projects, procures local materials, uses local tradespeople and keeps money flowing through towns. It's dealing with pests and weeds. It's building exclusion fencing. It's bringing sheep back into the communities. We understand what drives the economy in these local towns. We've seen lambing rates go from five per cent to 87 per cent. And you know what that does? It brings back shearers, and shearers invariably leave more money in these regional communities than anyone else. They do such a good job in terms of supporting the pub, the cafes and the servos. They keep the economy going. We've invested even in my electorate. There's the $34 million we've put into tourism projects, the Stockman's Hall of Fame and the Qantas Founders Outback Museum, to diversify our economic base. You ask how those communities would be going if we hadn't made those investments. You ask them how it would be going if we were relying only on primary production to support those small towns. We're continuing to make sure that we're putting investment into infrastructure around our communities, whether it be the $3.5 billion for Roads of Strategic Importance, or the beef roads in the north that are going to connect our product, which we've been able to deliver around the world with our trade agreements with China, South Korea and Japan. There is the TPP-11, of which those opposite said, 'No, no, no, forget about the TPP-11; it'll never happen.' Well it did, with our leadership. And now we've got Hong Kong, Peru and Indonesia. As to all the sanctimony of those opposite, I say, 'Will you ratify Indonesia?' This is a unique opportunity for our nation to secure a trade agreement with our nearest neighbour, the hundreds of millions of people up there that can take our product. But the Labor Party has sold out on that. They sanctimoniously come in here and say, 'We're not doing anything.' Let me tell you: we're continuing to work to provide localised climate guides for our small farmers to be able to understand the science and know what weather is coming in. They give our farmers the tools to be able to prepare and plan and make informed decisions about their agricultural production system. We're also committing our money, boots and all, into dams: $1.3 billion. And we are having trouble getting the states to come with us, and those opposite. Let me give them a lesson about Federation, which is convenient only when it helps them. But let me tell you this: the reality is that it has never ever been the responsibility of the federal government to build a dam or water infrastructure in the states; it has always been the states'. Our forefathers gave them the responsibility for and ownership of resources. But let's be honest: they've done three parts of bugger-all! Since 2003 only 20 dams have been built, and 16 of those have been in Tasmania. Now, even in urban Australia, we will see by 2030 a 37 per cent reduction of storage per person, which actually goes to the essence of anyone sustaining a lifestyle in an urban area as well, because the states have done nothing. So we showed leadership. We created the National Water Infrastructure Development Fund, with $800 million, then topped it up to $1.3 billion. We created the Regional Investment Corporation to put money out the door, $3.3 billion, which those opposite, again, decided to vote against, to not support. And only last weekend the Deputy Prime Minister decided the leadership needed to go further. The states were not doing enough. So we are going to lead, with a national water grid. We will use the science to determine where the water infrastructure needs to be and how you link that in, to create a sustainable environment for those people in regional and rural Australia. That's leadership. That's what happens if you want to put your shoulder to the wheel. Unfortunately, in our home state of Queensland, where we were talking about the Emu Swamp Dam, all we asked for was a measly $13 million from the state government. The Queensland state government only had to come up with $13 million, the federal government $42 million. The farmers themselves put up more than the state government. We had to bring them in, kicking and screaming, to kick their tin and put their money on the table. On the Rookwood Weir, we find out today that the Queensland government has somehow run out of money again, so they're cutting back the capacity of Rookwood from 76,000 to 54,000 megalitres. But they don't seem to cut the Cross River Rail. The cement costs the same in Brisbane as it does in Rockhampton, I would have thought. But, no, those in the south-east of Queensland from the Labor Party have decided that it's more important to have a Cross River Rail than to give the people of Rockhampton an opportunity to have an agricultural sector. Fourteen thousand jobs, over a billion dollars worth of agricultural production, but the state Labor government decided they didn't want to do it—'It will became too costly, so we're going to cut it down.' Why don't they cut down Cross River Rail? Why don't they do that? No, they're more interested in South East Queensland; they're more interested in Brisbane. That's the problem. You might want to put your head down, because that is the story of the Australian Labor Party. They don't understand regional Australia and they don't care. This is the problem we've got. Let me talk about decentralisation. I'm proud to say that, regarding the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, I am moving over 100 jobs out of Canberra to up and down the Murray-Darling. Twenty-five of those jobs are going to Goondiwindi—a small town of about 6,000 people. We're bringing 25 new families to Goondiwindi. That's an enormous opportunity. We're doing the same in Mildura and Griffith. Mr Fitzgibbon 8K6 How's the APVMA going? Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Let me tell you about the APVMA. There are over 100 at the APVMA. Let me tell you: I met a senior scientist who said she only came back to Australia from Geneva because it was in Armidale, not Canberra. Lo and behold, this metropolitan bastion of Canberra can be beaten. This town is the perfect example of decentralisation. Eventually, we will continue to roll out the decentralisation program that we started. That's how we deliver to regional Australia. We understand that, if we have faith and confidence in it, business will follow. But the Australian Labor Party don't have confidence in regional and rural Australia. They talk it down and then they politicise it when it's their opportunity to politicise their misery. We will support regional and rural Australia, and I can tell you that the future of regional Australia is a lot brighter because we're in government and not you. 15:37 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair No-one is more inconsistent than the National Party when it comes to regional and rural Australia, particularly in my home state of Queensland. They promised, for example, $100 billion of infrastructure spend. They've underspent $5 billion already, and only 30 per cent of it is budgeted for. The Warrego Highway and the Cunningham Highway, in regional and rural areas, go into the member for Maranoa's electorate. He's going away from the place, because he doesn't want to hear it. He's not fighting for the funding for those areas. They've underspent the money for those areas. And there's a digital divide in this country. It's not just on social and economic areas; it's on geographic areas. How can you spend over $50 billion and stuff up the telecommunications in this country? How can you? The NBN is four years late, and no-one suffers more from failures in telecommunications than people in regional and rural areas. We saw that in the recent floods and fires and cyclones in Queensland, because the black spot funding has been botched by these guys as well. We have areas that actually deserve and need the black spot funding—areas where it's been announced but not delivered. Again and again, they promise one thing in this place and they deliver nothing in the regions. What about the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, $5 billion? Guess what? That was rolled out, supposedly years ago, and they've spent less than $40 million. On that basis it would take 500 years to deliver the funding in that fund for northern Australia, in regional and rural Queensland. And there's not one project in regional and rural Queensland. So don't come in here and give us lectures about how much you support regional and rural Australia, because you don't. The National Party and the LNP have always failed in Queensland and in regional and rural Australia. Recently I was up at the Somerset Dam looking at the infrastructure the Queensland government is building to improve it. The Somerset Dam and the Wivenhoe Dam in my electorate service the water needs of about 65 per cent of South East Queensland. Sadly, the farmers are doing it tough and the regional towns in my electorate—places like Toogoolawah, Esk, Kilcoy, Lowood and Fernvale; country areas in rural Ipswich like Rosewood and Walloon, and other areas—are doing it tough. They don't need unction and sanctimony from the member who just spoke. They need action in this area. That's what they need. They've got a third-term government that's failed regional and rural Australia. The government raise expectations in election campaigns. They raise expectations in speeches here. But when's the money going to be rolled out? It's not being rolled out. They are underspending. No-one has worse health outcomes than the people who live in rural and regional areas. They die of cancer earlier— An opposition member: Heart disease. Mr NEUMANN HVO Heart disease, diabetes, asthma—they suffer from a whole range of maladies and illnesses, and in larger numbers and at higher rates than people in urban areas. The government are not just failing in relation to telecommunications and drought infrastructure; support in the form of a digital strategy; funding for the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility; spending on water processing and water infrastructure; and spending on rail and roads—they're not just failing in those areas—the government are also failing in health funding. They're failing because they haven't delivered. They have botched it up. They've got this primary health network. The greatest example of the botching of the primary health care of rural and regional people is the Darling Downs and West Moreton PHN, which is one of the worst PHNs in the country. It covers the Darling Downs area and the rural parts of South-East Queensland, including the Lockyer Valley, the Brisbane valley and the Scenic Rim areas. But guess what? The money they're delivering for that is not being rolled out to meet the needs of the people in these areas. They're not actually following the needs analysis that they conducted. So their failure is not just in the areas I talked about before; it's also in areas like health, which is so important. The government have also failed in aged care, because people in rural areas haven't got access to the home care they need. We have 130,000 people who have been assessed for these packages, who are waiting for packages, but they're not rolling them out in rural and regional areas. It is across the whole architecture of government that this government are failing rural and regional Australia. In my home state of Queensland, the LNP members should hang their heads in shame, because their failure in those areas is even worse. 15:42 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest I'm very pleased to speak on this MPI, and I'm particularly proud of the efforts of this government in dealing with regional issues. Don't listen to the talk; look at the programs that we've rolled out. I think they speak for themselves. You just have to ask the people on the ground in our electorates, and they'll soon tell you exactly what they think of these programs and how useful they are. Let's look at the over $2.3 billion in regional grants programs, like the Building Better Regions Fund. For those of us who live and work in rural and regional areas, when you look at the impact of the Building Better Regions Fund, the projects that have been delivered have been significant, and they've often been projects that regional communities have been waiting an awfully long time to get funding for. So we've got a program dedicated to delivering exactly what those communities want right around Australia. There's been significant investment in the Regional Growth Fund as well. We've got over $100 million in the Stronger Communities Program, which is delivering over 7,700 projects. Around five are currently open for applications. Look at these practical programs. They are what matter on the ground in our communities. There is also the fund that wasn't there prior to us coming into government—for towers in mobile black spots, to provide the connectivity that is so important to businesses and individuals. We have worked so hard on this program, and it's delivering right around Australia. The Mobile Black Spot Program is a very sound one for rural and regional Australia, particularly for our emergency services, and it is making a huge practical difference on the ground. These are some of the key measures that we've implemented since coming into government. There are over $2.3 billion worth of regional programs, just like that one. That's the reality. When you're out there on the ground, what you find is that local people and local communities make the federal investment go even further, because they're so committed to these programs and they know that funding provided by the federal government makes such a great difference to our communities. Even in the small business space, the tax cuts and the instant asset write-off—all of these matter in rural and regal Australia. They're decisions of this government. In the health space, when we look at what's happened with the medicines that have been listed on the PBS—they're matters that affect our rural and regional people and matter very much to them. It's the same with the investment in the additional headspace units. Most of those in my area have been very, very well received. I listen to other members in rural and regional Australia as well. The presence of a headspace for young people from 12 to 25—that investment by this government is making a major difference to young people who live in our communities. I'm very proud of those programs. They actually make a difference to people in a way that makes for greater opportunity in their life and brings far more to not only them but to their families as well. I look around at the education space and our regional study hubs. We've worked for many years in this place on additional opportunities for education for young people, and we've made a difference in a way that the other side hasn't. We didn't change inner regional students and outer regional students and prevent them from having access to the independent youth allowance. The other thing we didn't do: a kneejerk reaction to shut down the live cattle export trade. We saw the damage that that did right around Australia. It can be not only what you do do but also what you don't do that matters. That's a prime example of something that was so devastating for rural and regional Australia. That was a huge blow right across Australia in this space. Then there's the practical investment in infrastructure, which has impacted right around, particularly with roads. We know that connectivity matters so much, even with our roads and our roads for export. That really is where we've invested so much for small communities like my own. The Bunbury Outer Ring Road—$682 million of federal funding for a road that's going to help connect the Busselton-Margaret River airport as well. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 I thank the assistant member and I call the member for Bendigo. 15:47 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo For all of the ranting and the raving of the minister with the very long title because they couldn't quite work out what to call the portfolio—he's finger-pointing at us on this side, but perhaps he needs to point the finger at his own government and his own management. Right now, whilst we stand here, his electorate is running out of water. Six years those opposite have been in government, and what's the result? Townships in the minister's electorate are running out of water. Councils are having to pay $10,000 a day to truck in clean water. Parents are washing their newborns in filtered water that they've bought from the supermarket, because the quality is so bad. People are being asked to wash every other day. Can you imagine the parliamentarians rocking up and saying: 'I didn't shower today. It wasn't my turn. I'm showering tomorrow'? We wouldn't want to sit next to each other! But in these towns in the minister's own electorate, when he's responsible for drought, they are running out of water. And we haven't seen a plan from them, just more rhetoric and more distraction. So before he lectures us and stands up here in the pompous way that he did, with his crocodile tears, perhaps he should confront his own electorate and fix those issues. The previous speaker spoke about the programs that they've rolled out. The feedback from a lot of regional communities is: it's slow, it's clunky, it's a catch-all for everything, particularly their Building Better Regions Fund. Every time a group, an organisation or a council asks for funding, this government just says, 'building better regions'. It's always oversubscribed. Nobody quite knows how you get from one list to the other. There are constant complaints. There are favourite projects that are picked. Councils don't get feedback. Groups don't get feedback about what they could do to improve the program. It's not being rolled out in a strategic and coordinated way with state governments and local governments. Labor established a fund called RDAF, the Regional Development Australia Fund. It was managed far more appropriately and worked with local governments and state governments to deliver projects. Let's talk about the failed Mobile Black Spot Program. How many towers haven't been switched on? There's no point allocating funding if the towers haven't been built and haven't been switched on. Look at council areas like my electorate in Bendigo. We've got a high bushfire risk and we've got hundreds of listed blackspots. Councils did that work in good faith. Six have been allocated funding by this government, but only two towers have been built and switched on. What a joke! This is how this government is letting down regional areas. The government have failed with the regional cities program—City Deals or regional deals—that they established. They made a glossy commitment and convinced every council area to put together their projects around regional development. The councils spent the money and did the research, but this government forgot to tell them that, regardless of who the minister was, there's no money in the bucket—there's no money to help them. We all meet with these councils. Councils come up here to lobby us. They've done the work and they've pulled together their program of work—sometimes it's about projects costing billions of dollars—but nobody told them the truth. This government led them down the path and set them up. The government have failed on education when it comes to the regions. After six years, they ran another review, the Napthine review, to tell us what we already know: that regional students are not going to university. It didn't offer any concrete ways to move forward. It didn't commit to uncap places in regional universities to allow our regional universities to grow. It didn't commit to increase funding to our high schools and primary schools in regional areas. There were no commitments there. Instead, it was just more distraction by the government and generalist comments about how they want to do better. But we shouldn't be surprised, really, that they are letting down regional Australia, even though they claim to be the government of regional Australia, when you look at what they discussed at the National Party conference on the weekend. They were focused and fixated on banning the words 'milk', 'sausages' and 'burgers' when people use plant based products—all about distraction, not about delivering. (Time expired) 15:52 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey I look at the subject of the MPI today with wonderment—thank you, Member for Hunter. I came to this place in 2007. I've been here a little over 12 years. Half of that time was spent under a Labor government and half of that time has been spent under the coalition. I can tell you that, for the first six years, getting investment back in my electorate of Grey was like drawing blood out of a stone. We had stuff-all money for roads and absolutely nothing, not one cent—considering the previous member's comment—for mobile phones. One of the very first actions of the newly installed Rudd government was to steal $2 billion from the telecommunications future fund—the fund that was going to provide money forever to pay for the communications issues of regional Australia. We had no drought support scheme under the Labor government. They were very lucky that there weren't any droughts, because we had no drought support scheme. And certainly in Grey there was absolutely no investment in rail from the federal Labor government. Since we came to government in 2013, I have seen a completely different response from the government here in Canberra. I will start with drought, because drought has been one of the issues. I can tell you that it is a challenge at the moment. My farm looks as bad as I have ever seen it. I was up at Marree not very long ago talking to cattle stations that are totally destocked. They appreciate what the government is doing through the farm household support; the appointment of extra financial counsellors; offering low-interest loans for drought and restructure; and, particularly, the replanting and restocking loans, which people will not pay interest on for two years. That gives you the opportunity to buy some new cattle, fatten them up and ship them off to market and actually start paying off your loan before you get charged any interest. There's also the accelerated tax write-off—the threshold has been lifted to $30,000 now—and the drought community loans. There are now 19 councils across my electorate that have received $1 million. I have to say that my councils are pretty happy with the way the federal government is responding at the moment. The Roads to Recovery money has gone up by 25 per cent. In South Australia, because of a dodgy formula that's been around for many, many years, we've had a special consideration. We have had an extension of the Special Local Roads Program. Councils are pretty happy. We have spent more than $2 billion on drought and allocated another $3.3 billion to the Future Drought Fund. I think that's a good performance. We've heard a little bit about fencing. The dog fence runs through South Australia—2,150 kilometres of it. Sixteen hundred kilometres of it are more than 100 years old. This government, along with the South Australian government, has put in $10 million to replace that 1,600 kilometres of fence. This will be an investment that will pay dividends for the sheep industry for the next 80 to 100 years. In Grey we've established three new headspace units since 2013. One in Whyalla is up and operational; one is to start in Port Lincoln next year; and there is the 'flying' headspace at Port Augusta, which is servicing the northern regions of the state. We've recognised the fact that we have a doctor shortage. I had Greg Hunt, the Minister for Health, in my electorate only three weeks ago. He went to my home town and offered the northern Eyre Peninsula $300,000 for a project office to put together a northern Eyre Peninsula practice so they can all support each other. So $550 million was allocated to fixing up those problems in rural health, attracting more professionals back into the regions. In terms of roads, $490 million has been committed from the federal government for Grey to fix up the Horrocks Highway and to fix up the Barrier Highway. The federal government has committed $100 million for west of Port Augusta, with over $25 million of that committed to Eyre Peninsula to help deal with the closure of the narrow-gauge railway system there. They'll be a new bridge at Port Augusta. The Joy Baluch Bridge will be duplicated. There will be an overpass and dual lanes through Port Wakefield, which is a very famous bottleneck in South Australia where on holiday weekends people can queue for two or three hours to get through the town. All those things are coming. And we have committed $64 to the duplication of the Augusta Highway, north of Port Wakefield. This is an enormous investment. This is coming from a government that understands the power and the potential of the regions and how important they are to Australia. 15:57 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore This may only be my second week speaking in this chamber, but I am absolutely gobsmacked at the coalition's failure to look after the interests of regional Australia. Time and time again, those opposite say how good they are for farmers and for rural Australia, but, as someone who grew up on a dairy farm, I know that couldn't be further from the truth. Where was the coalition when local dairy farmers in my electorate needed help? Where was the coalition when local dairy farmers in drought were selling thousands of cattle to survive? I heard from local farmers directly on these issues and many more. I've held kitchen roundtables with local dairy farmers to show my support, to listen to their concerns and to canvas ideas about how to secure a more sustainable industry. When the Prime Minister came to Nowra in his COMCAR vehicle, guarded by the Australian Federal Police, he would not even meet with local dairy farmers. Local dairy farmers said, 'Prime Minister, it's cheaper to wash your car in milk than in water.' Our dairy farmers deserve better. It is not acceptable for our farmers to be paid less than the cost of producing their milk. They work their guts out. They take time away from their families every day to bring Australians a staple that I can almost guarantee the Prime Minister uses every day. They deserve to have that sacrifice valued by this government. But the coalition is all talk and no action. Our dairy industry is in crisis. It is caught in a long-running price squeeze that is being compounded by drought and Morrison government inaction. I am more than willing to work with the government to help our dairy farmers before it's too late. My dad was a dairy farmer. I know that dairy farms mean jobs, and jobs are something we need desperately on the New South Wales South Coast. I spoke only last week in this place about the ways the government is failing my community on jobs. The notorious Princes Highway, a stretch of road between Jervis Bay and the Victorian border, claimed the lives of 30 people between July 2012 and June 2017. It claimed eight lives in the single six-month period between December 2017 and June 2018. I ask the government: do they think regional Australia should have to face this reality on their local roads? Regional Australia doesn't think they should have to cop that. The people of the New South Wales South Coast and Far South Coast deserve to be safe on their roads. They deserve a government that will invest in them. Not only will this save lives but it will also create jobs and stimulate the economy. I ask the government: where is the federal funding for the Princes Highway? We should not have to wait for these improvements. This government needs to fix it faster. The people of regional Australia deserve that much. We deserve to have hospitals that don't leave people sleeping on benches for hours, or waiting a year for life-saving tests and treatment. Last night in the chamber I told the House about Tina, but Tina is not alone. I have heard from so many people just like Tina, people who praise the efforts of our local doctors, nurses, paramedics, and health workers, but recognise that those efforts are undermined because this government won't invest in them. I wonder if the Prime Minister would be happy to wait 24 hours for a bed. I wonder if the Prime Minister would be happy to have to travel two hours up the road for a simple test. I have invited this government to work with me to improve the outcomes for people in my electorate. The people of regional Australia deserve to have a government that invests in them, that believes in them and that looks after them. I will always stand with regional dairy farmers. I will always stand with regional doctors, nurses, paramedics and aged-care workers. I will always stand with regional Australians struggling to find work. I call on the government to stand with me and stand with them. We can't afford to wait. 16:02 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt I would like to put a call out to all of the fine citizens of Canberra to bring their wheelbarrows to this place, because what I have sat and listened to here in the last half hour would fill this chamber with bulldust and hypocrisy, and the Canberra community could fertilise their gardens for the next 12 months with the nonsense that's coming from the other side. What unadulterated rubbish. I have been in this place long enough to remember the shocking way those opposite treated regional Australia during the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd fiasco. You only have to look at the figures to see what regional Australia thinks of the clowns on the other side—of 68 seats, only 13 represent regional Australia. Our side, with 77 seats, have 35 coalition seats, and there are three independents. So, clearly, the voters out there are not fooled by the rubbish we've seen coming across the chamber here today. They know the facts. I'll tell you what: the Labor Party has never ever been a friend of regional Australia. I know how hard we worked to get the mobile black spot funding up to start to get communications in regional Australia. As soon as the Labor government got in, they trashed it, for the six years. They talk about mobile black spots and complain that they're not coming out quickly enough. In six years we never saw one single mobile black spot tower go up under Labor. We had to reinstate it, and we're now looking at number 6 and number 7 in the program, and it is continuing to come around. I heard some nonsense about water. We are putting up water infrastructure. In fact, there's a hell of a lot of water money. We committed about $3.3 billion, and we're already committed to projects and have already funded some studies on projects. Why is it taking so much lead time? Because those on the other side, particularly in Queensland, had a no-dam policy—for years. They refused point blank to cooperate, so we've had to start from scratch. But we do have Rookwood Weir up, even though we're going to have to put up the lion's share of the money, and now the state government is wanting to reduce it. We are in the final stages of a business plan for the Lakeland dam. There's the Hughenden irrigation area and a number of others where we've given a very strong commitment that we'll make it happen. In my electorate there wasn't one single kilometre—not a metre—of bitumen laid down on the Peninsula Developmental Road. There wasn't a metre of bitumen laid down on the Hann Highway. All of these are now being sealed because of commitments that were made by this coalition government. So, don't come in here and feed a load of nonsense into here. As I said, we're going to have the cleaners working overnight to clean the carpets in here after all the nonsense that's been dropped on the floor today. It's been an absolute disgrace. Not only that: there was mention of the NAIF, the Northern Australian Infrastructure Fund. That is something the coalition actually introduced. You never see programs like that coming from the other side. It was a $5 billion fund. There is closer to $2 billion now already committed. A lot of that has not been in Queensland. The reason is that Jackie Trad and the Palaszczuk government have done everything they can to stop it from being rolled out. That's why we've seen much more benefit in Western Australia and in the Northern Territory. So many other projects have come about through a range of initiatives from our side. I'll just go through a few of them. Talking about health: $60 million to James Cook University. We've got the Wangetti Trail. We funded the Mossman mill. And there is COUCH Wellness Centre and the Daintree microgrid, and a range of sporting grants have gone out. Let me tell you, the Morrison government is absolutely not neglecting regional Australia; that is simply not true. I stand up here to support our record in this space, compared with that mob on the other side. They should hang their heads in shame to suggest that somehow or other they got a commitment. It was in May this year, because of the poor performance on the other side, that— (Time expired) 16:07 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson As familiar as the member for Leichhardt is with ancient history, he is sadly misinformed and sprouting his own nonsense on this matter of public importance on regional Australia. There are two droughts in this country: the main climatic drought and a drought of leadership. We constantly hear the rhetoric that Labor can't manage money and that the government are the only ones who can manage the Treasury benches. Well, I say that the government can't be trusted with money, they can't be trusted with power and they certainly cannot be trusted with governing the people of Australia. Nowhere is this more important than in our regional, rural and remote centres. The problems of Australia are magnified in these places. The challenges we face in rural and regional Australia are absolutely magnified and multiplied by the challenges this government puts forward. They have abandoned governing for regional Australia. In fact, their whole modus operandi is to get out of the way. They regularly talk about small government, about doing nothing. They're pulling back, sitting on their hands, just waiting to see whether things will work out—with climate change, with the economy. They are the epitome of a do-nothing government. From the Reserve Bank of Australia to the banks of dry rivers and dams across this country, we are hearing the cries for leadership, for strategy, for plans—but for more than that: for infrastructure. Today I could not believe my ears when I heard the Deputy Prime Minister say, 'We're going to build a dam'—we're going to do that. This is a government in its third term. What have they been going to do? Ms Madeleine King 102376 Gonna, gonna, gonna. Ms SWANSON 264170 I take the interjection from the member for Brand and shadow minister for trade: gonna, gonna, gonna. In fact, in regional Australia there are plenty of properties I've seen called 'Gonna'—and 'Weowna', if they've paid off their mortgage. They're very clever, the people of regional Australia, with what they call their properties. But, seriously, people are shaking their heads. They just don't understand why, in a country like Australia—where we have organisations like the CSIRO, who are leading the science on this, who are saying, 'We've got the ideas; we can do it'—this government does not govern. Why aren't you doing anything? Someone put a fantastic email to the Prime Minister. They said: 'You built this desal unit in the Shire and you're not even using that.' That was a huge amount of money. People have got so many ideas in our community about how our regions could be doing better under this government—yet the government is doing nothing. I want to turn quickly to my own electorate and say how this government is failing the people of regional Australia. We have the M1. It is a massive piece of infrastructure. It links Sydney to Brisbane and it flows directly through my electorate. It is the main freight route up and down the eastern seaboard in Australia. When you get to Beresfield in my electorate, you come to a screaming halt. You have to sit at a set of traffic lights, turn right, go over the overpass, go down a piece of road and over an ageing bridge, and off you go again. Every B-double and semitrailer in Australia needs to do it. And don't just worry about holiday times. Three hours is nothing. They sit on that road for eight hours at a time on occasion. It is a nightmare and it is a danger. The government put it in the budget but they also sneakily said they are only going to spend three per cent over the next four years. It really is a minimal effort from a government that has the power to do more. On a very sad note, I want to talk about Frances Brennan. Frances was a lady in her later years. Her son wrote to me and said: 'We are waiting on an aged-care package. I am frightened that my mother won't live to see it.' Well, sadly, she didn't live to see it. She waited over 600 days for that package, and it never came. I'd like to say that this tragic example is a stand-out example. Sixteen thousand people across Australia have died waiting for a package. We note that 129,000 are still waiting. Their packages have been approved but they haven't been funded. Lastly, Dr Chris Boyle, a GP in my electorate from the fabulous Raymond Terrace GPs, has emailed me and said: 'Meryl, the Mediscare campaign'—which we put forward in the last election; that's what people from the other side were calling it—'is not without some basis in fact. By stealth, they are absolutely putting up the price to get medicine—' (Time expired) Regional Development 69 16:12 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I'm pleased to talk today about the Australian government's commitment to regional infrastructure. Since 2013-14, the Liberal-National government has invested $32.8 billion that specifically benefits regional areas—over $2.8 billion to grant programs helping regions unlock local competitive advantage and access new markets and around $30 billion to deliver road and rail projects to better connect regional communities. The Australian government is investing $100 billion in infrastructure across the next 10 years from 2019-20, through its rolling infrastructure plan involving a combination of grant funding, loans and equity investments. This includes the government's $4.5 billion commitment to upgrade key freight routes through the Roads of Strategic Importance initiative. We have announced $4.2 billion worth of commitments under ROSI to 26 key freight corridors and around 50 projects across this country. ROSI primarily supports network improvements which involve packages of investment to raise the standard of roads, including feeder roads, to provide more reliable road networks. This corridor approach provides a more reliable road network, improves access for high-capacity vehicles, better connects regional communities and facilitates tourism opportunities. We are working closely with state, territory and local governments to get projects underway as soon as possible. I'm pleased to say that the Australian government is continuing to contribute significantly to the funding of road improvements and upgrades across the Mallee electorate, including the Calder Highway upgrade, the Western Highway upgrades and the Henty Highway upgrades between Horsham and Warracknabeal. But the funding won't stop at these projects. We know that better roads lead to safer travel and to improved economic and social outcomes as people find it easier and safer to travel. Driving throughout my electorate on our roads—from Warracknabeal to Dimboola, from Charlton to Maryborough, from Berriwillock to Birchip and from Ouyen to Swan Hill—it is apparent to me that there are plenty of roads that need upgrading. I want to encourage all Mallee local councils and the Victorian state government to continue to submit projects to the Roads to Recovery Program supporting the maintenance of these local roads. The Liberal-National government has announced further funding for this program as part of the 2019-20 budget, with a $100 million commitment each year. I'm pleased that the Liberal-National government has delivered on its promise of $240 million for the Murray Basin freight rail project while supporting up to 500 jobs during construction and a further 47 long-term jobs in the region. However, there is currently a great deal of ill feeling in my electorate about the incompletion of the Murray Basin Rail Project, and I have called on the Victorian state Labor government to work cooperatively with the federal government to complete the project. Currently farmers in Murrayville cannot use the line, because the rail is in such poor condition that trains can only travel at 15 kilometres per hour. This does not in any way provide access and equity for these farmers to trade and send product to port. The freight transport mix must always include both road and rail. The reality is that many of our roads in Mallee are not suitable for the B-quads that now transport much of the growers' products to both domestic destinations and ports for export markets. For every train, over 40 trucks a day are removed from our roads. The community's safety and economic wellbeing motivates me to continue to advocate for the completion of the Murray Basin Rail Project and hold the Victorian Labor government to account. The SPEAKER 00APG The time for the discussion has concluded. PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION 70 PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION Election Petition 70 COMMITTEES 70 COMMITTEES Membership 70 16:16 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 218019 I have received two messages from the Senate relating to the appointment of senators to certain joint committees. I do not propose to read these messages, which will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. BILLS 70 BILLS Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Superannuation Measures No. 1) Bill 2019, Water Amendment (Indigenous Authority Member) Bill 2019, National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2019 70

Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Superannuation Measures No. 1) Bill 2019

Water Amendment (Indigenous Authority Member) Bill 2019

National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits) Bill 2019

Returned from Senate 70 Treasury Laws Amendment (Putting Members' Interests First) Bill 2019 70

Treasury Laws Amendment (Putting Members' Interests First) Bill 2019

Consideration of Senate Message 70 16:17 Mr GEE 261393 Calare I move: That the amendments be agreed to. 16:17 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam I move amendments (1), (2), (4) to (6), (8) to (11) and (13) as circulated in my name. (1) Amendment (1), omit "November 2019", insert "January 2020". (2) Amendment (4), item 3A, paragraph 68AAF(1)(c), before "the member", insert "it is reasonable to conclude". (4) Amendment (6), omit "November 2019", substitute "January 2020". (5) Amendment (7), omit "November 2019", substitute "January 2020". (6) Amendment (8), omit "December 2019", substitute "February 2020". (8) Amendment (10), omit "November 2019", substitute "January 2020". (9) Amendment (11), omit "November 2019", substitute "January 2020". (10) Amendment (12), omit "November 2019", substitute "January 2020". (11) Amendment (13), omit "November 2019", substitute "January 2020". (13) Amendment (15), omit "November 2019", substitute We support the objective of the amendments and the original bill, which is protecting members' interests. Earlier this week we identified a major flaw in the government's bill. On Monday they denied it. Today they have acknowledged it and sought to rectify it. It concerns the circumstances of 475,000 young workers in high-risk jobs. Without group insurance, these workers would be virtually uninsurable. Group insurance is provided to them via their superannuation fund. It's not a trivial issue. Over 103 workers have lost their lives this year alone. Life insurance provides a benefit to their dependants. The government acknowledge, through amendments they moved in the other place, that they've got a problem. They acknowledge that this group of workers, young workers in high-risk occupations, should be entitled to default life cover. The problem is that the funds cannot precisely identify each and every one of those members in the way that the government have prescribed in their legislation. We propose to remedy that through our amendment. The problem is this: the government's amendment assumes that trustees have complete information about the occupational risk associated with each individual member's occupation. We wish it was the case, but it's not. These funds only have the information that the employer provides to them. That's what's required by law. It includes their name, their birth date, their address and their place of work. Most funds are able to supplement this information, but it's very time consuming and it's an imperfect activity. Trustees do know the industry of their employer and sometimes the occupation, but it's not always accurate. It's for that reason we're proposing to insert an amendment to the government's amendment which requires that trustees make a decision on the basis of their reasonable belief. That will enable them to identify, with as much precision as the fund is able to, the members who are identified by the government as deserving default life cover. It also provides the trustees and the funds some protection against adverse action by an individual member or their dependant who has either been defaulted in and who shouldn't have been or defaulted out and shouldn't have been. It is a sensible amendment. It is a practical amendment. It's one that should enjoy the support of all members in this House. We ask that members opposite support these amendments and ensure that this bill can enjoy the support of all members in this place. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the amendments moved by the member for Whitlam be agreed to.

The House divided. [16:25]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 60 AYES Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Chesters, LM Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Giles, AJ Gorman, P Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Katter, RC Kearney, G Kelly, MJ Keogh, MJ Khalil, P King, MMH Leigh, AK McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Mitchell, RG Mulino, D Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Neil, CE Owens, JA Payne, AE Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Thwaites, KL Vamvakinou, M Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilson, JH Zappia, A 74 NOES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Entsch, WG Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Goodenough, IR Haines, H Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McVeigh, JJ Morton, B O'Brien, LS O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharkie, RCC Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Steggall, Z Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wicks, LE Wilkie, AD Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wood, JP Young, T Zimmerman, T 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

 16:28 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the amendments be agreed to. Question agreed to. ADJOURNMENT 72 ADJOURNMENT Australian Reading Hour, Australian Rugby Union 72 16:30 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton Today is the day that we ask all Australians to stop what they are doing for one hour and pick up a book. Today is Australian Reading Hour Day. While some of us use all of our spare moments to lose ourselves in a good book, other Australians just need a bit of a nudge to either discover or introduce themselves to the benefits of reading—and there are many. In children, reading has been shown to help with identity formation, and that will set them up for success in the future. In adults, reading has been shown to reduce stress by 68 per cent more than listening to music—although I thoroughly recommend that as well—going for a walk or having a cup of tea. Today is the day for all Australians to take one hour to learn, escape and relax. Australian Reading Hour is the result of a collaboration between the Australian Library Information Association, which initiated the Australian Reading Hour; the Australian Publishers Association, with huge support from Hachette Australia; the Australian Booksellers Association; and the Australian Society of Authors. Last year, the Australian Reading Hour campaign reached over 7.1 million people, garnered over 20,000 online followers and held hundreds of organised events in schools, libraries and bookshops all across Australia—and this year, it's even better. This year, for the first time, Australian Reading Hour will be led by seven ambassadors, including Benjamin Law, from Queensland; Rachael Johns; Matt Stanton; Karen Manbulloo; and Anthony Field, who is better known as the blue Wiggle—and you can't get much bigger than a Wiggle. For the first time, five books by five of the ambassadors will be published as a special promotion for Reading Hour and to encourage young readers to engage with reading. In yet another first, Karen Manbulloo's book, Moli det big bigi, is the first Indigenous language book featured in Australian Reading Hour, in English and Kriol. Kriol is the most widely spoken Indigenous language in Australia. So, if you have little ones, see if you can get a copy to read to them. It's a wonderful book. You can also search for the member for Sydney, the member for Cooper or me on Twitter. Senator Hughes, from New South Wales, and I are co-chairs of the Parliamentary Friends of Australian Books and Writers. We hosted an event in Parliament House this week to launch Reading Hour 2019. Sadly, I was unable to attend this year, but I was ably represented by Tanya Plibersek, who tells me that it was a wonderful event. Many members of parliament came along to hear from Australian authors about the importance of Australian books telling our Australian stories. On this occasion, the authors were children's authors Mick Elliott, best known for his Squidge Dibley series and his trilogy, The Turners; and Sally Rippin, who has written more than 60 children's books, including the Billie Brown series. Also at that event, the parliamentary friendship group announced the inaugural book to be read by the Parliamentary Book Club. I will use a prop for a second, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER 00APG I say to the member for Moreton that you can in speeches. That is more permissible than— Mr PERRETT HVP Oh, it's question time; I beg your pardon, Speaker! A community campaign was launched about a month ago, asking everyone to nominate the book they would like their parliamentarian to read. The campaign reached close to one million people. Nominations were finalised and the winner, by a wide margin, was Bruce Pascoe's Dark Emu. I purchased my copy from the Parliament House Shop today, and I can't wait to start reading it. In fact, that will be my one hour of reading for Reading Hour 2019. In February, after members and senators have had the whole summer break to devour Dark Emu, the author and publishers will be invited to Parliament House to discuss the book from their perspective. Ms Madeleine King interjecting— Mr PERRETT HVP I will take that interjection. My books are on sale at the Parliamentary Book Club. I notice that they are 50 per cent off at the moment, actually. Ms Madeleine King 102376 Is that right? I will get myself one. The SPEAKER 00APG I'll take the appropriate action after the House adjourns. Mr PERRETT HVP I can't wait for the Dark Emu author and publisher to come up to Parliament House. It will be a great way to bring everyone in this place together—no matter what side of the House or the Senate they sit on—to discuss something apolitical, to share the perspective of the author and to have fun soaking in words and ideas. Everyone should start thinking about what the next book should be for the Parliamentary Book Club. Keep an eye on social media for the callout for the second book early next year. In the meantime, make sure you do your one hour of reading today for Reading Hour 2019—and hopefully reading will regularly form a part of your day. We are lucky to have so many great Australian authors writing great Australian books, so get to your local bookshop or library and get reading. On a different topic, I am going to touch on a great Australian rugby union side that's competing in Japan. I notice that the member for Hinkler is here. He is one of the co-captains of that team, which was successful against Argentina and South Africa, with the member for Hinkler and I playing, and the member for Solomon. Sadly, they went down in the grand final today, when the member for Hinkler and I weren't there. They played well but went down in a golden-point try, after being drawn at full time, to New Zealand, I'm sad to report. Goldstein Electorate: Sporting Awards 73 16:35 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein We're heading towards summer. We are at the end of the winter and the ice is going. It is getting warmer in the mornings, and the afternoons are getting more energetic, particularly at Goldstein's wonderful bowls clubs, which have been buzzing with energy as the 2019-20 season commences with the opening of the greens. Sandringham Bowls Club hosted quite a crowd for the opening of the summer pennant in August, including a social game and afternoon tea. Locals and visitors looking for an evening of bowls, food and drinks should also keep an eye out for the barefoot bowls at the 'Sandy' Bowls Club as the weather begins to warm. The 2019-20 pennant is also underway at Glen Eira McKinnon Bowls Club. As the new season begins, it is an opportunity to acknowledge the tournament results and trophy winners from the 2018-19 season. Congratulations to the Men's Singles winner, Peter Felbel, and the runner-up, Brian Rosengarten; the Ladies Singles winner, Maureen Cohen, and the runner-up, Rosemary Michael; the Club Pairs winners, Peter Felbel and Brian Rosengarten, and the runners-up, Rosemary Michael and Lozza Robinson; the Mens Minor Singles winner, Ken Dowling, and the runner-up, Paul Epshtein; and the Ladies Minor Singles winner, Heather Gerber, and the runner-up, Gerda Bergman. The Most Promising Award went to Lozza Robinson. The Valuable Member Award went to Peter Martin. The Tuesday Pennant Most Valuable Award went to Trevor Gilbertson. The Most Improved Award went to John Makinson. The Smorgon medal winners were: gold, Peter Felbel; silver, Lore Zent; and bronze, Maureen Cohen. Congratulations also to Todd Shannon, Dave Lawrence, Rod Peterson and Jeff Hunter on winning Somerville B C Fours Tournament last month. I'd also like to acknowledge the community-minded leadership at Glen Eira McKinnon Bowls Club, like Brian Rosengarten, the president; Les Gerber, the vice president; Trevor Gilbertson, the club secretary; Dave Oshry, the club treasurer; and Peter Martin, Helen Weiner and Tony McMahon of the general committee. 'Bringing Bowls to Life' is more than just a slogan at Hampton Bowls Club. Social members, barefoot bowlers, junior bowlers and pennant players are all set for another successful summer. The pre-season tournament kicks off on Friday, 27 September. There is also the Try Bowls event, which is part of the Victorian Seniors Festival, on Wednesday, 9 October. Be there! Best wishes to the Committee in Hampton: Jim Tait, the chair; Ivan Silver, the president; Peter Boustead, the treasurer. Best wishes also to the great Armadale Bowls Club, which is alive and blossoming after the 2019-20 Opening Day. I was there with Jamie Hyams, mayor of Glen Eira; Margaret Esakoff, Glen Eira councillor; David Southwick, the incredible state member for Caulfield; Gary Lasky from the Sandbelt Region, and Lisa Pennycuick and Julie Broadhead, from Lendlease, which is doing a wonderful job sponsoring the event. The super veterans badges that were handed out that day were awarded to Michael Finestone, Nate Raik, David Mailer, Zara Simon and Elaine Kovkin. A special 90-year version was presented to Henry Lederman. I would also like to acknowledge the president, Les Newman, the vice-president, Stan Todes, the secretary, Barrie Rimer, and the treasurer, Nathan Kamien. It's not just bowls that is stirring excitement in Goldstein this spring season. It is also about the incredible opportunities that exist in other sports for people at all stages of life. The 'Sandy' Croquet Club had a cracker afternoon opening in early September. And let's not forget that, yes, the afternoon teas are exceptional, but it is about the game on the ground. I'd like to congratulate a few of the members on their recent successes: Lynette White, who won gold, and Jennie Bowles, who won silver, in the Singles 2019 Competition: range 10.0 to 12.0. Raymond Davis won silver in the Open Tournament 2019: range 3.0 to 4.5 Harley Johnstone took home silver in the GVCA Association Open Tournament at Rich River. For those wanting to try their hand at croquet, coaching is available at 'Sandy' Croquet Club for both golf and association croquet. I had to learn about the difference, but no matter what it is and how you like to play, croquet is the game for you. Thank you to the committee for the ongoing leadership and community engagement, particularly Liz McConnell, club president; Lynne Fox, club treasurer; Lyn White, secretary; and Jennie Bowles, the coaching contact. These clubs are part of the incredible social fabric that we have in the Goldstein community. We go to the winter, where people are playing netball, football, soccer and other sports. We go into the summer season, and of course they play cricket and tennis. But to be able to have these incredible sports that go year round, for people at all stages of life, brings together the social stitches of our fabric. We are so proud of what our community achieves, and it is wonderful to be able to speak about it in this place. Climate Change 74 16:40 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra I rise today to talk about the urgent need for the government to take decisive and meaningful action on climate change. Throughout the recent election campaign, there was one concern that electors in Canberra expressed to me ahead of all others, and that was the need to take action on climate change. Canberrans understand this is urgent. We need to take action now. The first action of the Abbott government was to dismantle the carbon price that Labor introduced, and we see the same denial and lack of action six years on. This is a government in denial and with no plan. My constituents continue to raise this concern with me. I want to highlight some of the meetings I've had with a diverse range of groups through the last sitting fortnight, in which the call for action on climate change has been a central theme. The government must also get these meeting requests, but they are ignoring the community as they are ignoring the science. I met with two of the nine inspiring UNICEF Australia young ambassadors for 2019. Of all the things they wanted to talk about, climate change was at the top of the list. They brought a report that detailed the culmination of their year of consultation with young Australians from right around the country, and their report, titled A climate for change, provides a snapshot into the minds of young Australians. In the report, a couple of issues shone through as concerns, and the environment was among them. Around 60 per cent of young people in Australia identify climate change as the biggest threat to their safety, more than two-thirds want Australia to reduce its carbon emissions, and 84 per cent believe that climate change will affect the world a lot in the future. It's their future that we are shaping in this place right now, and I want to thank the UNICEF young ambassadors for their important work in giving this particular group of unheard Australians a voice. Climate change is not a distant threat. It is very real and it is impacting the lives of millions of people around the world right now, nowhere more pressingly than our neighbours in the Pacific. One of the groups I met with this week was the Inter-Congregational Voice on Climate Change, a group of Catholic religious congregations working in the region. They spoke of the personnel that they have working around the Pacific, at the coalface of the climate change disaster—in the Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Tuvalu and Papua New Guinea. The group spoke of firsthand experiences of the very real impacts that climate change is having on some of our nearest neighbours in the Pacific, including crops being unable to be grown because of salinity as the watertable rises. They also showed us pictures of people's front yards at different times of the day, regularly under water, with the ebbing and flowing of the tide. Of course, these houses weren't built under water; it's the coast and the high-water mark that are changing. They showed us pictures of a flooded maternity ward, a regular occurrence in a country where the highest geographic point is only a couple of metres. Another picture showed a very small breakwall that had been breached, flooding a road—the ocean lying ready to take everything they know. These governments are having discussions about how they will deal with this crisis in the immediate future. They are talking about things like creating floating islands as a way of futureproofing their homes. They're buying land in neighbouring islands that have higher elevations. None of these options are sustainable, and, if we go through with them, in coming years we will fail and need to start again. These conversations are very real for people in these countries, and this is something that our country should not ignore. We need to take further action now and come up with permanent solutions. If Australia, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, wants to be a leader in our region, we need to be leaders in this space. Our Prime Minister needs to take responsibility, and not ignore the cries of the Australian people, and attend the UN climate conference when he visits the US this week. I'm calling on the Prime Minister to attend the UN Secretary-General's Climate Action Summit during his visit to the US this weekend, and not to boycott this important summit as his predecessor, Tony Abbott, did five years ago. Tomorrow students from all around Australia will strike to call on our government to take action on climate change. We need to listen to these young people. They are some of the most engaged people in our community and they really care about their world. I'll be proud to be joining them in Canberra tomorrow, and I look forward to seeing you there. Latin America 75 16:45 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney I am proud to represent in this parliament an electorate that is such a wonderfully diverse multicultural community. North Sydney is home to people from every corner of the world, and they have added to the vibrancy of the North Shore. We are a welcoming community, and I see this best epitomised at the scores of citizenship ceremonies I've attended since my election to parliament. One of the trends I have observed at those ceremonies and through my other work in the community is the growing number of people with Latin American heritage who have made their home in our area. While the numbers, relative to people of other backgrounds, are still small, there is discernible growth. In fact, around 2,000 residents in my electorate identify as holding Latin American ancestry, with those with Brazilian, Colombian, Chilean and Peruvian heritage collectively forming the majority of that number. I know that those from South and Central America and from Mexico will add to the diversity of our area as they bring their own special cultural traditions. Those in my electorate are part of a Latin American community which numbers over 140,000 across Australia. Latin American migration to Australia has a long history. In fact, the first recorded Latinos arrived in Australia from Chile in 1837. It is an interesting historical fact that one of them was an exiled Chilean President, Ramon Freire, who was ousted during a military coup. A notable figure in Chilean history, his descendants were to occupy the presidency on two additional occasions, including during the more recent term of Eduardo Frei in the 1990s. Those links, for people escaping political turmoil, extended into more recent times, with former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet having spent six months in Sydney in exile during the Pinochet regime. I know that what I am seeing in my electorate is a national trend. More Latin Americans are moving to Australia as students, short-term workers or permanent migrants, and this is of benefit to Australia. I hope it reflects a broader development, a deeper engagement with a part of the world which it is fair to say has for too long been neglected by Australian governments. I passionately believe that the potential of our economic, cultural and political relationship with Latin American countries is considerable. I am pleased that this has been recognised by the coalition government, and we have seen great strides made over the last six years to improve our engagement with nations on the other side of the Pacific. I was reminded of this growth, still incomplete but with such great potential, during a conference held here in the parliament last week by the Australia-Latin America Business Council. The council, under the leadership of its president, Richard Andrews, and CEO, Marcelo Salas, has been a staunch and consistent advocate for stronger ties between our two regions, and I congratulate them on what they are achieving. ALABC turns 30 this year, and during that period it has helped facilitate a growing understanding of the opportunities that lie in Latin America. I also explored some of the opportunities with South America through my role as convener of the Australia-Argentina Parliamentary Friendship Group in the 45th Parliament—and I want to acknowledge the ambassador, Hugo Gobbi, for his incredible advocacy as well. The case for our engagement is obvious and growing. The continent's population will reach over 700 million by 2030, meaning it will be home to over eight per cent of the world's population and be its third largest region. Over the same period, its middle class will reach 345 million. While many Latin American nations have experienced both economic and political difficulties—and we particularly despair about the situation currently faced by Venezuelans—the trajectory of economic growth is clear. So too, I hope will there be greater resilience for its democratic institutions. With a GDP 76 per cent higher than the combined GDP of ASEAN nations, the opportunities are just so great. This has been a focus for the coalition government. We saw it with the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which has improved our trading opportunities with Chile, Peru and Mexico. Those opportunities will be further expanded if we can conclude an agreement with the Pacific Alliance, which includes Mexico, Columbia, Chile and Peru. Soon this parliament will consider our free trade agreement with Peru. This agreement will open up new opportunities in one of the fastest-growing economies in Latin America. I am disappointed that, to date, the opposition has been unwilling to extend its support for the Peru FTA. It would be exceptionally short-sighted for Labor to oppose this agreement. These agreements are, I hope, just the start. We can broaden the depth of economic relationships. I would hope that an FTA with the Mercosur nations will, one day, be on the agenda. And the expansion of direct air routes, for example, to Mexico and Brazil would add vital aviation capacity. This is a region that does have so much to offer Australia, and I will continue to advocate for an even greater focus on a part of the world that, once considered economic competitors, can, will and should be our partners. Nitmiluk 76 16:50 Mr SNOWDON IJ4 Lingiari On 10 September this year, the Jawoyn people of the Katherine region celebrated 30 years since they were recognised as the traditional owners of Nitmiluk, or Katherine Gorge, and that started a historic joint management agreement between the Jawoyn people and the Northern Territory government. They've celebrated this by holding a 10-day festival. It's hard to imagine in 2019, but this was, 30 years ago, a very contentious issue. There was a huge backlash in the township, and indeed in the Northern Territory, to any prospect of land rights being recognised by the then CLP government, with many members of the Katherine community—I say very sadly—in Rights for Whites marches and mocking 'sacred site' signs, and with even the Katherine Town Council trying to extend the town boundaries to incorporate the then Katherine Gorge. It was dog whistling at its worst and it divided the town of Katherine for some time. Even at the hand-back ceremony in 1989, there were some who wore black armbands, lamenting the park's 'loss'. But the Jawoyn people had a vision for Nitmiluk as a place for sharing and a vision of its importance to the future of the next generation. On 10 September 1989, after a decade-long fight, the Jawoyn finally won their hard-fought land claim and the recognition of history, culture and unbroken connection to the country they had always been the custodians for. Jawoyn leader Bangardi Fordimail Nagarimayn said at the hand-back: 'We have this piece of paper that tells the world this is Jawoyn country, but we can't live on a piece of paper. Paper is a whitefella thing and means nothing unless there is respect for people and for country. It means nothing unless there is a future.' The end of the world did not come as some had predicted. The Jawoyn people entered into a joint park management agreement with the Northern Territory government to operate Nitmiluk as a national park and it became one of the most successful—indeed an exemplar of—joint park management ventures in this country. 'The park was still there for us all to see and enjoy and was clearly going nowhere,' as the old man had predicted. The Nitmiluk National Park joint management agreement is now seen as an exemplar, as I said, of how a genuine collaborative partnership can benefit the community and provide an outstanding tourism experience that is continually improving and innovating. They have won a number of awards, including the major tourist attraction Brolga Award in 2018. To mark the 30-year celebrations, a 10-day festival was held, with an array of fabulous events, including a concert in the gorge; evening markets; Sharing Country, an exhibition of Jawoyn culture, history and land; a family fun day; a bird festival; and many other events that saw a great number of people attend from Katherine and beyond. I'd like to congratulate the Jawoyn people on a successful festival that commemorates the 30th anniversary of that hand-back. In particular, I congratulate the chair of the Jawoyn Association, a good friend of mine, Lisa Mumbin, and the CEO of Nitmiluk Tours, Jane Runyu, and all those people who worked tirelessly to make this important celebration the success that it is. True to their word in 1989, the Jawoyn people have shared their amazing country with everyone—with over 270,000 visitors a year both from within Australia and from beyond. It is an internationally acclaimed attraction that has created never-before-realised economic opportunities in terms of training, jobs, business opportunities and a future for Jawoyn people, the town of Katherine and, indeed, the region. It's a very positive indication of what reconciliation and collaboration can effectively mean. The anniversary of the hand-back of Nitmiluk and Jawoyn's partnership with the Northern Territory government offers a significant occasion for the broader community to reflect on the success of collaboration and reconciliation. Nitmiluk has given us a remarkable story, a story that will forever mark an important time in our history, both locally and nationally. It's time we began to recognise more than 60,000 years in the history of Australia and the First Nations peoples and their extraordinary connection to country. Mallee Electorate 77 16:55 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I rise at this time to speak of my electorate of Mallee and to talk about the special connectedness that occurs in our communities, not unrelated to the fact that we are regional. I want to first congratulate recent grand final winners from the football grand finals across my electorate of Mallee. Over the last few weekends, the communities have come together to barrack for their favourite teams and witness grand finals in both football and netball. Grand finals are a time of year for our rural and regional communities to come together to celebrate, compete and bond as a community. I want to take a moment to congratulate winners across the electorate, including Harrow-Balmoral for their convincing win in the Horsham and district grand final, and the Natte Bealiba Football Club for their win in the Maryborough-Castlemaine district football competition. Sport is important to our communities and to our nation. It has been fantastic to deliver funding from the Liberal-Nationals government to sporting groups and facilities across Mallee, in excess of $10 million. Some of our sporting groups have been successful in receiving funding through the Stronger Communities Program, including the Horsham Football and Netball Club; the Natte Yallock Recreation Reserve for their scoreboard upgrade; the Great Western Football Netball Club; and the Kaniva Community Sporting Complex for their upgrade. Other Mallee community sporting groups were successful under the community sport infrastructure grants, including the Warracknabeal Leisure Centre, the Red Cliffs Golf Club and the Southern Mallee Giants Football Netball Club, who have secured funding for facility upgrades. This government continues to support small sports clubs in the regions because we know the importance that sport has in our communities and the contribution it makes to physical and mental health. The range of sports and the clubs that support them play an important part in building resilience in our communities, whether it is football, tennis, croquet or bowls. The opportunity for people to come together around these common interests builds connection and resilience. When communities do it tough, as they are right now, it is sporting clubs that draw people together. Sporting clubs also provide a place for leaders in develop. At an event in Ouyen last month, organised by the late Tim Fischer with Scott Pape of Barefoot Investor fame, we heard of how the Ouyen and Walpeup Underbool football clubs merged as their towns changed. This took strong community leadership from the club captains to see these proud clubs and towns embrace a new club and culture. Ouyen United are now a strong club, and the towns are bonding around their team. These teams and communities are spread out across our electorate in our regional towns, towns connected by country roads and highways. I'm pleased to say that the Australian government is continuing to contribute significantly to the funding of road improvements and upgrades across Mallee, including the Calder Highway upgrade, Western Highway upgrades and Henty Highway upgrades between Horsham and Warracknabeal. But the funding won't stop at these projects. We know that better roads lead to safer travel and to improved economic and social outcomes as people find it easier to travel. While I am driving throughout the electorate on our roads between Warracknabeal and Dimboola, between Charlton and Maryborough, between Berriwillock and Birchip or between Ouyen and Swan Hill, it is apparent to me that there are plenty of roads that need improvement. I want to encourage all our local councils and the Victorian state government to continue to submit projects to the Roads to Recovery Program, which supports the maintenance of these local roads. The Liberal-Nationals government have announced further funding for this program as part of the 2019-20 budget, with a $100 million commitment each year. Mallee is built by communities who are fiercely passionate about their towns, their sporting clubs and their needs, be it roads, digital connectivity or health. It is always heartening to see, in the good times and the tough times, how these towns come together to support one another and to celebrate with each other. It is these communities that make Mallee an incredible place to live and work. House adjourned at 17:00   The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Bird) took the chair at 10:00.

Thursday, 19 September 2019

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Bird) took the chair at 10:00.

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 78 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Memories of Menzies and Calwell, Upfield Soccer Club 78 10:00 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell It was my absolute privilege to co-host the inaugural Memories of Menzies and Calwell event with my parliamentary colleagues the members for Bennelong and Macarthur in Parliament House on Monday night. The event was a conversation between Heather Henderson, nee Menzies, and Dr Mary Elizabeth Calwell, who shared personal stories of life as the daughters of Sir Robert Menzies, Australia's longest-serving Prime Minister, and the Hon. Arthur Calwell, the Leader of the Opposition and Australia's first Minister for Immigration. A very special thank you to Ms Henderson and Dr Calwell for sharing their stories and allowing us to take a trip down memory lane to learn about life and what it was really like in Australian politics in the fifties and sixties. The night was moderated by the doyenne of political reporting in Australia, the very prolific Michelle Grattan of The Conversation, who facilitated and allowed for a very frank and colourful discussion. I know that the member for Menzies was also present and agrees that it was a very stimulating and interesting event. Menzies and Calwell were fierce rivals, but they also understood the importance of talking to each other—today we would call that 'dialogue'—in a national interest sense without the politics, and they were known to meet up regularly to do just that. Thank you also to the Museum of Australian Democracy at Old Parliament House for sponsoring the event. Last Friday night, I was delighted to attend the annual presentation night of the Upfield Soccer Club. I took to the floor, as I do each year, with Club President Wally Hanna, Club Manager Hani Pito and special guest Hakeem Al-Araibi, to hand out trophies to our players. Our players range from juniors to seniors and include boys and girls. It was one of the biggest events yet and a sure sign of the club's growing popularity in my local community. The story of the Upfield Soccer Club is a true migrant story. Three decades ago, the Greek community of Broadmeadows formed the club originally called Andromidos—a nice Greek name. It was founded by Broadmeadows locals Jim Massis, Demitris Fokianos, Petros Pandazopoulos, John Patsikatheodorou, George Xiniaros and many others. Along the way, a young Wally Hanna, from the emerging Iraqi community, came to play, and the rest is history. Wally today runs what is now called the Upfield Soccer Club and is doing a terrific job of serving the needs of our newly arrived. In recent years, the club has welcomed refugees from Syria and engaged them as players, coaches and volunteers. And the Upfield Soccer Club is very proud of the fact it has recruited 45 female players this season in its ongoing campaign to create gender equality at the club and foster inclusiveness. Pawley, Mr Mike OAM 78 10:03 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar I thought I had some difficult names to pronounce in my electorate, but kudos to the member for Calwell! It will be a very long time before I can beat that performance. I rise today to acknowledge a well-known and in turn much-loved member of— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 10:04 to 10:16 Mr FALINSKI G86 I rise today to acknowledge a well-known and, in turn, much-loved member of the northern beaches community. Those who know Mike Pawley OAM would describe him as an entrepreneur, sportsman, family man and philanthropist. However, those four terms hardly do justice to the generosity and passion Mike constantly illustrates. Mike's motto of 'never give up and always give back' really says it all and is exampled by his many, many achievements. As a lifelong resident of the beaches, Mike is a testament to what can be achieved. When speaking about his childhood, he explains that, whilst he was growing up, his family was very poor and lived in public housing. He describes his father as being 'generous to a fault—whatever he had, he was willing to give'. It was his father's generosity that taught him a lifelong lesson, forming the foundation of his benevolence. Mike attended Sydney university on a bursary from the Manly Leagues Club, completing a bachelor's degree in science and a Diploma of Education. Enthusiastic to make a contribution to the next generation, Mike began his professional career as a maths teacher, working across multiple schools on the northern beaches. Sport is a large part of Mike's life. As a passionate cricketer he spent over 20 years out on the field, and represented New South Wales in 11 first-grade matches. This love of sport inspired him to open his first sporting goods store, in Balgowlah, in 1978. Forty years later Mike Pawley Sports is a household name on the northern beaches, with four additional stores in Dee Why, Forestville, Manly Vale and Mona Vale. Mike's extensive knowledge of his products and his keen ability to develop authentic relationships with his customers set his family business apart from others. Mike's community presence is strong. In 2012, on the Australia Day Honours List, this was recognised as he was awarded a Medal of the Order of Australia 'for service to the sport of cricket in the Manly-Warringah area'. In addition, there is now a Mike Pawley Oval in North Curl Curl. However, Mike's footprint runs further than the beaches. His impact reaches as far as Cambodia, through the work of his Happy Days charity. His organisation provides sponsorship for over 1,000 children in rural Cambodia, a place where 85 per cent of the population lives on less than $1.50 a day. This includes 12 scholarships for university students, many high school scholarships and ongoing support for the education of 600 students at the Srey Vibol Ke village school. Since 2011 his charity has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars, holding a mission to improve the lives of underprivileged children. Mike is a strong believer that with education comes power. His charity has empowered a whole generation of children—the start of a cycle that can help people in the Siem Reap locality bring themselves out of poverty. (Time expired) Yarra Bay Cruise Ship Terminal 79 10:19 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith Last year the New South Wales Liberal government said that they would test the waters with a proposal for a cruise ship terminal at Yarra Bay. On Wednesday this week that proposal moved a step closer, with the New South Wales Liberal government issuing a press release stating that they were preparing a business case for this proposal and they were going to ask the cruise ship industry whether or not they wanted a cruise ship terminal at Yarra Bay. It comes on the back of the Port Authority saying that a cruise ship terminal at Yarra Bay would be feasible into the future. So, with the New South Wales Liberals, it's full steam ahead with a massive, destructive cruise ship terminal at the picturesque Yarra Bay, near La Perouse. At the recent state and federal elections, the Liberal Party volunteers on the polling booths were saying to people as they went in to vote: 'Don't worry; there won't be a cruise ship terminal at Yarra Bay. You've got nothing to worry about. It won't be going ahead.' The Liberals lied to our community. They deliberately misled people, when they were voting at the recent state and federal elections, about a proposal that is deeply unpopular in the community that I represent. There is massive opposition to a cruise ship terminal at Yarra Bay. The La Perouse Aboriginal community, whose ancestors have inherited those shores, that land and those waterways for tens of thousands of years, are opposed to this proposal. The land council has passed a motion in opposition to this proposal. But the government ignores them and ploughs on anyway. These are traditional fishing grounds that have been the source of food and income for the Aboriginal community for tens of thousands of years. This proposal will do massive environmental damage. Once again the northern side of Botany Bay will need to be dredged to build this cruise ship terminal. That threatens the protected species, like the weedy seadragons and the pygmy pipehorse, that inhabit that area, and protected seagrasses. Small-business operators, like the dive operators that work in that area, don't want it. Fisherpersons who fish in that area don't want it. And, of course, local residents are concerned about the increasing traffic and congestion on local roads. Even domestic airline pilots and their association have said that this is potentially a danger for them when they're coming in to land on the third runway. No-one in our community wants this ridiculous proposal to go ahead, but that is exactly what the Berejiklian Liberal government is doing. We will fight this proposal for a cruise ship terminal at Yarra Bay. It is a ridiculous proposal. It makes no sense, and it represents the New South Wales Liberal government steamrolling over the interests of Aboriginal people, the environment and our community. Bennelong Electorate: Armenian Community 79 10:23 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong Bennelong is rightly famous for its rich cultural diversity. We are one of the most multicultural communities in the country, with a huge diaspora from China, Korea, Italy and South Asia. These communities make our local communities richer and stronger and, I firmly believe, are the reason for our corner of Sydney's harmony and growth. We also have the largest Armenian community in the country. Armenians have been coming to our country for decades, and many have chosen to settle in Ryde and Marsfield. Many famous locals have come from this community—most notably the New South Wales Premier, Gladys Berejiklian. But while many have found success on the nation's stage, many more have found it in: serving our community as owners of small businesses, like Greg Kouchkarian, my mechanic; serving as councillors, like Sarkis Yedelian; and running chambers of commerce, like Nora Etmekdjian. This entrepreneurial, energetic and inspiring community accounts for a large amount of our community spirit. Australia's relationship with Armenia goes back over 100 years. It was Anzac prisoners of war being held in Turkey after being captured at Gallipoli who first reported on the mass killings of Armenians by the Ottoman forces, bringing the travesty of the Armenian genocide to the world stage. How a people can come back from such a devastating time is extraordinary—a great story of human resilience amid unrelenting heartbreak. These tragic events have brought our countries closer together, and our relationship will be even stronger when we finally recognise this event as the genocide it was. I've been talking about Armenia in this building for over a decade now but always from a point of unfamiliarity. I have heard of the country's beauty, the rich cuisine, the people's kindness and the many tales of their expatriates but I have never seen them for myself, which is why I'm so excited to finally be going there to see this incredible country. I can't wait to see the ancient churches and the prehistoric mountain ranges and meet the people of this incredible nation who've gone through so much suffering and conflict over the past century but have still remained resilient and optimistic. I'm grateful to the local Armenian community, who have helped put together my journey and advised me on all the things I should see, and the ANC for all their support. It will be an excellent journey, and I can't wait to return to be able to truly engage with Armenian locals with a deeper understanding of the country they left behind to come to ours—immigrants who have made our country enormously better. Centrelink 80 10:25 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley This government's flawed, toxic robo-debt system is putting already vulnerable people in financial peril, and it's also undermining Australian's relationship with and confidence in government. At the heart of the robo-debt system is one blanket computer algorithm which spits out letters to hundreds of thousands of citizens saying, 'We think you owe us money; you prove to us you don't.' That, understandably, is very stressful and, in many cases, it's proven to be wrong. The people are being put through the grinder. Australia's social security system—Newstart, youth allowance and pensions—is fundamentally about people and their lives. Yet what this Liberal government has done is take the people out of the administration of the system—taken the heart out. It's not the fault of the employees of Centrelink, or at least those that are left who haven't had their jobs cut by funding cuts or outsourcing to labour hire; it's the fault of an automatically generated letter based on an algorithm—a letter which puts the onus on people to prove, sometimes many years later, that they don't owe Centrelink any money. Since I've been the member for Dunkley, members of my community have contacted my office, often in desperation and always in frustration, seeking help to resolve debt notices or procedural unfairness in their dealings with Centrelink. Here are just two examples. A single mother of four struggling to make ends meet with the settlement from the breakdown of her marriage, her only financial security, woke on Thursday last week to find that she only had $28 in her bank account to get through the weekend. Overnight, Centrelink had withdrawn $39,000 for a debt that they say she owed from 2015. Apparently they didn't have the capacity to find the address that she'd moved to following the breakdown of her marriage, but they did have the capacity to find her bank account—which used her new address—and withdraw all the money she had. Where's the procedural fairness in that? How is she expected to look after her four children with $28 in the bank? Then there's another woman from my electorate who's about to have her first child in November this year. Imagine her surprise when she received a call from a debt collector in September 2018 telling her she owed $5,000 to Centrelink for alleged overpayments in 2011, when she was receiving youth allowance. Where's the procedural fairness in that? It gets worse. She was lucky enough to be able to prove that she didn't owe the debt—it was waived—but, all of a sudden, just recently, it's turned up again in her myGov account. It's no wonder that she and her husband don't have confidence in the system anymore. They don't have confidence that the review will wipe the debt again and they don't have confidence that the maternity payments that she is supposed to receive will be properly delivered. My electorate office will continue to advocate for my constituents to try to make sure their dealings with Centrelink are fairer, but it's time for this government to put the people and put the heart back into our social security system. Cox, Mr Robert, Hogden, Tyler 81 10:28 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page Forty years of service to one job is a wonderful achievement that few people reach, but that is exactly what Deputy Captain Robert Cox has done for the Casino fire brigade as an on-call retained firefighter. Bob joined the fire brigade at the age of 25 back in 1979. Bob served for many years with other family members. His brothers John, who is deceased, and Darcy both served at the Casino 253 station, along with his brother-in-law John Halliday. As a station officer in the early years, it was Bob's job to test the bells—perfect for letting his children, Darryl and Christie, know that it was time for school. Bob has also seen the service change from a volunteer service to the New South Wales Fire Brigade and now Fire and Rescue NSW. The station itself is 100 years old and has undergone extensions and renovations to keep up with the demands of the services today. One of those soon-to-be-completed extensions is a shed that Bob has been instrumental in arranging. The addition will become a museum, holding decades of firefighting memorabilia for our future generations. In April this year, Bob was present when the sirens sounded to mark the 100th anniversary of the station. To be part of the brigade for nearly half of its life is a wonderful story. Bob has also competed in many firefighting events representing the Casino station. The team was originally led by Bob Leeson and later Graeme Philips, and they often finished in the top 10 at state championships. In 2007 Bob applied for the position of deputy captain, which he has held since then. He has mentored many firefighters over the years, while performing in excess of 6,000 call-outs. Bob's wife, Sue, has been by his side since they married in 1976. Bob, I thank you for your dedication and service to our community, and I wish you and Sue all the best in your retirement. I would like to highlight the wonderful achievement of 16-year-old Grafton girl Tyler Hogden. Tyler is a junior Grafton Dragon Boat Club member, and was selected to wear the green and gold for the national Australian Dragon Boat team, the Auroras. Tyler was one of two paddlers picked from regional New South Wales, and recently had the opportunity to attend the IDBF World Dragon Boat Racing Championships in Thailand. After a successful trip Tyler returned to Grafton with a bronze and two silver medals, and was part of the Australian team who came second in the medal tally. Tyler's mother and father, Nicole and Warren, are exceptionally proud of her achievements, as are her younger brothers Mackenzie and Jake and the Grafton Dragon Boat Club. I would like to congratulate Tyler on the result and wish her all the best. Queensland: Olympic and Paralympic Games 81 10:31 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I recently had the pleasure of accompanying a Queensland delegation to meet with the President of the International Olympic Committee, Dr Thomas Bach, to continue discussions regarding a possible 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games for Queensland. The delegation was led by the Queensland Premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, and we were joined by the member for Fairfax, Mr Ted O'Brien; LGAQ President Mark Jamieson, of the Sunshine Coast; Mr John Coates AC, President of the Australian Olympic Committee and IOC member; and Mr John O'Neill AO, Chairman of the Star Entertainment Group. I'm pleased to inform the House that the delegation was warmly welcomed by the IOC, with President Bach commenting that he had never seen a bid 'as advanced and with such preparedness' as this stage of the Queensland potential 2032 bid. However, there is still much work and preparation to be done by the Queensland 2032 task force, which includes a value proposition assessment looking at the potential for an Olympic and Paralympic Games. The value proposition will assess the venue and village master plans and transport infrastructure required; assess what infrastructure would be prioritised, funded and delivered irrespective of an Olympic Games; assess the economic viability and cost benefits through a detailed economic assessment; determine the funding sources, including contributions from federal, state and local governments as well as the private sector; and determine the overarching value proposition of a 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The value proposition assessment is aimed to be completed by December of this year, with a report to be provided to government in December 2019. If the result of these investigations shows that having an Olympic Games delivers more jobs, private investment and the infrastructure needed for Queensland, then I believe we stand ready to fully support a bid moving forward. The visit to the IOC provided a unique opportunity to better understand the processes and just how the games could benefit Queensland and Australia. During the visit, the IOC also provided a series of expansive presentations on topics including the Olympic movement, the Olympic Agenda 2020, new norms, legacy sustainability and the future of the games. These briefings were extremely beneficial and will help inform and frame the work undertaken by the 2032 task force, and I acknowledge the hard work of the member for Fairfax. The opportunity to host an Olympics would be a tremendous honour, and it would undoubtedly present Queensland with incredible opportunities and benefits for our nation. It would build on Queensland's proven track record of delivering world-class sporting events, demonstrated through our recent experience with the 2018 Commonwealth Games. The priority now is to carefully assess the value proposition, including the full economic impact of bidding for, and hosting, an event of this magnitude. If a bid is to go ahead it will need to have strong backing, including financial support from all levels of government. I wish to extend my thanks to the Queensland Premier for her hard work on a dedicated proposal. Wide Bay Electorate 82 10:34 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay It's one of our jobs as members of parliament to convey the views, thoughts and ideas of the people we represent. I recently asked the constituents of Wide Bay, if they could make a statement to the parliament, what would they say? By far the biggest concern that was raised by people in my electorate was the nation's water security. Tessa Damasco says developing Australia's water infrastructure would be the greatest thing that politicians could do for our country. Yvonne Thomas wants to see the Bradfield Scheme enacted. Julie Collins, Ivy Mcauley, Maryan McGown and many others want to droughtproof Australia and make more dams and water infrastructure. Pam Rackley wants natural sequence farming, more carbon sequestration and soil improvement. The price of electricity is also a big concern in Wide Bay. Andrew Haack wants to use Australia's resources to produce more electricity at a cheaper rate. Michelle Byrne wants to upgrade electricity, water, roads and sewerage infrastructure to ensure Wide Bay can develop and create more jobs and attract industry to create employment in the region. Ricky Ware wants the government to help new businesses to decrease long-term mature unemployment rates. Sharon Turner wants to see roads improved, particularly the Running Creek bridge, which has caused so many accidents. Peter Todd also wants to see roads improved and more coal-fired power plants and water storage to be built throughout the country. Nancy Evans wants to see more action on section D of the Cooroy to Curra Bruce Highway Upgrade—and I want the project to start and be finished as soon as possible. Michelle Stevens and Cherie Haack want to see foreign ownership stopped. Margie Atkinson and Joy Goulding want to reduce immigration to Australia. Alecia Marie Staines, someone I know very well, wants improvements to maternal care to ensure that women receive a high standard of care during and after pregnancy. Mental health is an issue that I feel strongly about, and so do many Australians. Kelly Gee wants more mental health services and support for emergency service personnel to ensure they receive adequate care due to their stressful profession. Kaylene Moss supports our family law reform inquiry. Jeremy Ison wants to stop the proposed $10,000-plus cash transaction ban. John Kennedy wants to slash red tape to support small business and a rethink of population. Andrew Levine wants changes in the private importation of modified classic cars and to hold green activists to account. I thank everyone from my federal division who contributed their suggestions and look forward to continuing to advance their concerns in this place. Health Care 82 10:37 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand Pain is the first thing that Ben Harrison-Atkinson feels when he wakes up every morning. Ben is a constituent of mine. He has trigeminal neuralgia, a chronic pain condition where any stimulation to his face triggers excruciating pain. Simple daily tasks that we take for granted—brushing our teeth, eating, shaving or even smiling—can be unbearable for Ben. He's not alone in his suffering. Ben is one of over three million Australians who live with chronic pain. To lead a normal life, Ben casts aside pain and gets on with his day, but he can only do that when he has access to the right medication and the right pain management services, and getting access to pain relief drugs is hard, particularly for sufferers who use opioids. In recent years, federal and state governments have enacted several measures to reduce opioid utilisation in Australia. In July 2018, the Australian government's Chief Medical Officer sent letters to almost 5,000 GPs, telling them their prescriptions of opioids were being monitored. In August 2019, the government announced it'd be making post-operative opioid pack sizes smaller and it's changing indications for the powerful narcotic fentanyl so that it can only be used for cancer and palliative care patients. Chronic pain sufferers already feel stigma when they request medication scripts from their doctor. Ben says that he's made to feel like a junkie. These measures have made GPs even more reluctant to prescribe pain medication. As they work to reduce deaths from opioid related overdoses—an extremely important cause—the government must also not forget the needs of chronic pain sufferers. Earlier this year, the government released the National Strategic Action Plan for Pain Management to improve the quality of life for people living with pain. The plan doesn't set out a time frame for action, nor does it set out any targets. That's not enough. Many Australians are suffering now, and they need action now. They need access to GPs and specialist pain services. They need access to appropriate medicines without stigma or judgement. They don't need that extra burden on their physical suffering—the mental torment of having to plead their case to a doctor and have chemists look down their noses at them while filling their scripts. Nearly 300 people around Australia have signed a petition, which Ben set up, which calls for the government to improve the way they handle pain management, especially for accessing opioids and medical marijuana. Chronic pain, ironically, is a silent illness—often an invisible illness. Australians suffer in silence to avoid the stigma associated with prescription pain medication. I want to tell Ben that I support him and the three million people and ask them to no longer suffer in silence. I support their call on the government to do more now and to take action to close the gap between the removal of services now and the replacement of additional measures in the future. Bradfield Electorate: Arts 83 10:40 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I rise today to acknowledge the vibrant activity in the artistic community in my electorate of Bradfield. It's particularly pleasing to be able to acknowledged that because of the intersection between my local responsibilities and my responsibilities as the Commonwealth Minister for Communications, Cyber Safety and the Arts. The Ku-Ring-Gai Art Society held its 54th annual awards night recently. This was alongside the annual exhibition of works by the many talented members of the Ku-Ring-Gai Art Society, which was held at St Ives Shopping Village in a very innovative arrangement. The works are displayed on the ramps going down to the car park. It works extremely well. Each year I present the Member for Bradfield prize for a particular work, and this year it went to Caroline Oesterheld for her painting Middle Harbour Lookout. That painting will be used on my Christmas card, which will go to every household in the electorate, allowing that work to be widely known across Bradfield. I congratulate President Liz Harriott and all involved in the Ku-Ring-Gai Art Society. Can I also congratulate the Marian Street Theatre for Young People, one of Australia's oldest continually running children's theatre and drama schools, which opened in 1969. It uses a combination of theatre training and live performances to develop the creativity of young people from Bradfield and surrounding areas and to present engaging stories that can be enjoyed by all ages. It was a privilege on the weekend to attend the 50th anniversary celebrations of the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden. There were some selections from some of Marian Street Theatre for Young People's greatest hits. There were some samplers, including Nelly the Very Curious Elephant; Maya and the Sea Dragon; and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. Can I also acknowledge the recent visit by the Bell Shakespeare company to Lindfield East Public School. They performed an interpretation of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet in front of a class of year 6 students. The play has been adapted by Joanna Erskine into a format that absolutely grabbed the attention of the 70 or 80 year 6 students who were there. They thoroughly enjoyed it. They laughed and their attention was very much gripped. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of the talented artists, actors, musicians and others active in Bradfield and all who support them. I congratulate Ku-Ring-Gai Art Society, Marian Street Theatre for Young People and Lindfield East Public School, for their recent visit from the Bell Shakespeare company. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 00AMT In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. BILLS 83 BILLS Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020 83

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020

Consideration in Detail 83 10:43 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney Thank you for the opportunity to make an opening statement. The Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio currently have 13 agencies that receive an appropriation from the government. The 2019-20 budget supply and appropriation bills provide the portfolio with appropriations for ordinary annual services of $2 billion in 2019-20. The total appropriations for the portfolio include half-a-billion dollars for functions not related to Indigenous affairs. Included in the total funding for the portfolio, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet itself will be provided with appropriations for ordinary annual services of $279 million in 2019-20. The average staffing level for the portfolio is 4,520. It should be noted that a substantial portion of the ASL for the portfolio is funded through external revenue receipts that were not appropriated to entities within the portfolio by an annual appropriation act or another act. The 2019-20 budget delivered a number of important measures led by the Prime Minister and cabinet portfolio These included: supporting farmers in drought, suicide prevention, and the creation of the National Indigenous Australians Agency. On 1 March, the government announced the establishment of the North Queensland Livestock Industry Recovery Agency. The agency is supporting the immediate response recovery and reconstruction efforts in North, Far North and west Queensland communities affected by the heavy rainfall and widespread flooding in early 2019. The agency represents the government's long-term commitment to rebuild the region, long after the floodwaters have receded. This will include developing a long-term plan to help rebuild the industry, which will include new programs that provide access to seed funding to rebuild on-farm infrastructure and restock herds. More than $3.3 billion has been paid or committed to assist people affected by this event. The new National Indigenous Australians Agency was established on 1 July 2019, transitioning from the former Indigenous Affairs group of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. This agency will lead the Australian government's Indigenous policy and program design. The agency will provide more autonomy and authority to coordinate across the Commonwealth and will report to the Minister for Indigenous Australians, the Hon. Ken Wyatt AM MP, and the Prime Minister. The government is leading a change in the way Australians and Australian governments think about suicide prevention. Recognising that social, financial, legal, family, health and mental health factors may all play their part, we are elevating suicide prevention to a national whole-of-government priority. As part of this commitment, the government has appointed a National Youth Suicide Prevention Adviser to work with the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, and the Minister of Health to drive a whole-of-government approach to suicide prevention, while ensuring prevention services reach Australians that need them and the comments are supported. The government will provide $5.1 million over four years from 2019-20 and $1 million per year ongoing to the National Office of Child Safety within the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet to provide national leadership and implementation of the national principles for child-safe organisations, and to progress work in response to the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Funding of $5 million will be provided in 2019 to establish a task force within the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet to examine the Commonwealth's role in the social impact investment market. Building on work already undertaken, the task force will develop the next stage of the strategy for the Commonwealth's role in the market, leveraging international private sector and state and territory government experience to identify a way forward for the Commonwealth social impact investments, including how these investments can provide solutions for entrenched disadvantage. The government will provide $2 million in 2019-20 to undertake preparation for a national orphanage museum, including engagement with the states and territories. The government is also committing to maintaining the ability for agencies to deliver on key government priorities. Additional support will be provided to the National Australia Day Council for Australia Day activities and funding to undertake a review of their programs. As part of the $340 million Fourth Action Plan to prevent violence against women and their children, the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet will receive $2 million to support the development of strategies for the prevention of financial abuse. Thank you for this opportunity to set out the portfolio's budget measures and give a brief insight into how they will benefit our community and our economy. 10:48 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland My questions are to the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service and Cabinet. They go to the critical issues of the delivery of government services and the accountability of government. An essential part of good government is the need for a strong, professional and well-resourced public service. The role of public servants is critical in our democratic system. Their responsibilities include providing frank and fearless advice to government, managing public finances and multibillion dollar programs, and day-to-day service delivery and interaction with the Australian people. Labor value the is role of the Australian Public Service. That is because Labor believes in the role of government in delivering a more prosperous and productive economy in a fairer and more just society. By contrast, the Liberals and Nationals have entrenched ideological hostility to the role of government. So it comes as no surprise that the Liberal government have diminished and devalued the role of the Public Service. They have cut thousands of Public Service jobs, including in frontline service delivery. They've contracted out more and more Public Service functions to expensive private sector consultants. They've presided over major fiascos when it comes to value for money in government administration. They are led by a Prime Minister who has failed to enforce his own standards of ministerial conduct—a failure which has eroded standards of accountability and integrity and eroded the level of public trust in government institutions. People in my electorate rely heavily on government services like education, health care, social security and disability support services. They've been telling me that the level and quality of the services have been deteriorating under this government and that the cuts to services are hurting them in their everyday lives. Since being elected this Liberal government has cut nearly 15,000 jobs from government agencies, including Medicare, Centrelink and the Department of Home Affairs. In the last six years the Liberals have cut nearly 10 per cent of the jobs in the APS, even though Australia's population has grown by nearly 10 per cent over this period. The need for public services is increasing as our population grows and ages, yet the government keeps running down the services. In its election policies, the government announced a further $1.5 billion in cuts to departmental funding over the forward estimates. This will mean a further erosion of the quality and level of services provided to the community. The impact of diminished service quality is real and felt by ordinary Australians every day. The Liberals have cut more than 5,000 jobs from Centrelink. This has driven a blowout in processing times for age pensions, which sees thousands of seniors running down their savings as they wait six months or more for their pension. The Liberals have botched the implementation of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and this means people with disabilities are waiting up to a year for their plan to be finalised. The Liberals have cut thousands of jobs from the Department of Human Services while spending hundreds of millions of dollars on labour hire contractors to staff compliance functions and call centres run by private firms. The result is that more than 46 million phone calls from Australians seeking to access basic entitlements and services went unanswered in 2017-18. Let me repeat that: in 2017-18, 46 million phone calls to government services such as Centrelink went unanswered. And last weekend The Canberra Times reported that Australia's national scientific research agency, CSIRO, has been forced to tell Australia's next generation of scientists to get an ABN, as it tries to work around the government's staffing caps by hiring new talent as external contractors. This is insanity. The government likes to tell us it knows how to manage money, yet we've seen major fiascos when it comes to value for money and standards of accountability in the management of government contracts. The government's incompetence and inability to secure value for money in major contracts has been revealed repeatedly by the Auditor-General. We have seen $423 million in contracts for garrison services in Papua New Guinea issued, with no public tender process, to a company with a beach shack as its headquarters; a scathing report by the Auditor-General in 2016-17 on contract management in the Immigration portfolio; and the shonky decision to award $443 million to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation. My questions to the minister are: How many Public Service jobs will go under the government's latest $1.5 billion in cuts to departmental funding? What impact will these job losses have on the delivery of services to the Australian people? Will he apologise to the thousands of pensioners and NDIS families in my electorate who are forced to wait for essential services and answers because of this government's chronic cuts? 10:53 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I'm delighted to respond to the member for Shortland's statements. I have to start with some clarifications. Firstly, in terms of value for money, I did inherit, when I was responsible for the environment, the task of cleaning up the mess of the pink batts fiasco. We also saw the citizens assembly program, which never took off; the green loans; the school halls; and 'cash for clunkers'. I lived through the pink batts program and met with the families of those four young men who lost their lives, and others had to spend many years cleaning up the mess of the catastrophe in terms of the borders: over 1,000 people lost their lives; over 50,000 people arrived; there were more than 17 detention centres; and $5 billion worth of costs— An opposition member interjecting— Mr HUNT 00AMV I'm responding in terms of fiascos. There were $5 billion of additional costs just under the now shadow health minister's watch, when he was immigration minister, in terms of border blowouts. I don't think this is an area that they ought to be going to. I'm happy to inform the House that there were 147,000 APS employees as at 31 December 2018. We value their work enormously. They make a huge difference to the delivery of services. As the Prime Minister said in his speech on 19 August to the Australian Public Service, he has enormous respect for and belief in the role of Australia's public servants. In particular, one of the things we talked about, going forward, was the importance of outside-experience and mid-career-experience recruits, and the value that private sector secondment would give in terms of providing career development opportunities. We focused very clearly, in our discussions and in the Prime Minister's statement, on valuing the Public Service and valuing its career trajectory. In my own discussions with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, with the Public Service Commissioner and with the union, I have raised that very notion of support for, belief in and commitment to the role of our public servants. Equally, all of this is about making sure that, ultimately, we are delivering for the Australian public. There was a reference to Medicare. That's why we've guaranteed Medicare as the first call on the budget, through the guaranteeing Medicare and PBS bill. That's why, when we talk about value for money, being able to deliver a balanced budget—as the Treasurer and the finance minister have outlined in the last half-hour—in the year just completed has meant that we have been able to invest in those services. That's why bulk-billing is up to record levels, never before seen. That's why Medicare funding is up to record levels, never before seen, from $19 billion under the previous government to $26 billion, to $27 billion, to $29 billion, to $31 billion. Those figures are real, unequivocal and verified. They may be inconvenient for the opposition but they are important for Australians everywhere. Above all else, as the Prime Minister said in his speech to the Public Service on 19 August, we need the APS to be an exemplar of innovation and adaptability. That's why the Thodey review is such an important part of that, and why we honour our public servants and support them. I want to express my thanks for their work not just within the Department of Health but also within my role assisting the Prime Minister right across the Australian Public Service. 10:57 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin My questions to the government ministers are in relation to women and the women's portfolio, particularly on what the government is actually doing to drive gender equality in Australia. Just last week we had the Treasurer say in this place that the gender pay gap had closed, which I think was news to many women around Australia. Of course, we know that that is not quite true. Indeed, we know that women are still earning 14 per cent less than their male colleagues. Indeed, the fact is that there has been a consistent gender pay gap in Australia for the last two decades of around 16 per cent. According to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, between 1998 and 2018 the gender pay gap has hovered between 14.1 per cent and 18.5 per cent. Last month's ABS data showed that the gender pay gap remains static at 14 per cent. Indeed, it was at its highest—coinciding with the mining boom—in November 2014, at 18½ per cent. My question to the minister is: what has the government done, essentially, since the mining boom to close that gender pay gap? I'd be really keen to hear from the government how it has allegedly closed the gap. I understand the gap still exists, despite what the Treasurer has said. It is interesting that the government is trying to claim credit for a small change in the gender pay gap—particularly the Prime Minister, when he said: 'Under Labor the gender pay gap increased. Under our government it's fallen, and it's heading in the right direction.' But, apart from the ending of the mining boom, there's been nothing done by this government that would actually explain that change in the gender pay gap. Indeed, the experts actually say that the government cannot claim any credit for decreasing the gender pay gap because they haven't done anything and that the only measure by any government that may have been responsible for closing that gender pay gap was, indeed, put in place by the former Labor government, and that was the gender pay gap reporting that we introduced. The government haven't actually done anything about the gender pay gap. They have not. It's a really serious issue that does need to be addressed, so I'd be keen for one of the ministers to tell me exactly what they've done. Saying, 'We had an economic statement,' doesn't actually cut it. We had one every year. It was called the Women's Budget Statement. We released it with the budget. Perhaps they could give that a go and actually start to assess some of their policies and their impact on women. The other issue I want to raise is a very serious one that has been raised in this place in the last few days, and that is violence against women. I am privileged to be a former Minister for the Status of Women, and I know the statistics don't lie. I know that, sadly, still one in six Australian women after the age of 15 is affected by family violence by a current or former partner. We all know that, according to Our Watch, one woman a week is murdered by a current or former partner. These are very serious issues, as I know everybody in this place agrees. I know that the government had an election commitment around increasing some services around this. I'd specifically like to know what services are being delivered by the Office for Women, how much funding they're getting and whether or not it's going to frontline services, because I am getting reports from all over the country that frontline services cannot keep up with demand. They cannot assist all the women and children fleeing family violence. We had some commentary yesterday that, frankly, I think was very disappointing about whether or not women are telling the truth about their family violence. This is a really serious issue. We need to take this seriously, and the government need to respond to demand in those services. I would be very keen to hear whether or not those services are actually getting the funding from the government's election commitment. I'd specifically like to know that on behalf of the member for Newcastle. She has in her electorate a centre, Jenny's Place Domestic Violence Resource Centre, that I understand is at risk of imminent closure. She would like to know: can she get access for this service to the government's funds that it announced during the election campaign? I've got services in my own home state of Tasmania that are seeing more women and families fleeing violence than they can deal with. These services urgently need money, they urgently need funding from the government and, whilst I understand there was an election commitment, I'd like to know when, where and how that money is actually getting to those women and children that desperately need those services. 11:02 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff Under the Morrison government, the point is that the gender pay gap is decreasing. The coalition government backs Australian women, expanding their choices and delivering more opportunities. The budget bills we are considering will deliver a range of specific programs and, importantly, help to create the right conditions for women, men and their families to get ahead. Today, I want to highlight the achievements of Gold Coast women in the 70,000 small businesses on the Gold Coast—32,000 of those are in Moncrieff. We are known as the small-business capital of Australia. From the cafes in Miami and tourism operators in Surfers Paradise to the manufacturers of Molendinar, they are collectively the lifeblood of our local community. It's so important to support small businesses and celebrate their success. I want to take this opportunity to highlight the achievements and immense contributions that women-led businesses make to both the Gold Coast and the Australian economy. I'm proud to represent a city where women have a strong entrepreneurial spirit, with our city outperforming many of comparable size in female leadership, start-ups and industry innovation. I had the privilege of meeting with women leaders in my electorate with the Minister for Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business, Senator Michaelia Cash, and on a second occasion I hosted a roundtable discussion with the Minister for Women, Senator Marise Payne. It was the first time in history female leaders in business had had the opportunity to meet with the Minister for Women on the Gold Coast. These women have been successful across many industries, including manufacturing, health, law and the automotive sector. It was a great experience to hear directly from our women about the issuing affecting them and to showcase their success stories. I'd like to make special mention of the Women in Business Awards of Australia and Queensland Women in Business CEO, Karen Phillips, who has been instrumental in unearthing the depth and breadth of the growing cohort of female leaders in our city. Her work through these awards has encouraged ambition, empowered confidence and inspired women leaders now and into the future. These awards support and promote the exceptional work women are doing in the business community. Perhaps we can look forward to a day when women-in-business awards and roundtable discussions on how we can support women are no longer required, but until then the Morrison government continues to scaffold women who take the brave leap of faith to start their own business to reach their full potential. I want to see women with the networks, opportunities and financial support to match their entrepreneurial spirit. I'll just mention a few of the women who were at the roundtable: Councillor Gail O'Neill; Alana Beattie from Coffee Roasters Australia—which is a 100 per cent Australian owned and manufactured coffee-roasting equipment business—was the 2015 Gold Coast Women in Business of the Year winner; Deb Farnworth-Wood, the 2017 Gold Coast Woman in Business of the Year winner and managing director of Ultimate Skin & Body; Cheryl Stewart; Kathleen Broadway from Gold Coast BMW; Caralee Fontenele from Collective Family Law, a new style of law collective; Criena Gehrke, the CEO of the Home of the Arts on the Gold Coast, with a diverse and eclectic background in arts management; and mayoress Ruth Tate and Councillor Pauline Young were also there as special guests with the mayor. It's great to be in this chamber to highlight the women in business in my electorate of Moncrieff on the Gold Coast. I ask the minister to explain in detail how the programs within the Women's Economic Security Statement, which are being delivered with this budget, will help women in my electorate and across our nation. Finally, I conclude my remarks by commending the budget bills to the House and by restating how proud I am to be part of a Morrison government that is delivering real and practical benefits for all Australians, especially for women. I'm very proud to stand here and commend this bill. 11:06 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland My question is to the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, an assistant minister representing a Prime Minister and government who are letting Australians down. Instead of helping Australians to get ahead, they are cutting education, health care and infrastructure—the investments that Australians need to build better lives for themselves and their families. Instead of managing the economy to boost living standards, they are presiding over the weakest economic growth since the global financial crisis. Instead of offering policies to meet the challenges of the future, all they can do is play student political games of wedge politics. This is a government which is striking in its complete lack of a positive agenda. They have no policies for meeting the big challenges of the future like climate change and energy, the impact of technological change on the workforce, the need to boost productivity and economic growth, and rising social and economic inequality. They have no agenda for building a better Australia. What we have is an out-of-ideas government led by a Prime Minister obsessed with wedging Labor and bashing the trade union movement rather than governing for all Australians. We have a Prime Minister who got the top job by knifing his predecessor, Malcolm Turnbull, and whose election campaign was built on misleading scare campaigns about Labor's policies. The government are in a state of denial over the weak state of the Australian economy. Their inaction is leaving Australia exposed at a time of global economic uncertainty. The latest national accounts show that, in the year to June, Australia's GDP grew at its slowest pace since the global financial crisis 10 years ago—just 1.4 per cent in real terms. Slower growth means lower living standards, fewer jobs and less opportunity. It means wages are stagnant. There are 1.8 million Australians who are looking for more work or work in the first place, and living standards are under pressure. The economic indicators are clear. When the Liberals came to office in 2013 Australia was the eighth-fastest-growing OECD economy. Today we have dropped to 20th. Middle Australians living standards have fallen. The median Australian household income is lower in real terms today than when they came to office in 2013. Let me repeat that: Middle Australia has lower living standards now than when the government were first elected in 2013. Business investment as a share of GDP is around its lowest level since the early 1990s. Productivity, which is the driver of improvements in living standards long term, has actually declined over the last year. So we've got poor business investment, 1.8 million people wanting work or looking for more hours, living standards actually falling and declining productivity—this is a recipe for stagnation. The government are in denial about this, just as they are in denial about the need to take action on climate and energy policy. Climate change is a challenge which will have serious effects on future generations of Australians. Some of them are marching tomorrow to protest those impacts. Yet this government has washed its hands of serious action to tackle climate change by reducing Australia's greenhouse gas emissions. The countries of the world came together at the Paris climate conference in 2015 and agreed to take action to limit the global temperature increase to well below two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The scientific advice is that to achieve this goal will require reducing carbon dioxide emissions to net zero by 2050, yet this government has no target for 2050, and its target for 2030 is woefully inadequate. It will use Kyoto accounting tricks to water down its inadequate target even further. The government's own figures show that, in 2030, emissions in Australia will be only seven per cent below 2000 levels, despite its commitment to achieving at least minus 26 per cent. It has no policies for actually delivering on the emissions reduction commitments it has made, so it's hardly surprising that, under this government, emissions are going up, not down. The list of areas where this government is letting Australians down goes on: failing to deliver on infrastructure promises; washing its hands as low-paid workers see their penalty rates cut; putting caps on NDIS that are hurting vulnerable people; ignoring age pensioners' concerns about deeming rates; and failing to enforce its own standards of ministerial integrity. These are all signs of a Prime Minister who puts the coalition's political self-interest ahead of the national interest, ignoring the concerns of ordinary Australians and ignoring the long-term challenges this nation faces. My question to the assistant minister is this: with the rate of economic growth falling to its lowest level since the global financial crisis, why is this government playing wedge politics in this parliament instead of bringing forward an agenda to boost living standards, productivity and economic growth? 11:11 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson The 2019-20 budget continues to deliver for all Australians, because both men and women deserve an equal stake in our society and our economy. We have a proud track record of delivery for the women of Australia. We have delivered a stronger economy, resulting in over six million women now in jobs. Women's full-time employment and female participation have reached record highs, and we now have the lowest gender pay gap on record, at 14 per cent. I'm delighted that around 56 per cent of new jobs created under this government have been taken up by women. In addition to creating the best economic environment for women to get ahead, we also delivered the 2019 Women's Economic Security Statement. Under this statement, we're investing $151.4 million to improve the financial security and independence of Australian women, giving them more choices in their lives. This includes: $3.6 million to support young women to become entrepreneurs, through the Future Female Entrepreneurs Program; $18 million for Boosting Female Founders, a start-up fund to ensure women can access the finance they need to achieve their entrepreneurial goals; and Career Revive, a program working with regional employers to develop action plans for their businesses to attract and retain women. We're also supporting young women and girls with educational investments in STEM, economics, business and enterprise so that they can get the high-paying jobs of tomorrow. All of this matters because nothing gives an individual more choices than a hand up, a good education and the economic security that comes with a steady job. Importantly, we'll continue to treat domestic violence prevention and reduction as a natural priority— An honourable member: What's a 'natural priority'? Mrs ANDREWS 230886 I made an error in my pronunciation there. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY Order! All remarks will be made through the chair. Mrs ANDREWS 230886 I'm happy to correct that. I don't want this to be an adversarial statement here, because we are speaking about a particularly important issue, which is women. I would have hoped that those present and those listening today would understand and recognise the importance of women and making sure that we are working together in the best interests of women. I'm happy to correct the error that I just made then, so I shall do that now. Importantly, we will continue to treat domestic violence prevention and reduction as a national priority, with $340 million invested under the Fourth Action Plan of the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children. The 2019-20 budget continues to guarantee the essential services Australian women rely on, with additional investment in the health and wellbeing of Australian women. Our government knows that, when women do well, their families do well, our economy does well and our nation prospers. I certainly commend this budget bill to the House. Before I sit down, I would like to make some comments about women from my own personal experiences. I have a degree in mechanical engineering, and, in the portfolio that I hold now, I have the opportunity to talk to many young women. I am absolutely committed to making sure that, as a government, in my role as minister and as a local representative, and in fact, as a female member of this society, I do all that I can to encourage our young girls, particularly those at school, to look at what the future options may be for them. We understand that many of the jobs of the future—and the figure quoted is around 75 per cent of the jobs of the future—will require skills in science, technology, engineering and maths, and, unfortunately, very few girls are studying the higher level maths or the engineering subjects that they need, which includes the science subjects. I'm committed to assisting those women and those girls to make the career choices that they need, starting from at school, and so this government is injecting a significant amount of resources to assist young girls as they embark on their journey to fulfilling, rewarding careers. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY The Federation Chamber will now consider the National Indigenous Australians Agency segment of the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio in accordance with the agreed order of consideration. 11:17 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney Thank you for the opportunity to make an opening statement, this time in relation to Indigenous affairs. As I mentioned previously, the 2019-20 budget provides the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio with appropriations of ordinary annual services of $2 billion in 2019-20. Of the total appropriations for the portfolio, $1.5 billion relates to Indigenous affairs, with funding provided to Aboriginal Hostels Limited, the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, Indigenous Business Australia, the Indigenous Land and Sea Corporation, the Torres Strait Regional Authority and the recently established National Indigenous Australians Agency. The dividends of a strong economy are being reinvested by the coalition government into new services and opportunities to improve the lives of Indigenous Australians. The 2019-20 budget builds on the existing $5.2 billion Indigenous Advancement Strategy and invests in new services to support the aspirations of Indigenous people by providing safe and stable communities, improving health and wellbeing outcomes, delivering better education for young Indigenous Australians and creating sustainable pathways for jobseekers. Our government is committed to working with state and territory governments to deliver better housing for remote Indigenous communities. Building on our significant investment in housing for remote communities in the Northern Territory and Western Australia, this budget includes finalisation of an agreement with the South Australian government for a $37.5 million payment to support better housing for residents of remote Indigenous communities. One of our election commitments will also provide an investment of $105 million for remote Indigenous housing in Queensland. We are making communities safer by tackling the drivers of family and domestic violence, with $35 million allocated to support Indigenous women and children impacted by family violence and to develop prevention programs specifically designed for the needs of young people and adults. Through the 2019-20 budget, the coalition government will also invest $5 million over four years in youth led Indigenous suicide prevention initiatives across Australia. These initiatives will be regionally focused and tailored to meet the needs of each community. They reflect the coalition government's commitment to empowering young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians to design and lead efforts to tackle high rates of youth suicide in their communities. As part of our election commitments, we have also committed to a further $19.6 million for new services to prevent Indigenous youth suicide, particularly in the Kimberley. We remain steadfast in our commitment to recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians in the Constitution. We will seek to proceed to a referendum in this term of parliament once there is consensus on a proposal. While the issue of constitutional recognition is related to the issue of voice, they need to be treated separately. We are also committed to ensuring we have the best possible framework in place to hear Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices at the local, regional and national levels. This government has allocated $7.3 in 2019-20 to undertake a co-design process with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians to determine options for a voice, improve local and regional decision-making and consider options for constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians. The coalition government will build on its highly successful Indigenous Procurement Policy, which introduced a three per cent target for the number of Commonwealth contracts that go to Indigenous businesses. Commencing on 1 July 2019, the Commonwealth introduced a new three per cent value target for all Commonwealth contracts to be awarded to Indigenous businesses within the next decade. The IPP has already been a spectacular success, lifting Commonwealth purchasing from 30 Indigenous businesses winning $6.2 million of Commonwealth contracts in 2012-13 to over 1,400 Indigenous businesses winning $1.8 billion in Commonwealth contracts since the introduction of the IPP. The new targets will grow the opportunities for Indigenous owned and operated small businesses. The budget reaffirms the coalition government's commitment to supporting Indigenous students to attend school and get the education that creates the foundation for a better life. The budget includes the $200 million Indigenous Youth Education Package, announced in February, to fund additional scholarship placements and to give more Indigenous students the support and mentoring they need. This funding will drive school attendance and improve education outcomes, which we know are critical for their future. The budget demonstrates that the coalition government is working closely with Indigenous communities to invest in local priorities and what works on the ground. The coalition government believes in working together with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to make local decisions that give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people the support they need to deliver better life outcomes. Improving the lives of Indigenous Australians is part of our plan for a stronger economy and for securing a better future. Thank you for the opportunity to set out some highlights of the 2019-20 budget measures and election commitments and to give a brief insight into how they will benefit our community and economy. (Time expired) 11:19 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton Two years ago several hundred Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders met in Uluru. The Uluru Statement from the Heart was generated and the Australian Labor Party endorses and embraces the three aspects of the Uluru statement. The Uluru statement talked about an entrenchment of a First Nations voice to the Australian Constitution. It talked about a Makarrata Commission, which would lead the process of agreement and treaty making. It also talked about a national process of truth-telling. There are several questions I wish to put to the minister in relation to that particular process and where things are at in relation to the co-design process. It seems to me that the Labor Party has been very forthright in saying to the government on this particular issue: 'We want to work with you. We want to collaborate.' And that's still absolutely my position, but I am beginning to feel very nervous that that collaboration and that bipartisanship is not being embraced. My questions to the minister are as follows. If there is $7.3 million, as you said, that has been allocated to the co-design process, what has been undertaken so far by the government? Is there going to be a consultation with the Labor Party in relation to this? Has the Prime Minister already determined the outcome of the co-design process or will he genuinely listen to First Nations people through the process and deliver on an enshrined Indigenous voice to the parliament if that is the wish of First Nations people? The rub here, everyone, is that Minister Wyatt—whom I have enormous respect for—made a statement several weeks ago at the Press Club, only to have what I think was the Prime Minister's office coming in over the top and saying there will be no enshrined voice in the Constitution. I want to know where that issue is. I also note that we're still early in this term of government; however, if these consultations don't start very quickly, then the government will actually run out of time. My question is to the minister is: has the government got a process to establish the group within the parliament that will assist in the constitutional process? I want to turn my thoughts to closing the gap. Clearly, the Closing the Gap targets were developed alongside the national Apology to the Stolen Generations given by the Rudd Labor government. In fact I was here that day. It was the first act of the Rudd Labor government. I know my colleague the member for Lingiari was also very much a part of that particular day. Since then there have been Closing the Gap reports, and we all know how dismal each and every one of them has been. The target to halve the gap in child mortality is not on track. The target to close the school attendance gap is not on track. The target to close the life expectancy gap is not on track. The target to halve the gap in reading and numeracy is not on track. The target to halve the gap in employment is also not on track. I have questions for the minister. Can the minister inform us where the work of the group that's developing the new Closing the Gap targets is at? Is there going to be any consultation, even a sliver of consultation, with the Labor Party on it, seeing that we have offered a bipartisan approach in this space? Can the minister tell us when parliament can expect a report on the work of the committee on closing the gap? And can the minister inform the House on any new targets, and when we can expect to see those targets? I finish by reiterating that our offer of a bipartisan approach is not about a race to the bottom. It's about actually achieving the best in excellence, but there has been little to no consultation despite the fact that I have offered, on numerous occasions, collaboration and consultation on these issues. 11:27 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra To grow up as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Australian is to belong to a history, culture and tradition some 65,000 years old. As Minister Wyatt has said, for Aboriginal Australians bloodlines and ancient songlines have provided the continuity of connections for individuals, families and communities through the passage of time. But, sadly, in Australia to grow up as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander Australian means being twice as likely to die by suicide as non-indigenous Australians. Suicide affects every community in this country. Between 2013 and 2017 the average number of suicide deaths per year across the entire population was almost 3,000. That's around eight people every single day. As the Prime Minister said last week, suicide is a curse on this country that we have to break. Suicide doesn't discriminate on who it can affect, but there's no doubt the most at-risk communities are Indigenous communities, and particularly young Aboriginal Australians. And in particular places that risk skyrockets. Between 2012 and 2016, 13 Aboriginal children and young people in the Kimberley died by suicide. The youngest of those children was 10 years old. She lived in the community of Looma, home to about 500 people, when she died in March 2016. As Watoday's headline has reported, 'If the Kimberley was a country, it would have the worst suicide rate in the world'. The suicide rate in that region is seven times the rate of the rest of the country, and nine out of 10 of the deaths by the suicide in the Kimberley are of Aboriginal Australians. There are a number of communities across the country where the situation is similarly crushing: outback North Queensland, Litchfield and Katherine. In the first four months of this year, 62 Aboriginal Australians died by suicide. More than half of them were under 25 years old. Suicide accounts for 40 per cent of all deaths of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. Earlier this year Gracelyn Smallwood, a professor of nursing and midwifery at Central Queensland University, described suicide among Indigenous youth as 'normalised behaviour' after four Aboriginal youth in Queensland died by suicide in March. She described— Mr Morton 265931 Point of order, Deputy Speaker. I ask that the chamber be brought to order. I think conversations about last night's ball, while discussion on this important matter is occurring in the chamber, are inappropriate. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 I don't think the conversation is at a hugely audible level, but if people are feeling as though they're having difficulty hearing then I would ask members to take their conversations outside. Ms Burney 8GH Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Mr LEESER 109556 Ms Smallwood described a sense of hopelessness among Aboriginal young people and spoke about the need for services to understand the culture of the people they're working with. She said most programs are from a Western perspective and take very little account of the need for a holistic approach that includes lore and culture and local community. What might work in the Torres Strait might not work in Cherbourg. From 2017 to 2019, the Western Australian State Coroner, Ros Fogliani, conducted an inquest into the deaths of Aboriginal children and young people in the Kimberley. The inquest acknowledged that to focus only on the events that occurred shortly before the deaths of the young people would be insufficient for understanding what led to their deaths and that it was important to explore and address the broader circumstances that contributed to suicides among Aboriginal communities of the Kimberley, including medical history, family circumstances, home environment and interaction with education, as well as the events that led up to their deaths. The inquest found common factors that corresponded to the suicide deaths of the children in the Kimberley. These factors, among many others, included: intergenerational trauma, abuse and poverty; a lack of mental health and suicide prevention training for young people and service providers; insufficient cultural adaptation of services; and a shortage of trauma-informed care. Most of the children and young people had previously voiced suicidal thoughts but hadn't been referred to a health service. The inquest found it had become normal for some of the children to voice threats of self-harm and that even if family or friends had been able to identify the seriousness of the threat they wouldn't necessarily have known how to seek help. The coroner spoke about the need to invest specifically in suicide prevention for Indigenous Australians, not simply in mainstream programs. These findings and the findings of many other reports that have been written over the past decades give us some clues about the sorts of things that might be done to turn around the situation. As the coroner's report stated: The considerable services already being provided to the region are not enough. They are still being provided from the perspective of mainstream … It may be time to consider whether the services themselves need to be co-designed in a completely different way … As the co-chair of Parliamentary Friends of Suicide Prevention alongside my friend the member for Eden-Monaro, I believe it's our duty to do everything we can to give people, especially young Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, a sense that their life has value and purpose, that we cannot do without them. The Prime Minister has said: I want every young person in Australia to know that they are not alone and that we are committed to doing everything we can to support their mental health and wellbeing. In the light of the high suicide rates among Indigenous communities, can the minister update the Chamber on how the government is reducing Indigenous suicide rates? 11:32 Mr SNOWDON IJ4 Lingiari Can I firstly acknowledge the contributions that have been made thus far, particularly that of my learned colleague to my left the member for Barton, my leader in this portfolio area in the opposition, but I also acknowledge the member for Tangney and the member for Berowra. I say to the member for Tangney: the next time you read a speech you actually need to understand what you're saying. I say that because, whilst I understand that you had to do this, and that's good, it would have been useful had you been able to comment in some detail on the inadequacies of the Indigenous Advancement Strategy, which has been proven to be inadequate by the Commonwealth Auditor-General. The question to be asked is: what is the government doing to address the issues in the recommendations made by the Auditor-General about the Indigenous Advancement Strategy? I think that's really important. To the member for Berowra: thank you for your dedication and your partnership with us—I mean that in a collaborative sense—on issues to do with First Nations people, particularly in the case of suicide prevention. I look forward to working with you on that. I will make a number of observations about some quite insidious programs which have been introduced by this government over time since the racist intervention by the Howard government in the Northern Territory. We still have the remnants of that intervention operating. In particular, I am talking about the BasicsCard, which clearly does not work and impacts on the capacity of people in the Northern Territory in remote Aboriginal communities to purchase food and to be engaged in employment. This is evidence that has been given to us by the Arnhem Land Progress Association, which has made it very clear that in the communities in which it works the BasicsCard has meant less food being purchased and fewer opportunities for young people, who are dropping out of the system, which means that it is a real health issue. That has been identified very clearly by other reviews. There is no review which can demonstrate to me or anyone else in this country that the cashless debit card process has actually worked. Ms Burney 8GH It doesn't. Mr SNOWDON IJ4 It doesn't work. We know that. I am very concerned. I ask the minister, wherever he is—well, we know where he is. He's in Geneva; I won't say what he's doing but it's really important that we understand there has been an abuse of human rights in this country by successive Liberal governments, and it is happening still. I want to also address the issue of CDP. Deputy Speaker Zimmerman, you will be aware that there was a report in The Guardian on 6 February which raised the question of the CDP program and its inadequacies. It referred to a review undertaken by the government and stated: The review found that Aboriginal CDP participants were three times more likely to be penalised for non-attendance and were penalised more often. In other words, they were breached, some for as much as six or eight weeks: They went without income for longer periods and were less likely to be exempted on medical grounds "despite a much higher burden of disease in remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities". Will the minister comment on whether or not the government accepts the findings of its own review in this regard? Could the minister also tell us if the government accepts the finding: Poor mental or physical health, disabilities or other personal problems also meant people were more likely to be penalised. Could he also tell us if the government accepts the report's findings that social problems have increased since the introduction of CDP, including: increase in break and enters to steal food, predominantly by children and young people increase in domestic and family violence increase in financial coercion and family fighting We have before us here a disaster—a disaster of the government's own making. I would like to know whether there are any plans or proposals by the government to reform CDP in the way in which Aboriginal people around this country are demanding. One is that it be inclusive. A second is that it be a wage based system, that people are provided the opportunity to earn proper wages, that top-ups are available for people who work beyond their mandated hours and that money unspent as a result of the CDP in communities is retained in the communities for investment in capital infrastructure, further development of the program, additional wages being paid to people and new jobs being created as well as the possibilities for small business. These are things that can be done. But we've got to get the government to understand that what they've been doing is clearly wrong. It has not worked, it is harming people and it is making sure that young Aboriginal Australians are not getting the opportunities they properly deserve. (Time expired) 11:37 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey It will come as no great surprise that I disagree with some of the comments from the member for Lingiari. I point out that it was just on four years ago that the then Assistant Minister for Social Services, the member for Aston, and I sat down with a leadership group in Ceduna that included the Indigenous groups around that greater community and the mayor of Ceduna, and we agreed together to trial the cashless welfare card. I'd have to say that community is absolutely delighted with the results. It came on the back of a coroner's report after no less than seven people had died either sleeping rough or in accidents on the road with intoxication. I had been to Ceduna and talked to people at the drying-out centre, where they said, 'Last night there was a woman in here who was eight months pregnant who could not stop throwing up.' It is just heartbreaking when you hear the stories. This card has made a palpable difference. It has changed Ceduna. The Indigenous leaders there have stood up strongly, and they believe in the card. A gentlemen the other day said to me: 'I get all the numbers; I get all the figures. But this place just feels like a whole lot better place.' So the outcomes are very, very good. Ms Burney interjecting— Mr RAMSEY HWS I invite you to come and sit down and speak to these people. I was at Koonibba the other day, speaking to a community leader. He said: 'Don't you take that card away. That's made all the difference.' Those Indigenous groups there have grown in confidence. In fact, the member for Lingiari was just slamming the CDP. The CDP in Ceduna is run by the Ceduna Aboriginal Corporation, and they really like it. It's getting their people into work. They are building a relationship there that we should all be very proud of. I say of the card that anyone who is managing their working-age welfare income correctly will not be inconvenienced. Twenty per cent of their income is available for alcohol, drugs or gambling. If you're on working-age welfare, that is more than enough to spend on alcohol, drugs or gambling. When somebody else tells me that the 80 per cent is only available for the basics of life, that is rubbish. It's available for everything in life except drugs, alcohol and gambling. I ask the minister to tell me about the progress of the cashless welfare card. 11:40 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper I welcome the opportunity to raise an incredibly important issue: the need to free the Aboriginal flag. A company called WAM Clothing, owned by a non-Indigenous Australian, was given exclusive rights to reproduce the Aboriginal flag on clothing by artist Harold Thomas, who designed the flag in 1971. There is also copyright over it being reproduced digitally. I'm not even entirely sure what that means. I don't know about many of you, but I have the Aboriginal flag along with the Torres Strait Islander flag on my email signature, which goes out every time I send an email. I might soon have to pay for the benefit of doing that. WAM Clothing have started issuing cease-and-desist notices to companies who use the flag, including an organisation called Spark Health, which is an Indigenous social enterprise that works in my electorate of Cooper. My incomparable colleague the member for Barton, who I'm terribly proud to stand beside and be a part of the same party as, has an Aboriginal flag tattooed on her shoulder which, under the agreement between WAM Clothing and Mr Thomas, may well be a breach of copyright. They are going further and further with this. An Aboriginal Indigenous health charity had to pay $2,200 to use the Aboriginal flag on T-shirts that it gives away to patients who attend the clinic. Knowing they will get a T-shirt with the flag on it is an incentive for Aboriginal people to attend a health clinic. But they have had to take the flag off their T-shirts because of the agreement between WAM Clothing and Mr Thomas. I ask this: should WAM Clothing, a non-Indigenous business, control the market and profit from the resistance, resilience and perseverance of Indigenous people? To quote the member for Barton: The flag is one of our national symbols and a central part of Aboriginal and Australian identity. The flag should be about people and pride, not profit. Displaying the three flags—the Aboriginal flag, the Torres Strait Islander flag and the Australian flag—together has become a sign of struggle, of pride and of a reconciled future. This is an important issue for so many Australians. The Pride not Profit petition created by Spark Health now has over 48,000 signatures; 48,000 people are in support of this message calling for a change to the current licensing agreement around the Aboriginal flag, with their common goal being freeing the flag from copyright. While there's no need for anyone to get permission to use the Australian flag so long as they abide by the guidelines respecting its use, this is not the case for the Aboriginal flag. The formidable former senator Nova Peris had this to say about the situation: We want equal rights to our flag like other Australians have equal rights to their flag. When you look at that flag it's symbolic of us as a race of people that goes back 50,000 years, even though it's only 48 years old. The copyright of the flag is valid for Harold Thomas's life plus another 70 years, so potentially we're looking at another hundred years until the rights of the flag can enter the public domain. In terms of the nation, the most public pieces of public property are flags. Locally, there's an inherent contradiction when the Aboriginal flag is privately owned. The Australian government recognised and proclaimed the Aboriginal flag in 1995 and again in 2018 under the Flags Act; therefore, there is a legitimate expectation of free use of that work as a flag. The federal government must do more to protect the flag, which for some is being held hostage. The member for Barton has said that the situation is untenable. It's unthinkable that the use of the Aboriginal flag is now governed by a secret agreement at the discretion of a for-profit company. It's a discredit to the flag's history and the strength it represents. The Australian Indigenous people want no more and no fewer rights to their Aboriginal flag then we have to the Australian flag or the Torres Strait Islander flag. The effect of the deal between WAM and Harold Thomas is that the Aboriginal flag will start to disappear from view. This is already happening, with a number of organisations, large and small, removing the flag from clothing in fear of high costs and legal battles to use it. The Aboriginal flag is an important symbol to Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians alike, and it must be able to be used freely without fear of prosecution or exorbitant costs. I commend the work of Spark Health, Dreamtime Kullilla-Art and each and every organisation and individual who has added their voice to the call to free the flag. In the words of Laura Thompson: The flag represented a struggle and a resistance movement, and now it just feels like a struggle to use it. My question is: what resources and efforts are you putting into finding a fair and equitable resolution to ensure that the Aboriginal flag remains just that—a national flag? 11:45 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney I thank members for their contributions in this very important portfolio area. As I said in my opening statement, the Morrison government is committed to ensuring better outcomes for Indigenous Australians by delivering better remote housing, supporting Indigenous businesses, combating domestic violence, combating Indigenous suicide and supporting Indigenous students. As the member for Berowra noted in his contribution, reducing youth suicide rates is a central part of our work. The Prime Minister has elevated suicide prevention to a whole-of-government priority. Christine Morgan has been appointed as the first National Suicide Prevention Adviser, to oversee and coordinate the whole-of-government approach and action in relation to suicide prevention. The government has provided $503 million for the Youth Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Plan, which is the largest suicide prevention strategy in Australia's history. Of this, $34.1 million is dedicated to reducing Indigenous youth suicide rates—an issue that, in this chamber and across the parliament, we can all be dedicated to. The National Indigenous Australians Agency is working closely with the Department of Health to ensure that the needs of Indigenous Australians are addressed in the strategy. The Morrison government is also providing $48 million through primary health networks to fund 12 suicide prevention trial sites. Two of the trials, in the Kimberley and Darwin regions, are Indigenous-specific and are helping the government to develop a coordinated and culturally appropriate suicide prevention model for Indigenous communities. I thank the member for Grey for his contribution outlining the importance of the government's cashless debit card. The trial sites in the Ceduna, East Kimberley, Goldfields, Bundaberg and Hervey Bay regions will operate through to 30 June 2021. The evidence on the ground shows that the cashless debt card is making a difference, improving lives and communities. Over a dozen research projects attest to the trials' success. Most recently, the baseline report into the Goldfields trial has reaffirmed previous findings. We're continuing to see decreases in drug and alcohol issues; decreases in crime, violence and antisocial behaviour; improvements in child health and wellbeing; and improved financial management. The card will be expanded into the Northern Territory and Cape York, with work commencing from January 2020. A package of targeted support services informed by consultations with communities and stakeholders will be part of the transition. On the issues raised in relation to the voice to parliament, further work is needed to define the detail of the voice to parliament. We know that Indigenous Australians want their voices heard by all levels of government—local, state and federal. The voice is multilayered and includes individuals, families, communities and Indigenous organisations, who want to be heard by those who make decisions that impact on their lives. The government has committed to a process of true co-design to articulate the details of the voice to parliament. In addition to the co-design work with Indigenous Australians, the government will work constructively, as requested by the member for Barton, across the parliament on this matter. On the issue of constitutional recognition, the Morrison government is committed to recognising Indigenous Australians in the Constitution. The Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have agreed to work together to realise constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians. The Morrison government is committed to holding a referendum in the current term, provided there is consensus and a good chance of a referendum succeeding. Constitutional recognition is too important to get wrong and too important to rush. The Constitution belongs to all Australians. We must find a way forward that will result in a majority of Australians in a majority of the states overwhelmingly supporting constitutional recognition. We must be pragmatic. There is a lot of work to do on this journey. We haven't had a referendum since 1991, and we must educate a new generation on the importance of the Constitution and the significance of the change that we are asking for. I am representing the Minister for Indigenous Australians, and, on issues within his portfolio, he is deeply committed to working across the parliament, across the chambers, and to putting politics aside in dealing with the important issues that confront Indigenous Australians. I thank members for their contributions to this debate. I know that, given the time available to me, I have not been able to deal with some of the issues in my response. But the Minister for Indigenous Australians will work across the chamber and with the shadow minister and the Leader of the Opposition on those issues. Proposed expenditures agreed to. Remainder of bill—by leave—taken as a whole and agreed to. Bill agreed to. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2019-2020 95

Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2019-2020

Second Reading 95 Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020 95

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2019-2020

Second Reading 95 GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH 95 GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH Address-in-Reply 95 11:53 Dr ALY 13050 Cowan I know it's four months since the last election but I would like to take this opportunity to iterate today how fortunate I feel to be returned as the member for Cowan, albeit on a very, very small margin. But I'm here nonetheless—just over the line! I'd like to use the next 20 minutes or so to reflect on three years as a first-term member of parliament and somebody who came from outside of the political system. I was very much an outsider. I remember when I went to my first question time, in my first week in this place. It was the first time I'd ever seen question time. I'd never watched a question time on television before. I probably should have done my homework, because then I would have known that there was no need for paper and pen to take notes! Over the last three years there are a lot of things that I have learned in my time in this place. I'm not ashamed to admit that I have struggled at various times. I'm sure that many new members, and even some who have been in this place for some time, struggle with the same things that I did. That struggle was really about: how do we connect what we do in this place, which is often referred to as 'the Canberra bubble', to the lives of the people who we represent in our electorates, the people who walk into our offices, the people who come and meet us in shopping centres, the people who stop us in the pasta aisle of the shopping centre to speak to us about very deep and personal issues that are affecting their lives? When I first entered this place, a very wise member of parliament who happens to sit on the other side of the chamber said to me, 'Anne, there are three roles for you here: there's the parliament and parliamentarian, there's the politician and there's the community person.' I really took that on board and thought, 'Okay, I guess my role is really how to connect those three together, particularly connecting the role of the parliamentarian coming into this place, speaking on bills, standing up in the House, attending committee meetings, meeting with stakeholders, meeting with lobbyists and meeting with interest groups to what happens in my electorate and to those very personal stories that people share with me in my electorate.' So I've learned that what we do in this place does matter. But I've also learned that, just as importantly, what we don't do in this place matters. Sometimes, it's what we don't do and the priorities that we put aside, the things that we ignore, the things that don't get up or the things that we don't talk about, that matter more than the things that we do talk about. There are about 51 schools in my electorate, and I've visited every single one of them. I make a point of visiting my schools at least once a year—every single one of them—and arranging meetings with the principals so that I can keep up with the issues for young people and families in my electorate. Cowan, like most outer-suburb electorates, is very diverse. I know that everybody who stands up here talks about the diversity of their electorates. Cowan, as I mentioned in my first speech, is a beautiful and wonderful mix of different demographics, including new and emerging communities, new developments, older suburbs and significant commercial and light industrial areas—but the schools are at the heart of all of those communities and bring them together. In my last series of meetings with various schools, I was really surprised by a number of things that they were raising with me. In some of the most affluent suburbs in my electorate, the schools there are having to start breakfast clubs. They are having to start breakfast clubs because the impact of a sluggish economy, low wage growth and mortgage stress on people in my electorate is filtering through to the young people and the children. All the school principals I spoke to mentioned a very disturbing trend. They told me that up to one in four young children—these are children in primary school, year 1 or year 2—have some form of mental health issue. As a consequence, the schools in my electorate are consistently having to spend their budgets on creating learning environments and ensuring that children are primed for a learning environment, as opposed to what they're constantly told to do, which is to teach reading, writing and arithmetic. They do, but, if the kids can't learn because their bellies aren't full, they've got learning difficulties, there are issues going on at home, they've got anxiety or they need speech therapy or occupational therapy, that responsibility often falls on the schools. The schools in my electorate are increasingly spending their budgets on mental health, on speechies and on occupational therapists. This is the impact of the funding cuts to public schools in my electorate—a direct impact of what we do or don't do here and how it affects the lives of people in Cowan. Another thing that I want to talk about is the impact on the community. As I mentioned, many parts in Cowan are hugely affected by mortgage stress. The housing bubble in WA really burst a number of years ago. While housing prices are starting to recover very slowly, it is still the case that there are people with huge mortgages in parts of my electorate who are trapped in debt because they can't sell their homes and recoup the value of that mortgage, having bought or built their homes when housing prices were very high. As a result of mortgage stress in my electorate, the wonderful food banks—the Wanneroo food bank and The Pantry in Wangara—in one month alone gave out 5,000 boxes of food. That is absolutely astounding, and, it tells me, anecdotally, that the tax cuts that this parliament passed are not flowing through where they are needed the most. They are not stimulating the economy. We have low wage growth, as I mentioned before. We have a sluggish economy, as I mentioned before. And, in spite of this promised land of tax cuts that would get everybody spending on big screen TVs and lift retail, we know—not just anecdotally but also by the figures—that discretionary spending, by both businesses and consumers, has not picked up with these tax cuts. Yet the government refuses to do its heavy lifting on monetary policy. Instead, we have a Reserve Bank lowering the interest rate to an all-time low of one per cent with an indication that it may be lowered even more. We know that in countries where interest rates have gone to zero or a negative percentage, that hasn't helped their economies either. In fact, it's had adverse impacts on their economies. I worry about what we don't do here and how that's going to affect the people in my electorate who are suffering mortgage stress—the people in my electorate who walked into my office after they got their tax returns and said, 'Well, Anne, I've just spent it on paying off that electricity bill that I had,' or 'I just put it aside because I don't know if I'm going to be able to afford the next electricity bill.' People did not go out and spend their tax returns on retail. I am very sceptical when the Treasurer tells us that it's coming, that it's going to happen, that we will see that flow-on effect. If it hasn't happened now, I'm very sceptical about whether it's going to happen at all. So what are we doing? What's plan B? What's the government doing? What's plan B if the tax cuts don't stimulate the economy, and all indications so far are that they have not? All indications so far are that people are doing it hard—so hard that the food banks are giving out 5,000 boxes of food. So what is the plan? Where is the plan to lift the economy? Where is the plan to ensure the living standards of people in the electorate of Cowan? Where is the plan for the children? Where is the plan so that the schools don't have to put on breakfast clubs and the food banks don't have to run out of supplies, because there's so much demand? Cowan also has a significant business community. Just a couple of days ago, I was in here speaking about the wonderful Wanneroo Business Association and the work they do bringing together businesses in the Cowan community. I talk to the business owners in Cowan and they're struggling to keep their doors open. There's the changing nature of work. There's the low retail spending, as I mentioned earlier. People just aren't out there spending money, and businesses are finding it harder and harder and harder. So what are the government doing? They're telling businesses to increase their research and development, even as they cut funding for research and development. They're telling businesses to, in effect, stick to their knitting and not partake in any kind of social discussions—completely ignoring that businesses, corporations and working environments are in themselves social environments. I'd like to take the time—because I think it's really important that I stand here today—to speak about the government's proposed inquiry into the Family Court. For a government that likes to do a lot of wedging, it seems that they've been wedged by One Nation into agreeing to this inquiry with Pauline Hanson at the helm. I want to put on record how appalling Ms Hanson's comments with regard to women fabricating family violence complaints is. As a survivor of domestic violence, and as somebody who has dealt with the Family Court myself, I find it an out-of-touch and disgraceful comment to accuse women of making up family violence in the Family Court. What's even worse is this government capitulating to Pauline Hanson and calling an inquiry into it. Where is the inquiry on domestic violence that sees one woman a week dying? Where's that inquiry? Why are we silent on that? But they're going to speak up for Pauline Hanson accusing women of lying in the Family Court. They're going to do something for that? I just despair. I just despair at where the government are heading when they capitulate and allow themselves to get wedged by Pauline Hanson and One Nation into this offensive inquiry into the Family Court based on her belief that women are fabricating family violence complaints. It's absolutely disgraceful. It affects people in Cowan; it affects people in my electorate. I have people coming in on a regular basis talking to me about their experiences with the Family Court. I have seen women who have been made homeless because of family and domestic violence. I am hugely honoured and hugely privileged to be a person who people can come and share their stories with and who people feel comfortable sharing their stories with. Sharing stories is such a powerful way of making connections with your electorate, with the people who you represent and with other human beings in your community. In the time I have left I do want to raise other electorate issues, because these are the things that are the bread and butter of my electorate office. They're the things that people come in every day with. And one of them is the NBN. We are inundated—and that's no exaggeration—with complaints about the NBN from people who can't get it. One example is a constituent who came into my office asking for help to access the NBN. This constituent has three school-aged children and his ADSL is very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very slow. His street is connected to NBN, including his neighbours on both sides of the street—everyone else. But his particular residence, because of where it is located on the street, is on a different NBN site that runs from the street behind him. The providers are saying that his connection will now not be until January 2020. I imagine his children will have finished school. What is he to do until then? Mindful that his problem has been going on for some time, the NBN have told him that, if he wants to get access before then, he will have to use a wireless service. Fair enough. Unfortunately, he also lives in a wireless dead spot. So here we have a family of three children, who are all of school age and who all require the internet to do their homework and research. We know what families use the internet for. You use the internet to order a pizza. You use the internet to find information. Personally, I use the internet to diagnose myself when I'm not feeling so well—Dr Google gets a good run in my house. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Not recommended. Dr ALY 13050 We all have different needs. I do not recommend it; don't do that. We all have different needs for the internet, and it would be incredibly difficult in this day and age to live without it. NBN issues are one of the top three issues that we deal with in the electorate of Cowan, alongside visas and people on Newstart and on different forms of welfare. I want to tell the beautiful story of Tracy and her daughter, Jane. They don't have much, but they're such a beautiful family. They don't have much at all. Tracy is on a disability pension. A few weeks ago I was doing a 'meet your member' in the car park of one of the local shopping centres. It was Jane's birthday, and the family, despite how much they are struggling, went to the shops and bought a small birthday cake. They came to me and said, 'We really want to celebrate Jane's birthday with you.' So we stood around, sang 'Happy Birthday' and blew out candles, and some very generous passers-by stopped and gave this young girl, who was turning nine, a small gift. It really shows the spirit of my community. Even though this family is really struggling, they wanted to spend their child's birthday with me and they went and bought a cake to celebrate their child's birthday with me. I'm glad to say that we were able to help her put on a real birthday party by connecting her with a wonderful organisation in the Cowan electorate that puts on birthday parties for families that can't afford to. But what does it say about our time? What does it say about the times we live in that we now have charities out there to put on birthdays for families that can't afford to put on birthdays for their kids? How did we come to this stage—that there is a need for these kinds of charities, especially in Cowan? It's often said of this place that it's a privilege and honour to be here, and I agree. I see it; yes, great, it's a privilege. It's a privilege to be driven around in a Comcar. It's really fantastic—love it, yes, good. But I tell you what: I feel most privileged and most honoured when I'm in my electorate. I feel most privileged and most honoured when people take the time to come and see me and when people take the time to share their stories with me. Even if they come in angry, yelling and screaming, I feel privileged to have those moments to sit down with them, hear their stories and hear about their lives. I'm really proud to continue to represent the people of Cowan. 12:13 Mr EVANS 61378 Brisbane Three years ago I made my first speech in this place. I'm humbled to have once again been elected to serve as the member for Brisbane, and I reiterate my thanks to the people of Brisbane for giving me the opportunity to continue representing our wonderful community. I pledge to keep working hard towards a style of representation that is as visible, accessible and responsive as possible and that is deeply thoughtful about the challenges and the opportunities ahead of us. When it comes to the future, there are compelling reasons for Australians to be so optimistic. The liberal democracy we maintain and the institutions, traditions and values we uphold have delivered Australia through many challenges over the past 118 years since Federation. Our nation scores well on most measures compared to most other countries—prosperity, health, the environment, justice, freedom and security. We're home to the oldest continuing cultures on the planet, of which we can be very proud, and simultaneously we are one of the most successful multicultural and immigration based societies around the globe. Australia's economy has now been growing for 28 consecutive years—longer than any other advanced nation. Yet that economic growth is not merely an end in and of itself. Economic growth is the means by which we help achieve people's needs, hopes and dreams. We want future generations to have higher living standards than ours and to realise their dreams, and the aspirations of Australians will always be easier to achieve with a stronger economy and, conversely, much harder to achieve if the economy is weaker or if the nation's budget is mismanaged. The 1.4 million extra jobs created under this government represent 1.4 million Australians who have gained security, dignity and the power of self-determination which only gainful employment can provide. And, when it comes to reasons for optimism, there are now around 35,000 small businesses in my electorate of Brisbane, which is up by about 2,000 over the three years since I was first elected. I see those 2,000 new small businesses in Brisbane as a vote of confidence in the future of our city, our economy and our community. Small businesses like these 2,000 new small businesses in Brisbane will continue to provide opportunities for the majority of locals to gain employment, build prosperity and secure a better future. Small business is indeed the backbone of our economy. It has sustained families like mine for generations. Australia's small-business middle class—described in Menzies' 'Forgotten People' address as shopkeepers, skilled artisans, professionals and farmers—finds new expression today in the notion that quiet Australians determined the recent election outcome. While Australia's small-business middle class is now just as likely to mean tradies, consultants, independent contractors and creative industries, they nonetheless will continue to rely on there being strong voices for them in this place. The corporate tax reforms passed last year, which will be to the long-term benefit of Australia's small and family businesses, were one of the hallmark achievements of the previous parliament. I also want to mention the significance of the income tax relief passed in one of the first acts of this new parliament. These reforms are significant because they'll ensure that a majority of Australians will forever avoid the negative impacts of bracket creep going forward. Eliminating bracket creep is arguably the biggest income tax reform in a generation. And over 88,000 people across Brisbane are receiving tax relief, including tax rebates of up to $1,080, as they submit their tax returns this year. There's a reason why Australians have been completing their tax returns in record time this year. This is a government that is quickly returning to work and delivering precisely what it said it would deliver in the budget and in the lead-up to the recent election. There are other significant achievements of our government that will be of benefit to Brisbane into the future. And I tend to characterise the biggest challenge we have in Brisbane broadly as how to deal with the consequences of growth. Put simply, lots of people want to live, work and play in Brisbane. The challenge manifests itself in different ways on different days. It could be transport and congestion, concerns about a local development, pressure on services or pressure on green spaces. Managing the transition as Brisbane grows and striking the right balance as things change are the mainstays of a local representative's work at all three levels of government. Don't get me wrong: this challenge is fundamentally a good challenge to have. It's much better than the alternative, if that means no emerging projects or opportunities and people moving away. I know which challenge I'd prefer. And I know that the vast majority of residents in Brisbane agree that Brisbane is heading in the right direction, and they share my optimism for the future. Good planning is a big part of the solution. In so many areas of public policy, we must do everything we can to extend our planning horizons. That's why I am very pleased about this government's record pipeline of infrastructure investment totalling over $100 billion nationwide and including over $16 billion worth of projects around Queensland. It's worth representing what those numbers mean in practice for a community like the one that I represent. In the heart of Brisbane, the Inner City Bypass has just been widened. Kingsford Smith Drive is currently being upgraded—heading out towards the airport, which is getting its second runway. Heading up or down the coast, the Gateway Motorway has just been widened, and there are now massive upgrades being completed on the M1 and Bruce Highway, with further rounds of upgrades recently committed to. Heading west, the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing has just been opened. And the federal government is contributing to the majority of these projects. I want to particularly single out the Brisbane Metro. The public campaign run in the Brisbane community for the Brisbane Metro received the strong and enthusiastic backing of numerous local residents. I was very proud to be part of the campaign and very pleased to see this federal government commit $300 million in support of this important project in the 2018 budget. The Brisbane Metro is now fully funded. All it needs now is for the state government to give its approvals—not a single cent in funding, just approvals—and then this project can commence construction. The Brisbane Metro will revolutionise public transport and change the face of our city in Brisbane. It'll change traffic flows and public transport into and around the CBD, and it is an important legacy for the future of our city. Yet we need to keep looking further ahead and extending our planning horizons. That's why it's significant that the federal government has announced its support for a city deal for South-East Queensland, which can help us plan ahead for the infrastructure Brisbane is likely to need in the coming decades. This will, incidentally, be the biggest city deal ever for the federal government. This city deal is indeed a big deal, and it's occurring at the same time as South-East Queensland is preparing its bid to host the 2032 Olympics. The Prime Minister has thrown his very clear support behind this opportunity, and the federal government has provided $10 million towards the preparation of our bid. The Olympic bid provides us with one extra opportunity to extend our planning horizons. I also believe that the South-East Queensland city deal provides an opportunity for us to advance another of my passions: longer-term planning in relation to our local environment. The Brisbane River and its catchments flowing out into Moreton Bay are the most significant environmental assets in our region. I want to see governments at all levels investing more in our local environmental assets in the same way that we invest in other physical and social infrastructure. There's a program I've mentioned before in this place many times called the Resilient Rivers Initiative, designed by the South-East Queensland Council of Mayors and Healthy Land and Water, which is our region's natural resource manager. It's the best strategy I've found so far not only for improving water quality through the catchment and turning the Brisbane River blue, so speak, but also for conserving our native wildlife and bushland and ensuring the ongoing liveability of our beautiful leafy suburbs and our spaces for sport and recreation. I want to see a program of works just like that described in the Resilient Rivers Initiative to be considered for inclusion in the South-East Queensland city deal and ultimately get the coordinated support that it needs from all three levels of government. Working to improve the health of the Brisbane River catchment has been one of my priorities since I was elected, informed by my previous work with Seqwater and my involvement in tree planting and catchment work over many years. Over the last term, I fought for and delivered funding—almost $1 million in total—for projects that protect and improve the Brisbane River and our creeks and catchment. I'm very pleased to add to that, now that I'm re-elected, with further commitments including over $1 million from the Environmental Restoration Fund for the next round of important projects that will continue to restore the health of the Brisbane River catchment. As His Excellency the Governor-General noted in his address opening this parliament: Caring for our environment and conserving it for the future is an integral part of meeting our intergenerational obligation to future Australians. It's an obligation that derives from the fact that, as Australians, we're custodians of a continent, as well as a country, home to some of the world's most precious natural wonders and unique species and ecosystems. It confers on us many natural advantages, but it also bestows on us significant responsibilities to protect what we have for future generations. I characterise it as Australia being a sanctuary—an environmental sanctuary, clearly, but also a sanctuary when it comes to health, justice and economic factors, affording us Australians safety and security from many of the illnesses, injustices and other tragedies all too common in the outside world. So we should take very seriously the responsibility that comes with having the custodianship of our continent, our sanctuary. In this spirit, can I say that it's an absolute privilege to have been appointed the Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management. I'm enjoying working with and supporting the Minister for the Environment, Sussan Ley, and I look forward to all of the hard work ahead of us on important priorities. In his speech opening this parliament, His Excellency also talked about other government priorities, including our determination to reduce waste and increase recycling, as well as the health of our oceans. I know our government and our Prime Minister are determined to take up the global advocacy we need with other nations in our region on the health of our oceans. When it comes to my new responsibilities, this is the first time ever that a ministerial portfolio has been created to focus specifically on waste, increasing recycling and implementing the move towards a more circular economy. The Prime Minister recognises that there is growing need for national leadership, and a role for the Commonwealth, in an area that has traditionally been a responsibility of state, territory and local governments. There are big challenges when it comes to our recycling and waste industries in Australia, and there are also some big opportunities. I'm excited to be able to contribute in an area of work where a growing number of Australians are so obviously passionate about seeing results. The Prime Minister's personal passion for these issues explains why this is the first government elected with a comprehensive platform of commitments to fund and deliver programs to reduce waste and increase recycling. At the heart of our government's strategy is the Australian recycling investment plan. It's a package of initiatives totalling $167 million, designed to grow and strengthen Australia's domestic recycling industry and to support industry and community initiatives to lift recycling rates in Australia. I look forward to future opportunities to outline further all of the initiatives and programs in that package. When it comes to the very important topic of packaging, our government is working with industry and has endorsed Australian industry targets for 100 per cent of Australian packaging to be recyclable, compostable or reusable by 2025. Our government is supporting the phase-out of plastic microbeads from personal-care and cosmetic products, which have now been massively reduced—by over 90 per cent. The Prime Minister is working very closely with other leaders in our region on waste reduction, plastics and oceans. I know, Deputy Speaker Zimmerman, you join with me in welcoming the PM's very strong announcement recently to phase out the export of problematic waste, including tyres, glass, plastics, paper and cardboard, which we may be able to achieve as early as next year. On the subject of environmental management, I declared my passion for conservation in my very first speech here three years ago, when I talked about my love of Australia's wilderness and our native flora and fauna. I've always loved travelling, camping and hiking widely around our beautiful, dreaming, sunburnt land. Just last month, I was fortunate enough to see platypuses playing in Eungella, echidnas in Carnarvon Gorge and turtles swimming near Lady Musgrave Island. I think we can do more to reconnect Australians with their local environment, which can help reinforce the value, the importance, of environmental work and recycling, and empower people to make a difference. Too much of the recent debate and commentary about the environment has been fundamentally disempowering of individuals and communities. So it's time we place a greater focus on achieving tangible and meaningful results in our local communities right across Australia. On a national level, there is a strong and longstanding coalition legacy when it comes to supporting our environment in Australia. Coalition governments have given Australia our oceans policy and our Threatened Species Strategy. On land, coalition governments have given Australia many of our iconic national parks. In our oceans, Australia can be very proud to now have the largest representative network of marine parks in the world. Our marine parks and their management plans are almost all the result of the coalition's vision, hard work and ability to deliver solutions in complex areas. It was a coalition government that banned whaling in Australian waters, and it was a coalition government that made the biggest ever investments in Australia's environment through the Natural Heritage Trust and set up the Regional NRMs that continue to care for our catchments today, like Healthy Land and Water in South-East Queensland. Half a century ago, a coalition government took on a new responsibility by creating the first office for the environment in the office of the then Prime Minister. Today, we are the federal government making the biggest ever investments: more funding and more projects than any government in Australia before in our Great Barrier Reef. Now, in a similar spirit, our Prime Minister is the first in Australia to raise recycling and waste reduction as a priority deserving national attention. I've witnessed so many great Australians, community groups and organisations around Brisbane and around our nation making such remarkable contributions. In the face of so much hard work, hope, enterprise, resourcefulness, charity and invention, you can't help but be inspired and optimistic. At the end of my first speech three years ago, I quoted some words of optimism from former Prime Minister Sir George Reid. He spoke about having no fear of human progress and drawing confidence from the triumphal march of human discovery and innovation. He spoke of the need for policymaking that serves the national interest, not vested interests, as we usher in the new and usher out the old. It was a forward-looking Liberal prescription from a time before there even was a Liberal Party of Australia, yet former Prime Minister George Reid's words, from 116 years ago, still inspire me. They sit in a frame on my desk and they helped guide me through some of the debates of my first term in this place, from tax reform to same-sex marriage reform. Reflecting on the recent election, it seems that another generation of Australians may have been introduced to some century-old fundamentals in the choice presented in Australian politics. After considering those fundamentals, it seems the majority of Australians continue to prefer a platform that embraces their aspirations, avoids sectional interests, is forward-looking and projects optimism for the future. It wasn't just Reid who was fond of quoting Tennyson— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 12:31 to 12 : 43 Mr EVANS 61378 It wasn't just Prime Minister Reid who was fond of quoting Tennyson. Menzies used a verse from Tennyson's 'Ulysses' in his 'Forgotten People' address. I believe it captures a spirit of determination and optimism that continues in Australia today. It states: Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho' We are not now that strength which in old days Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are, One equal temper of heroic hearts, Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield. It's an honour to have this opportunity to serve Brisbane and Australia as we strive, seek and find an even better future. Debate adjourned. ADJOURNMENT 101 ADJOURNMENT Greenway Electorate 101 12:44 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I take this opportunity to mention a number of events and initiatives that have been occurring in the Greenway electorate over the past few weeks that speak volumes about our community, about our people and about the spirit that is alive and well in west and north-west Sydney. The first of these is an event that recently I had the pleasure of attending in Blacktown. It was called—and indeed was—a super citizenship ceremony. It was 'super' because there were 1,500 citizenship recipients on this occasion, becoming Australians by choice. As members of parliament, it is probably one of the most poignant opportunities that we enjoy—to be there at a most auspicious day in the life of individuals who were not born here and who do the greatest honour to Australia and our people by deciding to become Australian citizens. Just looking out over that crowd that was there at Blacktown Leisure Centre—expertly organised by Blacktown City Council, and a big shout-out to Kevin Poilly and his team who put that together—there were clearly people from every corner of the globe. There were well over 100 languages and nationalities represented at this citizenship ceremony. It fills us with great hope that each of these new citizens will make a tremendous contribution to our local area. I particularly note the families who were there to support them and the children who became Australian citizens. I want to acknowledge them all today and again offer a very sincere welcome to our nation's family and in particular to the city of Blacktown. In a different tone, I want to mention the residents and local activists who form the Homicide Victims Support Group. It was truly an honour to attend the official sod-turning for an initiative called Grace's Place. It's an innovative residential and counselling facility particularly for children who have been traumatised by homicide. It's named after Grace Lynch, the late mother of Anita Cobby. The Grace's Place organisation is headed as patron by Anita's amazing sister, Kathryn. Grace's Place is going to play a pivotal role in helping to heal and support children who are experiencing what can only be described as unimaginable pain. I have become deeply affected by the senseless murder of Anita Cobby in 1986. She was taken from a spot in Blacktown, outside Blacktown railway station, where I would wait for my bus to go home from school. Her senseless murder was an absolute abomination. It's only been in recent years that the community of Blacktown have, I believe, started to come to terms with that senseless violent act and really started to turn our minds to how we can work towards something good in future. Grace's Place is one of those things. There have been very generous contributions that have got us to this point with Grace's Place. They include contributions from Blacktown City Council and the Western Sydney Parklands Trust, who by a lease arrangement between them are providing land for that. I encourage everyone to consider supporting the annual Anita Cobby Memorial Dinner, which is on 23 November this year at Blacktown Workers Club. Blacktown Workers Club is one of those local organisations that are doing their utmost to support initiatives such as this. One of the most poignant events of the sod-turning was PolAir doing a flyover in honour. I want to acknowledge all the police and law enforcement people who were there, particularly those who were involved in the investigation around Anita Cobby. I don't want to single anyone out, but Gary Raymond was a hero of the Granville train disaster and one of the lead people involved in the investigation. He maintains such a deep interest in that today. I also want to acknowledge Maryam Popal Zahid, who is Blacktown's Woman of the Year. I had the great pleasure of attending her play The Good Woman, exploring her experiences as an Afghan refugee to Australia. It was held at the Blacktown Arts Centre. I was expecting it to be thought-provoking, but I wasn't expecting to be so entertained. I want to congratulate Maryam on a fantastic play, and everyone who enjoyed it would do the same. Veterans 102 12:49 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert As many in this place would be aware, there are a lot of important issues that I'm passionate about in my community, and one of those is veterans affairs. I'm of course a veteran myself and I represent the largest garrison city in the country, Townsville, which is home to thousands of current serving men and women at a number of bases, the largest of which are Lavarack Barracks and RAAF Base Townsville. Earlier this week, during consideration in detail on the appropriations bill, we heard from the minister about defence's posture in northern Australia. But many of those men and women could at any moment be a part of the veteran community, whether by choice or by necessity due to injury, employment or something else. That veteran community is only growing in Townsville. Here are some of the numbers. There are over 5,500 DVA clients in my electorate of Herbert. There are many different combination of figures which tell numerous stories, but on the raw number themselves that's a lot of people. That's great. We want as many people who serve in Townsville to stay in Townsville and enjoy the great things our city has to offer. It's great for the community, it's great for veterans in being able to support other veterans and, of course, it's great for population retention, which is great for our economy. So I hope to see those numbers continue to grow. One of the most devastating factors which hurts our veteran community is the horrible effect of veteran suicide. Just one person dying by suicide is too many. It keeps happening, and it shouldn't happen at all. It was only back during the election campaign when I was about to face a press conference in Townsville on the day after Anzac Day with the Prime Minister that I received a call and was told that one of my mates had died by suicide. The PM, very thoughtfully, told me I didn't have to keep going with the press conference, but I refused to go and hide in a corner, because I refused to shy away from the work that needs to be done. Here we are, in this Chamber, with the opportunity to get that work done. That work is to ensure that our government is doing everything in its power to support the mental health and wellbeing of those who have served our country. It does please me that veteran issues, such as veteran wellbeing and suicide prevention, are bipartisan. Everyone in this place, and in the other place, is working together to lower the very high numbers of veteran suicide. I am pleased to say that there have been positive steps forward in this regard. During the election campaign, it was my great pleasure to announce on behalf of the government $5 million for the Oasis veterans centre which is getting off the ground in Townsville. This facility is aiming to be a one-stop shop for former serving men and women to connect them with services they need, perhaps even before they are discharged from defence, and letting them know that there are plenty of different support organisations available. But the biggest challenge is navigating the system. Knowing where to look for the right help and even having the opportunity to meet other veterans in the same boat, ask what's worked for them and learn from their experiences can be invaluable. It's peer support. This is a proven model that works across the country in different sectors—having people who have suffered the same injuries or illnesses or who have been through similar experiences help one another. Peer support is not about counselling; it's about discussing what's happened. I know through my friends in the peer support space that it's about giving information, not advice. I'm not a counsellor. I leave that to the professionals. But I can give information on where people can get help when they need it. I note that this is one of six veteran wellbeing centres across the country making up a $30 million investment which will also go some way in helping achieve better outcomes for our veteran community. Furthermore, it's been fantastic to learn of the government's move to work towards providing psychiatric assistance dogs to eligible veterans as an addition to their treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder. I myself have been diagnosed with PTSD and know the challenges that come with it. Anything that is provided to help with this condition is a good thing. It's something we shouldn't shy away from. We should talk about where we've been in the past. This is something that I think is a great initiative. There is currently a trial underway at the La Trobe University. Six veterans are on a 12-month training program, and soon there'll be up to 20 veterans taking part in 18 months of training and bonding before the dog is placed. It's something that will roll out nationally, including in my electorate of Herbert. It's a great initiative, and I look forward to everyone in this place getting behind it. National Disability Insurance Scheme 103 12:54 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Like many in this country, I am shocked and not congratulating the government on their announcement today around the fiscal position of the budget. The reason I, like many, am not congratulating the government is that this new deficit of theirs is being propped up—even though it is smaller than previous deficits—by a $4.6 billion underspend in the NDIS. It's money that has not been allocated to people desperately in need. The government will say it's a demand-driven system. The problem is, with the way in which they've rolled out the NDIS, they're not meeting the demand that is there. I recently held a forum in my electorate, because I've had a number of people come forward to say to me that they're just not getting their funding allocated and, if they are getting funding allocated, they're struggling to get the services to spend their package. We are a regional town with many regional communities that need services but that are unable to get the support. I organised a forum to give local people a chance to come together collectively. Over 80 people came to share their experiences. One of those was Jordana, who is 26 years old and lives with a disability. She is an amazing young woman. She works eight hours a week at the Bendigo Bank head office and loves her job. She has good work colleagues. This is her third year as an NDIS participant. The first two plans were great: she worked with a good planner and received adequate funding and the support that she needed. However, because she is in a regional area, and because of the way in which the NDIS has been rolled out and the upheaval it has caused to organisations, Jordana has struggled to find support workers suitable for her needs. Quite often they didn't turn up. Those who did turn up didn't quite have the skills that she was looking for. Jordana did switch providers, and things were looking up. However, in this year's plan the NDIA decided to cut her funding, because they claimed that she had not spent her funds allocated previously. They did not take into consideration the reasons why the funds were not spent. Jordana is one of many who are part of this $4.6 billion underspend. She still needs the support. She still needs support in the morning to prepare breakfast and to get ready for work. She's now only going to one physio class instead of her usual one-on-one appointment, and it's a physio class with multiple participants as opposed to one-on-one care. That is because she doesn't know, even though she's put in for a review, if the original funding will be restored. She is also going less often to the physio, which is not a good long-term outcome for someone in Jordana's situation. This is not what the NDIS promised. Jordana is not alone. I've had vision-impaired people come and visit me. They had been told by NDIA planners that they should catch the train to work. Anyone who knows a regional area knows that, if you are lucky enough to have a regional train stop, it's not quite interconnected and well lit to the rest of the community. Saying to someone who is vision-impaired that they can walk 1.3 kays from the Epsom Railway Station to their centre of work is unacceptable. This is another reason the government has such a significant underspend of the NDIS. Transport funding is not being allocated appropriately. It's also that funding is not being allocated appropriately for people's needs with regard to equipment, whether it be a wheelchair, a new guide dog or support for in-home modifications. There are people who don't have the skills or qualifications with NDIA. There's inconsistency between planners. There's arbitrary decision-making, against expert advice, saying, 'You're spending too much money; we're going to cut it away.' Multiply all of these individual cases across our electorates—that's how this government has ended up with a $4.6 billion underspend. They're propping up their budget by ripping off people with disability. It is disgraceful. They need to return that money. They need to uncap what they've done to the NDIS. They need to allow proper planning and allow people the opportunity to access their funds. This government's rollout of the NDIS has been a disgrace. They need to support people like Jordana. They need to support people to access the services that they need when they need them. Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths 104 12:59 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I rise today to speak about the work that the Morrison government is doing in an area that is very important to me and my community of Ryan—promoting STEM, or science, technology, engineering and maths. The Morrison government understand STEM jobs are the jobs of the future and we're committed to boosting the study of STEM subjects. Australians continue to excel in inventing new technologies which have a profound impact in industries such as health, manufacturing, education and many, many more. New technology increases productivity and innovation, and upskilling across small to medium businesses is a priority for the Morrison government and for my community of Ryan. In Ryan, we have a strong history of succeeding in STEM and we will continue to do so. In this place yesterday, I spoke about one of the constituents of Ryan, Professor Ian Frazer, who, of course, famously invented the Gardasil vaccine—a vaccine that is saving, and will continue to save, the lives of Australian women. In my community of Ryan, we have one of the best universities in the country: the University of Queensland. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it is the best university in the country, but I might be a little biased. Recently, together with the member for Flinders, the Minister for Health, I visited UQ's Institute for Molecular Bioscience, where we announced more than $440 million in funding to assist with the incredible research being undertaken at this facility. In total, we have funded 26 projects at UQ, and many, many more around the country. I look forward to seeing what the students in the team at UQ will achieve next in health, science and space. But it is not just in health sciences that my community excels. Ryan is also home to the CSIRO precinct in Pullenvale. A few weeks ago, I was out there with the member for McPherson, the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology. We were visiting the precinct to launch the Manufacturing Modernisation Fund. The fund will help manufacturers become more competitive by investing in new technologies—businesses like Emesent, where we had the pleasure of touring and talking to the team, which was founded in 2018 by five CSIRO employees. This business is doing extraordinary things with commercialised drones. Their drone technology can navigate environments where they were previously denied access by GPS, delivering revolutionary efficiency, safety and operational insights particularly to the infrastructure and the mining sectors. Since their inception with a crew of just five people, they've grown the number of jobs involved in their company to 21 full-time staff and one part time. They have more than four roles currently advertised and they expect to hire 10 more staff in the next 12 months. I couldn't be prouder, as the local member, to see this real growth in local STEM jobs. I know that, as an engineer herself, the member for McPherson is particularly passionate about seeing more women encouraged to take up careers in the areas of science, technology, engineering and maths. As part of the Morrison government's plan to back the STEM superstars of the future, the Morrison government has released a new online tool, the Girls in STEM Toolkit. Together let's bust some of the myths around girls in STEM and give them every tool possible and every possible opportunity to explore the careers of the future. I'm particularly proud of local schools, like Grovely State School and Mitchelton State School, who are doing exactly that and are very active in the STEM space. They are using the online toolkit, as others will be, and it is just one way we can help ensure that females are encouraged into STEM careers of the future. The tool itself encourages young women to be problem-solvers, to ask the hard questions and to see how a career in STEM can lead to the answers. This is an area I will continue to push, and I hope to see more young women in my community of Ryan use this tool and take part in our other initiatives to find out just how rewarding a career in STEM can be. As the member for Ryan, I am a strong supporter of STEM jobs and STEM opportunities within my electorate, and I look forward to continuing to support these opportunities going forward. Energy 104 13:04 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I rise today to address what I would describe as a light at the end of the tunnel, finally, for my home state of South Australia when it comes to energy policy. In September 2016, we had the culmination of more than a decade of appalling electricity policy by the South Australian Labor state government that led to the lights literally going out in my home state. We lost power across the entire state for hours. That was really the culmination of what had been 12 years of failing to understand how the system works, how it operates, and what kind of pressures it can sustain and can't sustain. Although there is a lot of complexity in electricity policy, ultimately it comes down to a little thing called supply and demand. Consumers need to have enough electricity being generated at the point in time that they're choosing to consume it. What we've had in South Australia, until recently, is a blind obsession with installing an enormous amount of intermittent electricity generation—particularly wind—without having the stabilising forces in place to make sure that we can keep the lights on when we need to. The Morrison government and the state government in South Australia are working together on two very important things that are going to address the calamitous situation that the Labor Party have managed to put my state in. One is to do with increasing interconnection and the other is to do with balancing the intermittency of wind and other renewable generation through storage. We have one interconnector of significance into the South Australian grid, which is that with Victoria. It is an 800 megawatt line, the Heywood line. That was the line that had to be switched off because of issues in South Australian generation capacity in 2016 that meant we couldn't bring in 800 megawatts from Victoria to help support our grid. Hopefully, that never happens again and the changes that have been implemented since then mean that, hopefully, it won't happen again. But that one import-export line is all that South Australia has had apart from a smaller line, the Murraylink line, which is 200 megawatts, through to the Riverland in South Australia. We are working with the New South Wales government and the South Australian government to build another interconnector between South Australia and New South Wales, which is looking like it will be an 850 megawatt interconnector, which of course more than doubles the capability of us to import but more importantly export electricity amongst the National Electricity Market. This will be a real game-changer for South Australia. Not only will it increase energy security but it means we can export another 850 megawatts of the electricity we're generating through intermittent sources when we have a surplus in our economy. That is going to encourage an increase in investment in all kinds of generation. That may well be more wind farms, which I'm not against, so long as the security is in place around them. It will also be PV solar and potentially solar thermal. We have a lot of sites around Australia that are very suitable for these kinds of investments, but they need the export markets between states so they can project the margins they need by being able to supply not just South Australia but the rest of the NEM, and another 850 megawatts will be very significant there. The other thing we've had to do because of failed state Labor policy in South Australia, and unfortunately it is now contagiously spreading into states like Victoria, is invest in grid-scale storage and help the private sector to cover the margin gap that they need in order to invest in some of these—in my state, in particular—pumped hydro projects so we can store this intermittent electricity when it is being generated and have it available to be dispatched when consumers need it. The problem we have in South Australia is that when you turn on your television at night you don't want to only be able to do that if the wind is blowing or during the day when the sun is shining. You sort of want to do that when you want to watch the evening news or turn on your— Honourable members interjecting— Mr STEVENS 176304 You'd think in a modern, First World country that would be taken for granted. But in South Australia we've pushed the boundaries there quite significantly. So the Morrison government have a $40 million fund to support grid-scale storage projects. There are three exciting ones in South Australia: the Rise Renewables project, the Sunset Power and Delta Energy, and the SIMEC ZEN Energy project. The processes are still ongoing to work through the viability of these, but I hope they are supported, because they will go a long way to addressing the appalling situation that the Labor Party put us in in South Australia. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 I call the member for Lalor, and she did that perfectly! Lalor Electorate: Sport 105 13:09 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor Thank you, Deputy Speaker Hogan. I felt like I was running in a grand final getting up to the chamber just now! I'm so glad I did, because I'm here to celebrate all of the football clubs, the netball clubs and the women's football clubs in my electorate that made it through to the finals this year, and to thank all of the volunteers, committee members, coaches, players and their families for the terrific work they do building community and keeping people healthy. I'll start with a shout-out to the Werribee Football Club, which, as a standalone club this year, made the finals series. They were knocked out in a three-point loss to Essendon, but the celebrations in my local community about us being in the second tier of football and making those finals were absolutely incredible. A shout-out goes to Werribee Centrals Sports Club, who play in the GDFL in seniors and the WFL in juniors and whose seniors' and women's teams made the finals. They also had lots of teams in the juniors. They continued their absolute demolition of every netball team in the GDFL, and this has now been going on for years and years. I also want to give them a shout-out for their 50th anniversary this year. In the WRFL we had the Point Cook Centrals Sharks, whose women's team, seniors and many across the juniors made the finals. Their netball team were also dominant in their competition. Werribee Districts had their seniors and many of their junior teams making the finals. United Tarneit Sports Club, the Manor Lakes women, the Werribee City soccer club and the Hoppers Crossing Soccer Club made the finals. I want to give a big shout-out to those who won grand finals: the Wyndham Suns, who took the flag in their division in the WRFL; the Wyndhamvale Falcons women's team, who won the grand final in the WRFL; the Hoppers Crossing Football Club, who also made the finals; Werribee City FC, whose under-13 girls won their grand final; and the Tarneit soccer club, whose under-15s won the grand final. It's been a terrific winter sporting season for everybody in Wyndham. It's important that in this place we acknowledge the things that go into building our society in this place, that sometimes we stop talking about dollars and cents and start talking about hearts and souls. In my community, sport is the heart and soul of our community. In terms of women's sport, I want to give some real credit to the Werribee Basketball Association women's team, who took out the Victorian championships this year in a three-match play-off, winning it in the third game. It was fabulous. I want to congratulate the team, the coaches and everyone associated with the Werribee Basketball Association. I also want to say that their social media game has stepped up to the point where, while I was able to attend the first game of the three grand final matches, which they won, with hundreds of locals cheering on the girls, I was unable to attend the next two games that were not played locally but I was able to tune in on Facebook Live and watch the girls play. I watched them lose the second match and I watched them win the final match. It was an amazing effort from that team and from the Werribee Basketball Association generally. To finish, I want to congratulate the players selected, as was announced this morning, for the Australian Diamonds netball team, who'll be playing in the Constellation Cup against New Zealand in both Sydney and Perth before we return to the parliament. I want to wish all of those girls the very, very best. I should mention, given sport is the theme, the terrific work done by the member for Gellibrand in organising to have the Australian Opals legends here to launch the 40th WNBL season on the basketball courts outside Parliament House yesterday. It was fabulous to take to the court with Lauren Jackson against my male parliamentary colleagues and to have lots of our finest young female basketballers down there celebrating basketball and all that it does in this country. Question agreed to. F ederation Chamber adjourned at 13 : 14