
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2020-08-26</date>
    <parliament.no>46</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>4</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;"></span>
            <a type="" href="Chamber">Wednesday, 26 August 2020</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The SPEAKER (</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Hon.</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Tony Smith</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 09:30, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Selection Committee</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present report No. 18 of the Selection Committee, relating to the consideration of committee and delegation reports and private members' business on Monday 31 August 2020. The report will be printed in the <inline font-style="italic">Hansard</inline> for today, and the committee's determinations will appear on tomorrow's <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>. Copies of the report have been placed at the table.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The report read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">SELECTION COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">REPORT No. 18</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Committee and delegation business</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">private Members' business</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">26 August 2020</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Hon A. D. H. Smith MP, Speaker</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Members</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr B van Manen MP (Chief Government Whip)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr C Hayes MP (Chief Opposition Whip)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Hon D Drum MP (Chief Nationals Whip)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr R Broadbent MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms N Flint MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms P Murphy MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr K O'Dowd</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr R Ramsey MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms J Ryan MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms R Sharkie MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms A Stanley MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr L O'Brien MP, Deputy Speaker</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Secretary</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr G Worthington</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Committee support</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms F Hall</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr D Pecar</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr G Taylor</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Report relating to the consideration of committee and delegation business and of private Members' business</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. The committee met in private session on Tuesday, 25 August 2020.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2. The Committee deliberated on items of committee and delegation business that had been notified, private Members' business items listed on the Notice Paper and notices lodged on Tuesday, 25 August 2020, and determined the order of precedence and times on Monday, 31 August 2020, as follows:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for House of Representatives Chamber (10.10 am to 12 noon)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">COMMITTEE AND DELEGATION BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Presentation and statements</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Advisory report on the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Amendment (Transparency in Carbon Emissions Accounting) Bill 2020.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that statements on the report may be made — all statements to conclude by 10.20 am</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Ted O'Brien — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Next Member speaking — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 AUSTRALIAN PARLIAMENTARY DELEGATION</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Parliamentary delegation to India, 3 to 7 November 2019.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that statements on the report may be made — all statements to conclude by 10.30 am</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Ted O'Brien — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Next Member speaking — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> 1 MR KATTER: To present a Bill for an Act to amend the law in order to prevent non First Australians and foreigners from arrogating for their personal benefit First Australian culture, and to stop the sale of art, souvenir items and any other cultural affirmations that exploit and thereby deprive First Australians of the rightful benefits from their culture, and for related purposes. <inline font-style="italic">(Competition and Consumer Amendment (Exploitation of Indigenous Culture) Bill 2020)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 25 August 2020.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> 2 MR KATTER: To present a Bill for an Act to establish the Commonwealth Development and Infrastructure Corporation, and for related purposes. <inline font-style="italic">(Commonwealth Development and Infrastructure Corporation Bill 2020)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 25 August 2020.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Presenter may speak to the second reading for a period not exceeding 10 minutes — pursuant to standing order 41. Debate must be adjourned pursuant to standing order 142.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3 MR PEARCE: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes the decision to award Ordinary Seaman Edward 'Teddy' Sheean our highest military honour, the Victoria Cross for Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises the heroic acts of Ordinary Seaman Edward 'Teddy' Sheean on 1 December 1942 will see him be the first Australian Navy sailor to receive the Victoria Cross; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) acknowledges that an investiture ceremony that befits the magnitude of the award and its significance to Australia will be held at an appropriate time noting current COVID-19 restrictions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 25 August 2020.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 35 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Pearce — 10 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Next Member speaking — 10 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 10 mins + 3 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4 MS T. M. BUTLER: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) welcomes the release of the Auditor-General's report, <inline font-style="italic">Referrals, Assessments and Approvals of Controlled Actions under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999</inline> (the EPBC Act);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that Australia is currently experiencing an environmental crisis and jobs crisis, and the Auditor-General's report confirms the Government has failed on both counts;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further notes the damning findings from the Auditor-General including that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) there has been a 510 per cent increase in the average delays for approval decisions since the Liberals and Nationals were elected (between 2014-15 and 2018-19);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) between 2014-15 and 2018-19, delays to environmental approvals for jobs and investment from major projects exploded from 19 days on average to 116 days;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) 79 per cent of approvals assessed were non-compliant or contained errors;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) in 2018-19, 95 per cent of key decisions (referral, assessment method, approval), were made outside the statutory time frames, with just 5 per cent of decisions being made on time;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (e) conflicts of interest are not managed;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (f) reporting arrangements are not consistent with the EPBC Act; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (g) projects or environmental outcomes are not being monitored;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) acknowledges the extraordinary nature of these findings, which make up one of the most damning reports published by the Auditor-General to date;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) the report reveals the extent to which Government cuts to the environment department, which are estimated to be 40 per cent since 2013, has smashed the department's capacity to make good, timely decisions to create jobs and protect the environment; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) Government cuts and mismanagement (Liberal party blue-tape) is at the heart of job and investment delays, poor quality decisions and legal challenges; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) take responsibility for their abject failure on the environment and jobs; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) stop tying up projects and strangling the environment with Liberal party blue tape which is delaying jobs and investment, putting a handbrake on our economy, failing to protect iconic Australian species like the koala and allowing the state of our natural environment to rapidly decline.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 24 August 2020.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — remaining private Members' business time prior to 12 noon</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Ms T. M. Butler — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 7 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for Federation Chamber (11 am to 1.30 pm)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 MR HILL: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) reaffirms that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) Australians love who they love, and the community must have confidence that the partner and spouse visa provisions in the <inline font-style="italic">Migration Act 1958</inline> (the Act) are administered lawfully, fairly, impartially and with integrity;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) while the Minister generally has the power to limit the number of visas in particular classes and subclasses by using the program management provisions in s86 of the Act, s87 of the Act explicitly prevents the 'capping' of visas to people who apply for a visa on the grounds that they are the spouse or de facto partner of an Australian citizen or permanent resident;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) the Parliament has voted twice to reject legislative amendments to give the Minister a power to cap these visa classes, preferring the processing of spouse visa applications to occur on a demand-driven basis; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) inexplicable and unconscionable delays by the Department of Home Affairs in processing thousands of partner visa applications continues to result in significant harm to, and consequences for, Australian citizens and permanent residents;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) condemns the Government for:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) using the administrative tool of migration program planning levels to unlawfully override the legislated program management tools in s86 and s87 thus effectively 'capping' partner visas against the intent of s87 of the Act;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) refusing to release advice on the legality of their actions to restrict partner visa grants;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) presiding over an extraordinary blow out to 91,717 as at 31 March 2020 in the number of partner visa applications on hand, an increase of almost 30 per cent in under three years;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) unacceptably high and deteriorating processing times for partner visa applications, with the Department's website indicating that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (i) subclass 300—75 per cent of applications are processed within 16 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 29 months;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (ii) subclass 309—75 per cent of applications are processed within 15 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 20 months;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (iii) subclass 100—75 per cent of applications are processed within 20 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 24 months;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (iv) subclass 820—75 per cent of applications are processed within 20 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 25 months; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (v) subclass 801—75 per cent of applications are processed within 13 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 25 months;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (e) cutting the number of partner visas granted by 8,000 per annum which will mean the backlog and processing times continue to grow;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (f) allowing a blowout in the backlog of cases to 5,556 cases at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) as at 31 July 2020 with:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (i) an average processing time for partner cases of 726 calendar days; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (ii) a partner visa set aside rate at the AAT of around 60 per cent;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (g) failing to address the perverse consequences of COVID-19 related border restrictions for partner visa applicants including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (i) refusing to let numerous partner and prospective marriage visa holders enter Australia before their visa expires, or at least to extend their visa expiry date or refund their money; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (ii) refusing to let people who are currently in Australia on a temporary visa and who are granted an offshore partner visa to activate that visa without having to fly overseas; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (h) attempting to silence Australians who speak up publicly about the delays in processing and growing problems in the partner visa program;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) acknowledge the devastating human impact of delays and uncertainty on affected couples whose lives are in limbo, whose mental health is suffering, and whose relationships are being destroyed through separation from their partner for many years;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) apologise for the unacceptable delays in processing partner visa applications and take immediate action to process the backlog noting the Government has collected massive levels of visa application revenue that should be used to process applications in a timely way;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) urgently address the perverse consequences of COVID-19 related border restrictions on partner visas; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) publicly commit to affected people and the wider community that partner visa processing will in future be administered lawfully, fairly, impartially and expeditiously.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 24 August 2020.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 40 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Hill — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 RECYCLING: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 24 February 2020</inline>) on the motion of Dr Allen—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises the imperative of improving waste management, reducing unnecessary packaging and boosting recycling in Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) Australians generate about 67 million tonnes of waste each year, of which 37 million tonnes is recycled;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) only 12 per cent of the 103 kilograms of plastic waste generated per person in Australia each year is recycled, mostly overseas;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) for every 10,000 tonnes of waste recycled, more than 9 jobs are created; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) waste related activities add $6.9 billion to the economy annually;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) welcomes the Government's recent $20 million commitment for innovative projects under round 8 of the Cooperative Research Centres Projects grants to grow our domestic plastics recycling industry; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) notes that this is part of the Government's Australian Recycling Investment Plan, 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.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 35 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 7 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 MR KATTER: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) Amy Searight from the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC said:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (i) 'Australia (is) an attractive target for Chinese Communist Party (CCP) operations because of its strategic value as a U.S. ally in an increasingly contested Asia-Pacific region'; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (ii) 'That the growing financial dependence of Australian universities on tuition revenue from Chinese students and research funding from generous CCP-linked patrons created a base of support within the upper echelons of academia';</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) the US Department of State on 13 August 2020 designated the Confucius Institute US Centre a foreign mission; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) 13 of Australia's universities, including the University of Queensland (UQ) have Confucius Institutes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges the discernible influence foreign powers hold over Australian universities, as evidenced by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) the physical attack on UQ student Drew Pavlou during a Chinese student protest opposed to the CCP's brutal takeover of Hong Kong and his subsequent suspension;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) UQ's appointment of Chinese professor Xu Jie to Consul General, who described Mr Pavlou as an 'anti-China separatist';</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) the partnership between James Cook University and Xi'an University for collaboration between engineering and data science research students and staff, which was approved by the Chinese Ministry of Education; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) <inline font-style="italic">The Australian</inline> newspaper on 24 August 2020 exposing the CCP and their infiltration of our universities with the 'Thousand Talents Plan', which FBI director Christopher Wray described as 'economic espionage and a national security threat'; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) undertake a comprehensive study of the efforts by the CCP to exert influence over Australia's universities and means by which it seeks to do so;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) analyse the extent to which China's People's Liberation Army seeks to exploit Australia's universities to further its strategic interests;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) assess the degree of financial dependence of Australia's universities on revenue from overseas students;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) assess the strategic implications of this level of dependence; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (e) make recommendations to eliminate any strategic dangers to Australia presented.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 25 August 2020.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 10 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Katter — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Next Member speaking — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 SMALL BUSINESS AND THE DEFENCE INDUSTRY: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 24 February 2020</inline>) on the motion of Mr Thompson—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes the important role Australian small business has in the future of our national and economic security through its integral role in our defence industry;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises the defence industry's potential for growth in electoral divisions like Herbert and other regional electoral divisions across Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) supports opportunities to maximise the participation of Australian companies in all facets of defence procurement; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) acknowledges the Government's commitment to deliver a robust, resilient and internationally competitive Australian defence industry.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 45 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 9 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3 MR D. P. B. SMITH: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) in April 2019 the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories tabled a report on its inquiry into Canberra's national institutions, titled <inline font-style="italic">Telling Australia's Story—and why it is important</inline>;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) the report made 20 recommendations and was informed by some 83 submissions and several public hearings with witnesses from every major cultural institution;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) the report's conclusions and recommendations were supported across the political spectrum;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) unfortunately, 16 months on from the tabling of the report the Government is yet to respond to its recommendations;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (e) Government inaction on these recommendations is having a detrimental effect on the operation of these national treasures, including but not limited to the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (i) National Gallery, which is expected to lose about 10 per cent of their workforce;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (ii) National Library, which has modified its collecting strategy to remove Japan, Korea, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar from its list of priority countries from its Asia Collection; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (iii) National Australian Archives, which is preparing to lose large sections of its 117,000 hours of magnetic tape archives unless additional resources for digitisation are provided; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (f) these challenges outlined in the report are being further amplified by current COVID-19 restrictions; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that Canberra's cultural institutions play a critical role in telling our collective national story; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to immediately table a substantive and detailed response to the report's recommendations.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 24 August 2020.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — remaining private Members'</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">business time prior to 1.30 pm</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr D. P. B. Smith — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Items for Federation Chamber (4.45 pm to 7.30 pm)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Notices – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4 MR HAYES: To move—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that National Police Remembrance Day will be observed on 27 September 2020;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges the crucial role police officers across Australia play in our local communities and the tremendous risk and sacrifice that comes with their duty;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) honours the lives and memories of those police officers who have made the ultimate sacrifice in the course of their duty and specifically honours the tragic loss of four members of the Victorian Police Force, namely, Leading Senior Constable Lynette Rosemary Taylor, Senior Constable Kevin Neil King, Constable Glen Andrew Humphris and Constable Joshua Andrew Prestney, who tragically lost their lives in a multi-vehicle collision on Melbourne's Eastern Freeway;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) pays tribute to the families and friends of police officers who have been killed in the line of duty throughout our nation's history;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) commends the valuable work of Police Legacy, who look after the loved ones of police officers who have fallen; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) reaffirms its support for the nation's police officers and honours their courage, commitment and dedication in ensuring the peace and safety of our communities.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">(Notice given 24 August 2020.)</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 30 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Mr Hayes — 5 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Other Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 6 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Orders of the day – continued</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">3 HYDROGEN INDUSTRY: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 2 December 2019</inline>) on the motion of Mr Simmonds—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) recognises that with research like that occurring at the CSIRO Advanced Research Facility in the electoral division of Ryan, Australia has the potential to be a world leader in hydrogen development, production and export which will create highly paid jobs and an industry potentially worth billions to the Australian economy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) acknowledges that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) Australia's availability of land, high quality renewable energy resources and fossil energy resources, as well as our well-established reputation for undertaking large-scale resource projects, position Australia well for becoming a key exporter in a future global hydrogen market;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) the combined direct and indirect benefits of establishing a hydrogen production and export industry in Australia under a medium demand scenario will deliver to the Australian economy $4.2 billion and over 7,100 jobs by 2040;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) greater use of hydrogen is one way that Australia can contribute to global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, if Australian produced hydrogen replaces traditional fossil fuel sources in end user nations; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) the National Hydrogen Strategy is to be released by the end of 2019, providing the Government with an opportunity to signal its long term policy and commitment to this industry;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) welcomes the Government's significant investment of more than $140 million into hydrogen projects, partnering with industry to develop tangible solutions that are important for bringing down energy prices for Australian households and small</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">businesses; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) encourages the Government to utilise the opportunity of the release of the National Hydrogen Strategy to confirm its long term commitment to the development of our hydrogen capability in order to encourage private investment in the sector, create jobs, create export capability and reduce global carbon emissions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 40 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 8 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">4 WOMEN'S ECONOMIC SECURITY: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 24 August 2020</inline>) on the motion of Ms Collins—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) the COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted women's economic security, and that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (i) in April over half a million Australians lost their jobs, of which 55 per cent were women;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (ii) women's underemployment ratio now sits at an unprecedented 16 per cent, compared to 14 per cent for men; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (iii) modelling has estimated that more than 200,000 women casual workers in the accommodation, food services, and retail trade sectors alone will miss out on the JobKeeper wage subsidy;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) women typically retire with half the superannuation balance as men and if they choose to withdraw funds, women will suffer a significantly greater impact on their retirement income than men;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c) Australian women have been on the frontline of the COVID-19 crisis in Australia in underpaid and undervalued roles—women account for:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (i) 87 per cent of registered nurses and midwives;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (ii) 87 per cent of aged care workers; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">      (iii) 96 per cent of early childhood educators; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d) as a result of COVID-19, mothers are spending an extra hour each day on unpaid housework and four extra hours on childcare; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to recognise that women have been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 crisis and deliver a plan to reduce gender inequality.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 20 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">5 HEADSPACE: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 10 June 2020</inline>) on the motion of Mrs Archer—That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges that Headspace was established by the Howard Government in 2006;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) there are currently 113 Headspace services operating nationally, including 54 services located in rural and regional Australia; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) in 2018-19, the Government provided $95.7 million to commission Headspace services in rural areas;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further acknowledges that in the 2019-20 Budget, the Youth Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Plan was outlined with funding of $509 million; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) congratulates the Government for announcing a further $64 million to provide suicide prevention and mental health initiatives.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 45 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 9 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">6 SUPERANNUATION: Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 24 August 2020</inline>) on the motion of Mr Jones—That this House notes:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) the purpose of superannuation is to enable Australians to save for a dignified retirement;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) superannuation has made an enormous contribution to converting Australia from a nation that borrows to a nation that lends, creating a pool of funds to invest locally and abroad;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Australia is the 16th largest economy in the world, but because of universal superannuation has a pool of savings owned by Australian workers worth $2.8 trillion, which is the fourth largest pool of retirement savings in the world;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) before universal superannuation, 68 per cent of Australians and 85 per cent of all women had no retirement savings;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) the average superannuation balance at retirement is now approximately $160,000 for women and $280,000 for men;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) under current policy settings, the median balance on retirement for full-time workers will be $310,819 for women and $628,634 for men;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) over the past decade the average rate of return has been between 6 and 8 per cent—last year it grew by 9.2 per cent and Australia was among only a handful of countries that saw pension fund growth; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) superannuation is critical to Australia's economic growth and resilience and must be strengthened so it can play a pivotal role in Australia's economic recovery from COVID-19.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — 20 minutes.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 4 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">7 FAMILY LAW AMENDMENT (A STEP TOWARDS A SAFER FAMILY LAW SYSTEM) BILL 2020 (<inline font-style="italic">Mr Perrett</inline>): Second reading—Resumption of debate (<inline font-style="italic">from 15 June 2020</inline>).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Time allotted — remaining private Members' business time prior to 7.30 pm</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Speech time limits —</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">All Members — 5 minutes each.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">[Minimum number of proposed Members speaking = 2 x 5 mins]</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">THE HON A. D. H. SMITH MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Speaker of the House of Representatives</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">26 August 2020</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>8</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020</title>
          <page.no>8</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r6583">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>8</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>8</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FRYDENBERG</name>
    <name.id>FKL</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>Just over four months ago, I stood in this chamber and introduced legislation to implement the JobKeeper payment, the single largest fiscal measure in Australia's history.</para>
<para>Since then, more than 990,000 eligible organisations and more than 3.5 million employees have benefited from the $1,500 payment.</para>
<para>In the words of the Governor of the Reserve Bank, Dr Phil Lowe:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the JobKeeper program is really about keeping people in jobs, isn't it? It's done a remarkably good job at that.</para></quote>
<para>It has supported millions of Australians and given businesses the support they desperately need to help them get to the other side.</para>
<para>The payment is fulfilling its promise: keeping businesses in business and Australians in jobs.</para>
<para>While originally expected to run for a six-month period, following a review of the program, on 21 July the government announced it would be extended by a further six months until 28 March 2021 and that the payment would be tapered in the December and March quarters to encourage businesses to adjust to the new environment.</para>
<para>The government also announced that as part of extending the program, a two-tiered payment would also be introduced to better align the payment with the incomes of employees before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.</para>
<para>The government's decision recognised that Australia's economic recovery was still in its early stages and that a number of businesses and individuals remained significantly affected by the global COVID-19 pandemic.</para>
<para>At the time of being announced, these changes were expected to cost an additional $16.6 billion.</para>
<para>Subsequent to this announcement and following the introduction of stage 4 restrictions in metropolitan Melbourne and stage 3 restrictions across regional Victoria, the government announced it would make further changes to the program in order to help more businesses qualify for JobKeeper.</para>
<para>On 7 August, the government announced it would ease the eligibility requirements so that, post 28 September 2020, organisations will only have to demonstrate that their actual turnovers have significantly declined in the previous quarter.</para>
<para>The government also announced it would change the employee reference date so that, from 3 August 2020, the relevant date of employment for an eligible employee will move from 1 March to 1 July 2020, expanding employee eligibility.</para>
<para>The combined effect of the economic deterioration in Victoria which will see more firms needing to rely on JobKeeper and the eligibility changes announced on 7 August will see the cost of JobKeeper increase by around $15.6 billion.</para>
<para>These changes take the total cost of the JobKeeper payment to an estimated $101.3 billion.</para>
<para>The extension of the JobKeeper payment will provide much needed support for those businesses that continue to be most impacted by this crisis.</para>
<para>Nowhere will this be more important than in Victoria where the extension of the program will help to cushion the blow for businesses and their employees that have been severely impacted by the restrictions which have been introduced in response to the second wave of infections in that state.</para>
<para>Around $16.8 billion in JobKeeper payments is expected to flow into Victoria during the December 2020 and March 2021 quarters.</para>
<para>For many businesses, this support will be the difference between them remaining in business and reopening on the other side or having to permanently close their doors and let go of all their employees.</para>
<para>That is why this bill is so important.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 to the bill extends the prescribed period of operation for the coronavirus payment framework, enabling the extension of the JobKeeper payment until March 2021. Consequently, the ability to make amended rules to give effect to the JobKeeper payment will be extended and the rules can be further amended up until 28 March 2021.</para>
<para>The bill also amends the relevant information sharing provisions to enable the ATO to share certain JobKeeper payment information with Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies to assist them in their efforts to address the impacts of the coronavirus.</para>
<para>A two-tiered payment will also be introduced from 28 September. Employees who were employed for less than 20 hours a week on average in the four weekly pay periods ending before 1 March 2020 will receive the lower payment rate.</para>
<para>The phasing down of the JobKeeper payment will ensure a smooth and gradual transition to economic recovery, while ensuring that those who most need support continue to receive it. The introduction of a two-tiered payment rate will also better align the JobKeeper payment with the pre-COVID incomes of recipients—particularly those who work part-time hours.</para>
<para>When the JobKeeper scheme was introduced, it was accompanied by temporary changes to the Fair Work Act 2009. These allowed those employers qualifying for JobKeeper greater flexibility in operating their business, so as to respond to the impacts of the coronavirus pandemic, and assisted their employees to remain in employment and connected to their workplaces.</para>
<para>The government has heard from stakeholders and directly from employers that these provisions have been vital in keeping their business operational and keeping their employees in jobs. Survey results show that around three in four JobKeeper employers used the flexibilities in the provisions. Almost all of the employers surveyed that used the provisions said they were either important or essential for the continued operation of their business and for employees to keep their jobs.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 to the bill supports the continued operation of the JobKeeper scheme by extending the temporary JobKeeper fair work provisions in part 6-4C of the Fair Work Act, except for those relating to annual leave until 28 March 2021.</para>
<para>From 28 September 2020, employers who remain eligible for JobKeeper payments after this date will retain access to the full range of remaining flexibility measures in part 6-4C in relation to employees for whom they are claiming the payment.</para>
<para>Legacy employers, being employers who have previously received the JobKeeper scheme, but who no longer qualify after 28 September 2020, will be able to access a modified version of the JobKeeper provisions in relation to employees for whom they have previously received JobKeeper payments.</para>
<para>To do so, legacy employers will be required to hold a certificate from an eligible financial service provider stating that they have satisfied a 10 per cent decline in turnover test in the previous quarter before they can use the provisions, and again for each following quarter to have the flexibilities remain in place.</para>
<para>Under these changes, legacy employers will not be able to use a JobKeeper enabling standdown direction to direct an eligible employee to work less than 60 per cent of their pre-coronavirus ordinary hours, and cannot require an employee to work less than two hours in a day on which the employee works. Pre-coronavirus ordinary hours will be assessed using the employee's ordinary hours of work as at 1 March 2020.</para>
<para>Under these changes, the various safeguards that apply to the existing provisions will continue, including continuation of unfair dismissal rules, general protections and work health and safety laws to name just a few. And of course, an employer must continue to pay an employee in full, including any penalty rates or allowances applicable to hours they work.</para>
<para>There are also enhanced consultation and notice requirements for legacy employers before they can give an employee a JobKeeper enabling direction.</para>
<para>The JobKeeper fair work provisions provide greater operational flexibility for businesses in the recovery from the coronavirus pandemic than the more rigid terms and conditions under awards and enterprise agreements and support the effective continuation of the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme between September 2020 and March 2021.</para>
<para>The measures will provide continued workplace flexibility at a time when businesses are still in distress and recovering from the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic. Ensuring the viability of businesses in these circumstances will help preserve Australian jobs and assist employees to remain connected to their workplaces.</para>
<para>Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum.</para>
<para>I would like to take this opportunity to thank the opposition for the constructive approach they have taken to progressing this legislation through the parliament swiftly to provide certainty to Australian businesses and employees.</para>
<para>At an expected cost of over $100 billion, JobKeeper forms a vital part of the government's plan to support Australians and Australian businesses during this crisis.</para>
<para>My message to every Australian is that the Morrison government will continue to do what it takes during what is one of the most difficult times in our history. We have your backs.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
<para>Leave granted for second reading debate to resume at a later hour this day.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>10</page.no>
        <type>BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rearrangement</title>
          <page.no>10</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That notices nos 2 and 3, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>11</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Education Legislation Amendment (Up-front Payments Tuition Protection) Bill 2020</title>
          <page.no>11</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r6576">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Education Legislation Amendment (Up-front Payments Tuition Protection) Bill 2020</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>11</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>11</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>The Education Legislation Amendment (Up-front Payments Tuition Protection) Bill 2020 expands Australia's unique and successful Tuition Protection Service (TPS) to cover domestic higher education students who pay their study costs upfront. This will ensure that higher education students receive the same high-quality government backed tuition protection regardless of whether they pay upfront or access a HELP loan for their study costs.</para>
<para>These new tuition protection arrangements will ensure that domestic higher education students who pay for their study costs upfront are supported if their private higher education provider stops teaching or closes entirely. Students protected under these new arrangements will be assisted to complete their studies in a similar course with another provider and gain their qualification, or they may receive a refund for tuition payments they had made for those units of study which were not fully delivered by their provider.</para>
<para>The TPS successfully delivers tuition protection for international students and domestic students who receive Commonwealth assistance in the form of a HELP or VSL loan to support their studies. The TPS is a well-respected and proven model and contributes to the strong reputation of Australia's international education sector. The expansion of the TPS to include domestic higher education students who pay tuition fees for their studies upfront contributes to the government's ongoing commitment to safeguard the integrity and quality of Australia's higher education sector.</para>
<para>The bill also provides that, from 1 January 2021, the new tuition protection arrangements will:</para>
<list>be administered by a statutory appointed director. The same director will manage the HELP loans, VET Student Loans, and international education tuition protection arrangements;</list>
<list>require all private higher education providers to contribute annual levies commensurate with their size and risk. The levy system ensures the new arrangements are sustainable and can respond to sector trends;</list>
<list>rename the existing 'HELP Tuition Protection Fund' established under subsection 167-1(1) of Higher Education Support Act 2003, as the Higher Education Tuition Protection Fund, as the majority of leviable providers will have both upfront-paying students, and HELP students. This special account will be managed by the director to administer the arrangements for upfront payment students and HELP students, and to support displaced students;</list>
<list>ensure there are strict requirements for private higher education providers who cease delivering a course, or close, to ensure these providers put the interests of students first; and</list>
<list>enable payments to be made in connection with the new tuition protection arrangements and allow guidelines to be made to prescribe circumstances for which payments can be made. These guidelines will include an incentive payment to be paid to providers who take on displaced students, thus supporting them to continue their studies and gain their qualification.</list>
<para>In 2019, a number of providers and the peak bodies who represent the sector provided feedback to the Senate inquiry into the Education Legislation Amendment (Tuition Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2019 (which is now enacted), seeking an extension of the TPS to higher education students who pay their study costs upfront. Private higher education providers will also no longer be required to maintain separate burdensome and costly assurance arrangements for these upfront-paying students.</para>
<para>In light of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and its impacts on the higher education sector, these new tuition protection arrangements provide an additional measure of assurance to domestic upfront-fee-paying students that they will be assisted in the event that their provider closes or stops teaching a course from 2021. These arrangements will encourage people to invest in their education and gain a qualification, knowing that they will be protected by government backed arrangements, so they can help expand Australia's skilled workforce and support growth in our economy.</para>
<para>I commend the bill.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Higher Education (Up-front Payments Tuition Protection Levy) Bill 2020</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r6577">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Higher Education (Up-front Payments Tuition Protection Levy) Bill 2020</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>12</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>12</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>I'm also introducing the Higher Education (Up-front Payments Tuition Protection Levy) Bill 2020 that gives effect to the upfront payments tuition protection levy. This levy is part of the new tuition protection arrangements to protect domestic higher education students who pay for their study costs upfront in the event of a provider ceasing to deliver a course or closing.</para>
<para>The levy framework reflected in the bill has been developed by the Australian Government Actuary and is broadly consistent with the levy structure used by the successful Tuition Protection Service for international students, and students accessing HELP and VET student loans.</para>
<para>The bill imposes a levy on private higher education providers that have domestic students who pay for their higher education study costs upfront. The levy has three components—an administrative component, determined by an annual legislative instrument made by the minister, a risk rated premium component, and a special tuition protection component, which the higher education tuition protection director sets annually by legislative instrument. The Treasurer is required to approve the legislative instrument made by the higher education tuition protection director.</para>
<para>The strong governance arrangements of the TPS, including an advisory board, and flexibility in the levy framework, will ensure the levy settings can respond to emerging trends in the higher education sector, and reward low-risk providers through imposing lower levies. This is essential as it ensures sustainability of the government's tuition protection model, rewards providers when the sector is stable, and encourages providers to do the right thing by their students.</para>
<para>I commend the bill.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Higher Education Support Amendment (Job-Ready Graduates and Supporting Regional and Remote Students) Bill 2020</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r6584">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Higher Education Support Amendment (Job-Ready Graduates and Supporting Regional and Remote Students) Bill 2020</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>12</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>12</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TEHAN</name>
    <name.id>210911</name.id>
    <electorate>Wannon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a second time.</para></quote>
<para>The Higher Education Support Amendment (Job-Ready Graduates and Supporting Regional and Remote Students) Bill 2020 will create additional university places for Australian students and provide more support for regional students and universities.</para>
<para>The reforms in Job-ready Graduates will grow the number of university places for domestic students by 39,000 in 2023 and 100,000 in 10 years. That means more Australian students will get a university degree.</para>
<para>We will make it cheaper for students to study in areas of expected future job demand. So students will pay less for their degree if they study teaching, nursing, clinical psychology, English and languages, agriculture, maths, science, health, architecture, environmental science, IT, or engineering.</para>
<para>We have made sensible amendments to the legislation after listening to the constructive feedback provided by the consultation process. I would like to thank everyone who made a submission on the draft legislation or participated in the broad consultation process.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 of the bill amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to ensure public funding for places at university is directed to areas of expected employment growth, as well as industry and community priority. This includes amendments to the Commonwealth Grant Scheme funding clusters and Commonwealth contribution amounts.</para>
<para>This improves efficiency in Commonwealth spending for higher education and will enable the government to support more university places.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 of the bill extends Commonwealth support to more 'work experience in industry' units of study. This will incentivise universities to include more work integrated learning options in their courses and encourage students to gain more work experience from what they learn.</para>
<para>Improving how we connect graduates to employers, as well as tailoring education and training to ensure young people's skills meet industry demand, is critical to the recovery of the youth labour market.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 of the bill amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to change the way grants are paid to higher education providers for Commonwealth supported places.</para>
<para>This amendment will give table A providers flexibility to adjust the number of bachelor, sub-bachelor and postgraduate places within their funding allocation to better meet the demands of students, industry and local communities.</para>
<para>Table A providers will continue to be allocated places for designated courses of study, such as courses in medicine.</para>
<para>Table A providers will also receive funding for Indigenous students from regional and remote Australia on a demand-driven basis. This means all Indigenous students from regional and remote Australia admitted to a table A university will have a bachelor-level Commonwealth supported place. This was a key recommendation made by Dr Denis Napthine in the National Regional, Rural and Remote Education Strategy and will help improve participation and attainment rates for Indigenous people from regional and remote areas.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 of the bill will introduce the 'transition fund' into the Higher Education Support Act 2003. The 'transition fund loading' will ensure that table A providers maintain their revenue over the grant years 2021 to 2023, while the Job-ready Graduates Package is implemented.</para>
<para>The detail of the 'transition fund loading' will be included in the Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines and amounts reflected in table A provider funding agreements. The guidelines are a legislative instrument for the purposes of the Legislation Act 2003 and are subject to the parliamentary disallowance process. This means these guidelines will be subject to parliamentary oversight and scrutiny, ensuring transparency for providers.</para>
<para>During the consultation process, we listened to the sector and the community and have addressed the vital role of social workers and psychologists. Schedule 1 of the bill will create the new disciplines of professional pathway social work and professional pathway psychology in Commonwealth Grant Scheme funding. This change will result in an increase in the Commonwealth contribution and reduce the proposed student contribution amount for social work or psychology units undertaken as part of qualifications that are part of the professional pathway.</para>
<para>Providing a lower cost pathway for social work and psychology will mean that there will be more vital health professionals to support the recovery from COVID-19, drought, bushfires and other events.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 will also introduce a maximum basic grant amount 'floor' for 'higher education courses'. This will increase funding transparency for table A providers by establishing that a provider's maximum basic grant amount for 'higher education courses' for the grant years 2021 to 2024 must not be less than the amount specified in the Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines, and, for 2025 and later grant years, must not be less than the provider's maximum basic grant amount for those courses for the preceding grant year.</para>
<para>Schedules 1 and 2 include grandfathering arrangements to ensure no student enrolled in a course prior to 1 January 2021 is worse off as a result of this bill. These grandfathering arrangements extend to the amended Commonwealth contribution amounts also contained in schedule 1, ensuring universities receive the same Commonwealth contribution for grandfathered students in perpetuity.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 of the bill amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to match the student contribution amounts with the Commonwealth contribution amounts as amended in schedule 1. When combined, these two amounts will provide base funding for a Commonwealth supported place that reflects the cost of teaching a student at university.</para>
<para>Based on university data provided by the sector to Deloitte, the government has better aligned the cost to students and the taxpayer of teaching a degree with the revenue a university receives to teach that degree.</para>
<para>These reforms better align the total combined public and private funding for higher education units with contemporary data on the cost of delivering university education.</para>
<para>This is consistent with the reforms we are undertaking in vocational education and training.</para>
<para>The changes in this bill to both Commonwealth and student contribution amounts are going to be essential to Australia's economic recovery from COVID-19.</para>
<para>We are also encouraging students to tailor their studies to learn the skills that will be in demand in areas of future jobs growth. That means breaking down the traditional degree 'silos' by choosing units of study across disciplines and introducing a price signal to students by making degrees cheaper in areas of expected job growth.</para>
<para>Students enrolled in teaching, nursing, clinical psychology, English and languages will pay 42 per cent less for their degree.</para>
<para>Students who study agriculture and maths will pay 59 per cent less for their degree.</para>
<para>Students who study science, health, architecture, environmental science, IT, and engineering will pay 18 per cent less for their degree.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 of the bill amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to provide the legislative authority for the National Priorities and Industry Linkage Fund (NPILF)—a $900 million fund aimed at encouraging universities to collaborate with industry to design courses that equip students with the job-ready skills and experience they need to succeed.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 also includes amendments to enable the Indigenous, Regional and Low Socio-Economic Status Attainment Fund (IRLSAF) so that more regional, rural, Indigenous and low-SES students are supported to access university, graduate from their studies, and enjoy the benefits higher education offers.</para>
<para>Schedule 4 of the bill amends the Education Legislation Amendment (Provider Integrity and Other Measures) Act 2017 to strengthen and extend the application of various quality and accountability requirements to all higher education providers (including universities). Schedule 4 also amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to introduce new student protection and provider integrity requirements.</para>
<para>These amendments will support the work being done throughout the sector around best-practice approaches to student enrolment and progression and will re-signal the quality of Australia's higher education sector both domestically and internationally.</para>
<para>Schedule 5 of the bill implements another Napthine review recommendation by amending the Social Security Act to reduce from six to three the number of months a student must be receiving eligible student support payments to be eligible to receive fares allowance for a return journey home.</para>
<para>Schedule 5 also amends the Higher Education Support Act 2003 to reduce the loan fee for a FEE-HELP loan for an undergraduate student at a non-table B provider from 25 per cent to 20 per cent.</para>
<para>Schedule 5 to the bill also contains minor technical amendments that improve the clarity and operation of the Higher Education Support Act.</para>
<para>The amendments in this bill demonstrate the government's commitment to ensuring university graduates have the job-ready skills and experience to be competitive in a challenging labour market, as well as the government's commitment to supporting and driving economic growth into Australia's regions.</para>
<para>I commend the bill.</para>
<para>Debate adjourned.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020</title>
          <page.no>14</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r6583">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>14</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks very much, Deputy Speaker, for the opportunity to make a contribution on this really important legislation, the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020, which extends the JobKeeper program beyond the original finish date, which was the end of September. I will be moving a second reading amendment in my name, which I will get to a bit later on.</para>
<para>We have supported for some time the extension of JobKeeper beyond that hard September snapback. The last weekend in September was the original date that the Prime Minister and the Treasurer had nominated for the withdrawal of the JobKeeper payments. At the time, they said that they expected the economy would come roaring back, that everything would be fine all of a sudden and there would be no need for these JobKeeper payments. A number of times they gave interviews where they made it very clear that their working assumption was that this recession, this jobs crisis, would be a short, sharp episode and by the next month there would not be a need for this kind of support in the economy. Clearly, that's turned out not to be right, and, having recognised that, those opposite have had a change of heart, which we welcome. The Prime Minister's and Treasurer's original plan to pull this support—this JobKeeper support, these wage subsidies—out of the economy at the end of September would have been absolutely devastating. It would've been absolutely catastrophic. That would have had horrible consequences for workers, businesses and communities right around Australia and especially now, of course, in Victoria.</para>
<para>The thing that we need to understand as we debate this legislation is that, in terms of the JobKeeper payments themselves—I'll leave the industrial relations component for my colleague the member for Watson—all this legislation does is that it pushes the expiry date back a few months, from the end of December to the end of March. As I said, that's a welcome development, something that we have been calling for. But what it means is that it's still entirely the responsibility of the Treasurer now to set the rate of the JobKeeper payments but also to determine who is eligible and who is not eligible for the payments. It was the case before, and it continues to be the case, that there is one person who is solely responsible for the rates and for who gets the JobKeeper payments.</para>
<para>Having recognised that, we think that this bill doesn't address really the two major concerns that we have about the JobKeeper program. The first one is that this is now the third crack that those opposite have had at JobKeeper, and yet we still have a million casuals and hundreds of thousands of other workers deliberately excluded from the scheme—workers in universities, aviation workers and a whole heap of casual workers in the economy, concentrated in industries like tourism, who have been left out and left behind again with what the government is intending to do with the JobKeeper program. That means that the unemployment queues are longer than they need to be. It means that, because of a deliberate decision of those opposite about who they want to exclude from JobKeeper—despite the obvious need, despite the obvious benefits not just to particular workers but to the economy more broadly—the unemployment queues, which are already unacceptably long, are even longer. I hope that the Treasurer reflects on that when he sets the rules and regulations and rates for JobKeeper going forward. We're told that will happen in the coming weeks, and we would urge him to take into account that the fact that all of those workers are excluded means that the unemployment queues are longer than they need to be.</para>
<para>The second major concern is around the rates themselves. Again, this is entirely a responsibility of the Treasurer. A little over a month ago, the Treasurer announced the new arrangements for JobKeeper, including the winding-back of some of the support. He made that announcement before the economy—especially the Victorian economy but the economy more broadly as well, and the labour market especially—deteriorated further. Our concern is that there is a rush from those opposite to pull support out of the economy, without a proper plan for jobs to replace that support. That is probably our primary concern right now—that those opposite have a plan to pull this support out of the economy but they don't have a plan for jobs to replace that support. In case those opposite think that this is somehow a partisan thing or a political thing, I'd encourage them to reflect on the views that have been put forward by the Reserve Bank about pulling support out too quickly. I'd encourage them to reflect on the pretty remarkable consensus amongst the independent private sector economists in this country, who say that one of the real risks in pulling too much support out too soon is that that could cruel the recovery before it even gathers pace, create a new fiscal cliff and have consequences that nobody in this House would welcome.</para>
<para>Those are our two concerns: pulling support out without a plan to replace it and the fact that too many people are still excluded from the scheme. What is the reason we have those concerns? There was an overarching objective for the wage subsidies, which is the reason why we supported them in the first place. It's the reason why we welcomed the government's change of heart after they had initially said that they were a bad idea. We thought that it was good that they had a change of heart and came to our view that wage subsidies would be an important way to get through this recession. We welcomed that when it happened.</para>
<para>The reason those wage subsidies are needed is that we want to make sure that the extraordinary support which is provided to the economy during the depths of this recession is tailored to the economic conditions. That should be the navigating light here. That should be the guiding principle, whatever we are doing. Every dollar of this money is borrowed, and we need to get maximum bang for buck. We need to measure the effectiveness of our spending by what it means for jobs in particular and make sure that that spending is guided by and tailored to the economic conditions. And those conditions have gotten worse, not better, since the changes to JobKeeper were announced. We need to recognise that, acknowledge it and be upfront about it. Things have gotten worse, particularly in the labour market but also in the economy more broadly, and not just in Victoria but around Australia, and we need to respond to that. I think that means reconsidering the wind-back of JobKeeper payments while the labour market is as weak as it is now.</para>
<para>Our saying that the economy is weaker than when the JobKeeper payments were announced is one thing. We need to recognise that the government itself has said—the Treasurer has said a number of times now—that the half-budget update which was provided on 23 July is already out of date. Back then, I think just over 200,000 workers were expected to lose their jobs between then and Christmas. Now both the government and the Reserve Bank expect that to be more like 400,000 workers, in addition to the million already unemployed. The last unemployment numbers we got said that, for the first time in our history, we had more than one million unemployed Australians. That doesn't count all the Australians who have given up looking; they're not captured in that official data. But the government, the Reserve Bank and others have said that, even in the last four weeks, conditions have deteriorated substantially, and I think it's the responsibility of those of us in this place and especially the Treasurer, who sets the rates and eligibility for JobKeeper, to respond to that deterioration.</para>
<para>The reason why we need to get this right is that getting this wrong would have such enormous consequences for our people. The stakes really couldn't be higher, in lots of ways. There's the health part of the crisis; and, in economic terms, the stakes are remarkably high. This is the deepest downturn in at least 90 years, possibly longer. Next week we'll get the numbers for the June quarter. GDP growth will have probably the biggest contraction we've seen.</para>
<para>So, for all of those reasons, we need to understand that the stakes are really high here. We need to get this bang on, because, if we don't, it means more and more Australians will join the unemployment queues and it means more and more businesses will hit the wall, and nobody here wants to see that happen. So we have to get it absolutely right. I don't think any objective observer of the support that's been rolled out into the economy would say that it's been bang on so far. It's one thing to extend JobKeeper, which is a good thing, but that is not a comprehensive plan for jobs.</para>
<para>We should be trying to leverage our superannuation savings pool, rather than cutting the super guarantee and raiding people's retirement incomes. We should be getting the support flowing to bushfire victims, who have been hurting since January, not leaving most of the bushfire recovery fund unspent. We need genuine support for small business, not just a rebadging of the grossly undersubscribed SME loan scheme. We need a plan for social housing to create jobs and support vulnerable people, not rely on a HomeBuilder program which is inaccessible to too many people. We need energy policy certainty, we need cleaner and cheaper energy and we need jobs that are associated with that, not the energy policy chaos that's already costing thousands of jobs. We need a plan to make child care more accessible and affordable, not just kick childcare workers off JobKeeper while our second-largest city is in lockdown. We need a plan to support our university sector, which is critical to young people and our future, not make it more inaccessible and let uni jobs go. We need a plan to grow jobs and give a voice to the regions, not make cuts to regional services like the ABC and other cuts as well. We need to value older people, not freeze their pensions or hide from an aged-care crisis that's taken the lives of too many older Australians.</para>
<para>These are the kinds of missteps and mistakes which will make a really difficult situation and a really deep downturn, a really deep recession, even more difficult and even deeper, with devastating consequences for our people. We see in question time over and over again that those opposite are desperate to pretend that the only mistakes made here have been made by state governments. It's time for them to stand up and acknowledge that all the mistakes I just ran through have costs for the economy, and that means they also have costs for people and their jobs.</para>
<para>We need to get the response to this recession right, we need to get the recovery right and we need to reimagine what the place will look like after the recession has come and gone. Instead of those opposite taking a sensible three-part approach to this, we've got from them are these three parts. First, they were too slow and too narrow in their response. Second, they're in a rush to pull support out of the economy without a jobs plan to replace it. We desperately need a jobs plan; we can't wait until the October budget to hear what those opposite want to do about jobs. They're good at saying how bad things are now, but they're yet to tell people what they're actually going to do about it. The third defining feature of how the government is responding to this recession is really damaging. They're now using it as an excuse to pursue some of their old ideological obsessions, whether it be industrial relations, superannuation or pensions, right across the board. We know this because the Treasurer said he would take his inspiration in this recovery from Margaret Thatcher, and that will send a shiver down the spine of every Australian worker. We need to make sure that we are responding intelligently and decisively based on developments in the economy, not based on the same tired old ideological obsessions of those opposite.</para>
<para>When we talk about the consequences of getting this wrong—we've talked about the stakes being really high and about the depth of this recession—the thing we're desperately trying to avoid is what the economists call labour market scarring. That is really just a fancy way of saying that what we need to avoid is this big spike in unemployment becoming a permanent state of affairs. We need to make sure that this unemployment doesn't concentrate and cascade through the generations, particularly for communities like the one that I represent—and I see the member for Forde on the other side of the chamber. We can't have long-term unemployment in our communities. It's damaging for social cohesion. It's dislocating. It creates all kinds of intergenerational carnage. We need to avoid that at all costs. If you look at all the recessions here and overseas through time, one of the things we fear most is the long-term unemployment that follows, the long tail of disadvantage, which has such damaging consequence for our community. We need to avoid that at all costs. That means getting important programs like JobKeeper right. The ball is now in the Treasurer's court to set the rates and eligibility. We need him to get that right. If he continues to get that wrong, the unemployment queues will be longer than they need to be, and that will make it harder for people to put food on the table, to put school shoes on their kids and to pay their rent or mortgage. I move the amendment in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1)notes that this legislation gives the Treasurer extraordinary powers to set the rates and eligibility arrangements for the Jobkeeper Payment;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2)notes that millions of workers and struggling businesses continue to be excluded from the Jobkeeper Payment; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3)calls on the Treasurer to use his power under this legislation to ensure the Jobkeeper rate is tailored to conditions in the economy, including rising unemployment".</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the amendment seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fitzgibbon</name>
    <name.id>8K6</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Rankin has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form 'That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question'.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ALLEN</name>
    <name.id>282986</name.id>
    <electorate>Higgins</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm extremely honoured to stand here today, having spoken to the initial JobKeeper legislation in May this year. The reason I stand here so very proud is that the Australian people were looking to the federal government for a response, and they got a response that was certain, that was strong and that they could predict and rely on so that their businesses could stay certain and strong through what has been an incredibly unprecedented crisis. I want to take the House back to the end of March. This House rose on 24 March, and we actually had a concept that we would not be sitting again until 22 August. That is an example of how difficult it was to predict at that time what was happening around the world and how it was going to affect Australia. In fact, as it turned out, we have actually sat four times since that time, and we have been able to continue with the pace of legislation that is required to keep governing this country.</para>
<para>The reason I bring this up is that, as a public health researcher, I know how hard it can be to model and predict the future. I also know prevention is better than cure. In those two situations, we've been very clear, very stable and very certain in the way we have delivered a health response to a crisis that is a global crisis. But we can also say the same is true for our economic response. I remember saying to one of my constituents at the end of March that the Prime Minister was facing what could be the Spanish flu and the Great Depression coming at him at speed. It was like he had the Australian population of 25 million people as passengers on a great plane called the Australian economy and he had to land the plane to a safe haven in order to deal with what was an unprecedented crisis. And every day he was out in the public, for an hour a day, speaking to us about what his plan was. And I, for one, felt very comfortable and very certain that he had a plan.</para>
<para>And that plan was that this crisis was going to be with us for a significant period of time. The Prime Minister always said that from the very start. He said this wasn't a two-week crisis—some people on the other side argued that we should go for a hard lockdown and it would be over in two weeks—but would take at least six months. As early as late March, he was able to say we're going to put in place things that will help cushion the economy, which will help buffer jobs, which will help ensure livelihoods for a six-month period. That seemed almost unbelievable at that time.</para>
<para>As it's turned out, the Prime Minister was absolutely right: we've found that we needed a strong, secure economic approach. The people of Higgins are very, very grateful for the JobKeeper legislation, on which I was privileged to speak on 13 May in this House. We have seen 900,000 businesses now take up the JobKeeper payment—that's 3½ million employees—and already $42 billion has been disbursed to the people of Australia. Some people on the other side were surprised that we took this step. We did it because we knew that this had to be done, that this temporary payment was incredibly important. And I now back in this second piece of legislation. It was four months ago that the initial legislation was put in place, at a time when we didn't really know what was going to happen with this pandemic. So we're now moving to a point where we need to make sure we can step down the payment support in a temporary, transitionary way so that, moving forward into the future, people know what their business situation will be and what the economy will do. They need to be able to ensure that they can plan into the future.</para>
<para>The fact that the temporary JobKeeper payment is now being extended to March and we are going to have an industrial relations system that ensures flexibility for the JobKeeper payment through this period of time is incredibly important to the businesses of Australia and the employees of Australia. In my electorate of Higgins, so many people have been incredibly grateful for the support they have received. This is not the government's money; this is taxpayers' money. But they understand that this money is being well spent, that it is targeted and that it is temporary. We are making some adjustments now to ensure that as we move forward, going into the post-COVID period, we can enable the economy to get off its knees and enable businesses to move forward with certainty and plan right out until March.</para>
<para>I come from Victoria and, unfortunately, we are now nine weeks behind the rest of the country. Give a shout-out to my constituents in Higgins. We are struggling with feeling a little bit left behind with regard to our health response. But I can say that we look to the rest of the country to see the economy opening back up. When I speak to my colleagues around Australia, they tell me people are getting back to business. The businesses that have been hardest hit—retail, hospitality and health—are now opening up and getting back to business. This supportive economic initiative is so important. They can get back to business knowing that their employees have stayed connected to businesses. This is the important psychology of knowing that you have a job, that after this is all over you'll be able to get back to work. Businesses know that they are staying connected to their employees, that when it is time to open back up they won't have to open up their books again and find out how to interview people and get all of that administration going. They know that they can start back up again with trained, skilled employees, which means they can be on the front foot and ready to take forward their plans for their businesses. That is what the Australian economy is all about. It's about individuals, about the individual companies, having the confidence to move forward into a post-COVID period of time.</para>
<para>I must say, the most important thing about all of this is that the Australian people trust that they have a government that understands that this money is not the government's money but the taxpayers' money, and that we treat that money understanding that it's important to invest in our future through these temporary measures that will mean we're ready for a prosperous future. We know that we'll continue to do what it takes to ensure that Australia can trust that we have economic prosperity at the front of our mind each and every day as we make deliberations here in this chamber.</para>
<para>I'd like to say thank you to the opposition for working so cooperatively on what is clearly the most important economic initiative that this country has seen. When I look at the unprecedented economic and health crisis that we have faced, I think the Australian people can feel a great sense of confidence and trust that we are on the right track, that we are heading in the right direction. We've dodged a bullet with regard to the health consequences of the COVID pandemic. The Treasurer has the right plan and right strategy and the Prime Minister is leading us to a very optimistic and hopeful future.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to support the amendment moved by the member for Rankin. Labor will be supporting this legislation, the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020, but I do note the amendment moved.</para>
<para>At the start of this crisis it was Labor who urged the government to consider wage subsidies to help employers keep staff. The government initially rejected the idea, but then they listened to Labor. More recently it was Labor who called on the government to extend JobKeeper, and now they have. It was Labor who called on the government to abandon its proposal to extend emergency IR powers to businesses that have fully recovered, and they have. Throughout this crisis Labor has worked constructively with the government on the passage of legislation through this parliament to support Australians.</para>
<para>But, as we often see with the Morrison government, it has been painfully slow to act. It is slow to recognise the problem. It is often ignorant of the facts. Support for people in need was too slow, created too much uncertainty and excluded far too many people. This delayed an economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak and needlessly pushed too many Australians out of jobs and into those terrible queues of people we saw outside the nation's Centrelink offices, including more than one million casuals, who have been the hardest hit by restrictions and the downturn. Even as millions of people suffered, the Prime Minister had the temerity to falsely inform Australians that the economy would 'snap back' by September.</para>
<para>When this government does take action we then see the terrible failures of implementation. We saw the $60 billion JobKeeper bungle, the biggest in Australian history. We've seen three million vulnerable Australians forced to raid $33 billion from their superannuation accounts because the government failed to provide adequate support. This is a privatisation of the support that the public should have provided. We've seen the failure to implement a national scheme for paid pandemic leave. This government's failures will make this economic downturn worse than it needs to be, the unemployment queues longer and the recovery so much more difficult.</para>
<para>Labor's priority is always to protect jobs and to create new jobs. We want to help workers, businesses, families and communities through this crisis and to ensure that vulnerable Australians are supported. We believe job creation should be the No. 1 economic issue in this nation, but this government's record on jobs and economic growth is poor, and even worse, this government has no plan for the future.</para>
<para>Even before the summer bushfires and the COVID-19 outbreak annual growth was already well below trend, consumption was weak, business investment had fallen, underemployment and household growth had hit record highs, wages growth had hit record lows and debt had more than doubled. The Liberals now preside over the first recession in Australia in 29 years and hundreds of thousands more Australians are unemployed or left behind.</para>
<para>The unemployment rate is at 7.5 per cent and is expected to climb to 10 per cent. ABS data this week confirms the jobs crisis is getting worse, with 520,000 payroll jobs lost since the outbreak. The ABS 'Weekly payroll jobs and wages in Australia' shows that, since 14 March, payroll jobs have dropped by 4.9 per cent, and total wages have fallen by 6.2 per cent. Victoria was hardest hit, with payroll jobs declining by 7. 8 per cent. Payroll jobs for women declined by 4.7 per cent, and male payroll jobs decreased by 5.3 per cent. Jobs in the accommodation and food services sector decreased by 18 per cent and jobs in the arts and recreation industries fell by 15.3 per cent.</para>
<para>Here we are in late August, more than six months into the COVID-19 pandemic, at a time of mounting job losses, and this government is removing substantial JobKeeper support from the economy without any jobs plan to replace it. The government's changes to JobKeeper do not represent a comprehensive plan for jobs. They do nothing for the hundreds of thousands of people who have lost their jobs or will lose their jobs, including up to 400,000 additional workers expected to lose their jobs by this Christmas. That's 400,000 additional workers that will likely lose their jobs by this Christmas.</para>
<para>The wind-down of JobKeeper will come at the worst time for workers and businesses in Victoria and other parts of Australia. Some of the hardest hit industries are those that have been and remain deliberately excluded from JobKeeper. You'd have to be living under a rock not to have heard the outcry from countless Australian workers who have missed out on the scheme. The most recent incarnation of JobKeeper fails to expand the scheme to allow workers whose companies are owned by foreign companies to access the payment, placing undue pressure on the aviation industry. This government goes on about Australia's investment potential and economic credentials but, at the same time, allows these companies, who hire thousands of Australian workers, to hit the wall. The government have had ample time to tweak JobKeeper to ensure those workers are supported, and that they haven't just confirms that the Prime Minister and his government are happy for aviation to collapse in this country, and, with it, thousands of jobs. So, while they call for open borders to happen, despite health advice and the actual facts, they'll also let the aviation industry, which could work through an open Australia, fail.</para>
<para>I commend the work of the Transport Workers Union and its national secretary, Michael Kaine, for advocating on behalf of the aviation industry and its Australian workforce. He quite rightly pointed out:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the Government simply doesn't have a plan for aviation. It is willing to risk thousands of jobs and force families into poverty. It is standing by while Qantas and Virgin limp along, their futures entirely uncertain.</para></quote>
<para>Qantas has announced 6,000 redundancies, while redundancies are also planned for Virgin. We saw just last night that more job losses are coming for Qantas. Workers at dnata have been shut out of the JobKeeper payment because of an exclusion of companies owned by foreign governments, and they are expecting more job losses. It's a disgrace. It has become clear that the JobKeeper wage subsidies are a good idea but are being very badly implemented and leaving so many people out. Some people are being left out accidentally, but many people are being left out quite deliberately.</para>
<para>I turn to the matter of universities and international education. I for one am not surprised that this vindictive government would use the pandemic as cover to continue its culture wars against our amazing Australian universities. This is the same government that tried to deregulate our universities and force $100,000 degrees upon the students of Australia. The coronavirus crisis has had a particularly acute impact on Australian universities. The once-in-a-lifetime border closures have put an abrupt halt to international student arrivals. Many, if not all, Australian universities rely on this income to survive because of cuts implemented by this government, and former Liberal governments, to universities around this country and also their science and research programs.</para>
<para>The government deciding to lock universities out of JobKeeper means not only that universities have had to deal with funding shortfalls by culling workers but also that international students themselves have been left destitute, with little to no financial support. This idle government feels no duty of care to those students, even as it has watched borders close and flights get increasingly difficult to access and become largely unaffordable. Before the pandemic, the government refused to intervene to protect international students from exploitation in the workforce. During the pandemic, international students have had their superannuation stolen and have been forced to seek help from charities and food banks to survive. At the same time, UNSW and UTS surveys show that almost two-thirds of international students don't seek information or help for problems at work and suffer in silence, often because of visa concerns or fears of job loss.</para>
<para>When the coronavirus pandemic began, the Prime Minister said, 'We are all in this together,' but the experiences of international students in Australia paint a vastly different picture. We have treated our international friends, our international students, so poorly. This government could have shown some care and compassion by helping out those people—who literally are the fourth biggest export industry of this nation, worth some $30 billion—while the nation and the world rebuild and recover from coronavirus. Fortunately for these international students, the people of Australia do have care and compassion, and local communities did help international students. But, while they have been helped, the government has failed to help. Other nations have helped international students extensively and made sure that they are safe and feel welcome in those countries. I fear that, when this pandemic is over, international students won't want to come back to Australia because our government, this Liberal government, failed to help international students in their desperate hour of need.</para>
<para>So many of the people of Australia have been left behind by this government during the coronavirus pandemic. JobKeeper is going to be extended. It should be extended further. The people who have been left behind should be found and should be helped out of the crises they are facing, lest more and more people get left behind and drop into an unending cycle of poverty, which may very well be the legacy of this government's response to the economic crisis caused by the ongoing health crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic. I thank the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's times of crisis like this that require bold and decisive action. They require leadership. They require the vision to see that solutions which would in ordinary times be unthinkable are exactly what the situation demands. That is what this country needed as the double economic and health crisis from coronavirus began to bite, and it is what the Treasurer and Prime Minister delivered in April when they announced the single largest stimulus package ever undertaken by the Commonwealth of Australia. The impact of the Morrison government's JobKeeper program all over the country was dramatic and immediate. It's no exaggeration to say that this one bold decision, then worth $70 billion, rescued hundreds of thousands of jobs overnight and kept money coming in for thousands of families who were facing financial ruin. JobKeeper has kept almost a million businesses afloat. It has helped pay the wages of some 3½ million people. It's directly touched the lives of perhaps as many as a quarter of all Australians and indirectly underpinned the future for all of us.</para>
<para>On the Sunshine Coast, where I live and where my electorate is, we have felt its effects more than many. I've spoken to dozens of businesses large and small in Fisher over the past four months, and they've asked me to pass on their thanks to the Treasurer and to the Prime Minister as they've told me their stories—stories like that of Scott Armstrong, who owns the Parklands Tavern in Meridan Plains and the brand-new Baringa Tavern. When COVID arrived and the pubs and restaurants were closed, it looked like Scott was going to have to let almost all of his staff go. Despite the taverns quickly adapting to provide takeaway food, there would simply not have been enough work for them while the taverns' income sank through the floor. However, with the announcement of JobKeeper, all that changed overnight. Scott was able to contact 101 of his workers and let them know they would be retained with the federal government's support. Since that day those workers have maintained their connection with Scott's business, thanks to JobKeeper. Now that restrictions have been eased, Parklands Tavern and Baringa Tavern are back and better than ever before.</para>
<para>This story has been replicated in businesses across the Sunshine Coast. Take, for example, Tony Kelly's Rice Boi in Mooloolaba, one of the coast's most popular restaurants. It's got a huge following—some would even say a cult following—but, with a unique space and no bookings, the restaurant found it almost impossible to survive. Tony now has 30 staff on JobKeeper. Another example is Spicers Tamarind Retreat, perhaps one of the Sunshine Coast hinterland's best-known resorts and a must-visit destination for foodies on the coast. They were able to bring back 25 staff through JobKeeper. The Edge Cafe, Bar & Restaurant in Montville was able to reopen once JobKeeper began, with 30 employees in the program. Both Ryan Dillon of Spicers Tamarind Retreat and Andy Hargraves of The Edge tell me that they are now seeing important signs of recovery in our community.</para>
<para>Companies of every size in Fisher have used JobKeeper to stay afloat and keep employing Sunshine Coast locals. That's what JobKeeper was designed to do. For example, our iconic SeaLife Sunshine Coast Aquarium at Mooloolaba has more than 50 staff on JobKeeper. At the other end of the scale, Jono Milligan has kept his two community newsagencies, Kawana News & Gifts and Birtinya News & Gifts, going, helping a handful of locals and supplying Sunshine Coast residents with their newspapers. That's all thanks to JobKeeper. Likewise, Matt and Sharynne at the Moffat Beach Brewing Company were initially forced to stand down most of their modest staff, but, with the introduction of JobKeeper, they brought back takeaway business and lunch and put their eligible team members back on. JobKeeper even allowed Matt and Sharynne to bring back some of their non-eligible staff, with the leg-up provided by the program elsewhere in the business helping them to afford the extra wages.</para>
<para>For other Sunshine Coast small businesses, it's been the JobKeeper payment which has given them the people and resources they needed to offer innovative new pandemic-era services to customers. Two of the coast's world-class fishing businesses, Rockliff Seafoods and Walker Seafoods, rely on export markets to support their businesses. They are now doing quite well as a result of the support they have received through JobKeeper. A nearby Italian restaurant, Augello's Ristorante & Pizzeria, only had nine staff eligible for JobKeeper, but that didn't stop the owners, Simon Best and the famous State of Origin Queenslander Billy Moore. They were able to offer takeaway service and get their business open again, but only with the support of the Morrison government's JobKeeper.</para>
<para>I want to thank Simon and Billy, Heidi and Pavo Walker, Helen and Adam Rockliff and all of the other business leaders on the Sunshine Coast who have taken up the JobKeeper payment and used it not only to keep employing locals but to innovate and ensure that their business can make a contribution to our ongoing economic recovery. Nationwide, we are beginning to see the impact of that hard work. Since those deeply anxious early months, there have been promising signs. We should all be optimistic that, when our economy opens up fully once again, we will be able to rebuild and create a stronger Australia together.</para>
<para>Today we've heard a couple of speeches from those opposite, and I'm sure the rest of the day will be full of negative talk from those opposite, who are absolutely driven to talk down the economy. It's a real shame, because Australians want their political leaders to come together at our darkest times. Last week, I did my Tour de Fisher, where I rode around my electorate. On the ride from Peachester to Maleny there is a very steep hill up Bald Knob Road. It's a cracker of a road. It's a very steep road. When I left the Peachester listening post I got on the bike and I put a podcast on, and I made the mistake of listening to this podcast of the Leader of the Opposition talking about the difficulties he is having managing the expectations of his base and trying to have this modicum of being positive. Bald Knob Road is so steep that I couldn't stop to hit the 'stop' button on that podcast. So, for an hour of torture, I had to listen to the Leader of the Opposition talk about the troubles that he's having. Australians want positivity, not negativity, not the constant carping and talking down of the economy that we're seeing from those opposite. They want to see a positive contribution from those opposite, but that's not what they are getting. With the undaunted spirits of those in my business community, and in fact right throughout the Sunshine Coast, I have got no doubt at all that after this crisis the Sunshine Coast, and indeed this country, will be growing and prospering once more.</para>
<para>This bill will enable businesses who have struggled so much to stand proudly on their own two feet. We need businesses like those on the Sunshine Coast that I've mentioned today and many thousands of others to take a lead in rebuilding our economy and bringing Australia through to a brighter future on the other side of this COVID crisis. The bill before us gives those businesses and their employees the precious time they need to make this brilliant future a reality. I commend it to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020. There's no doubt that the JobKeeper payment has been an absolute lifesaver for employees and, in actual fact, businesses all over the country. That's why, when this government was resisting such an idea, Labor was out early calling for such a wage subsidy. For many, it's the only reason businesses and Australian families have kept their heads above water. The job crisis is getting worse, though, not better, with 520,000 payroll jobs lost since the virus outbreak began, and the government is predicting a further 400,000 jobs to be lost before Christmas.</para>
<para>With job losses continuing to mount and rising unemployment, this government sees it appropriate to remove substantial JobKeeper support from the economy without any coherent jobs plan to make up for it. Indeed, one might call the government's planned changes to JobSeeker and JobKeeper a no-jobs plan, as under it they predict more, not less, unemployment. Some of the hardest-hit industries are those that have been, and remain, deliberately excluded from JobKeeper—people who work in child care, many in hospitality, essentially all of the arts and cultural sectors, and those working for local government. We on this side of the House have been calling for a solid plan for jobs to be implemented before any sorts of supports are removed, so we need to ensure that financial supports are continued.</para>
<para>In my community, the supports put in place at the higher rate of JobSeeker and the security that JobKeeper has brought with it have largely been very positive. In my community, people have been doing well on the more significant payment—fewer mental health concerns, less crime, general improved health. Local small businesses are going well. In speaking with local law enforcement, there has been a marked decrease in petty crime for the simple reason that people aren't feeling the need to steal as they can afford what they need. Similarly, there is anecdotal evidence from local mental health charities that they are seeing fewer people struggling with depression and anxiety. While being supported by these payments, people aren't having the money worries they usually do. Who would have thought that basic poverty alleviation could be as simple as giving people in need more money?</para>
<para>So we do support the extension of these supports. However, as is the cliche, the devil is in the detail, and devilish detail it must be, because the government hasn't actually shown it to us. The legislation itself that we address today only extends the date that the government can pay JobKeeper through to the end of March 2021. The new lower rates—timing, tiers and eligibility—as before, will only be set out in Treasurer's rules, which we are yet to see, and can be changed at the stroke of the Treasurer's pen.</para>
<para>We are told by the government, however, that the plan is for the JobKeeper payment rate to be lowered from the $1,500 a fortnight in two phases. First, from late September to early January we will see the JobKeeper payment drop to $1,200 a fortnight for eligible employees that worked more than 20 hours a week before the crisis. For those who worked less than an average 20 hours per week the rate will be dropped to $750 a fortnight. But then there is a further drop at the end of the year, a merry Christmas indeed from the Morrison government. From early January through to late March the rates will decrease again to $1,000 a fortnight for those working more than 20 hours a week and to $650 for those who had been working less. JobKeeper will now end just as we go into Easter, hardly the driver of an economic resurrection then.</para>
<para>These reductions have provoked some significant concern in my community, with individuals and in the charity sector. In particular, they are concerned that people won't cope with the dramatic cut in pay that is to come. Before they suffer too much of a rude shock, they would like to see financial counsellors made more readily available to people so that they can prepare appropriately. After all, for some people in our community their income will be reduced by half. That's nothing to take lightly. And that's only if businesses are actually eligible under the tightened JobKeeper restrictions. You see, many businesses weren't doing well before the COVID-19 crisis hit. It's a rough market out there. It's because of this that our community are steeling themselves against what may, sadly, be a mass closure of shops that can't otherwise afford to keep their doors open with these changes, and that's on top of those that had already permanently closed.</para>
<para>When people are earning less money there's also less spending, which, of course, will flow into our small businesses, or rather it won't flow into our small businesses, many of whom I've been chatting with and who are quite willing to tell me that they are enjoying a relative bumper winter after the lifting of restrictions now in Western Australia because there's more cash in our community to support those businesses. To give an example, one of my local coffee shops has said to me that their major concern about the reductions in JobKeeper is not so much about their own employees—though that is part of it—their major concern is the reduction in JobKeeper that will be flowing through everyone else in the community, which will see fewer people able to go to their coffee shop, fewer people able to afford to get that extra side with their coffee, or coffee at all. That is the major thing that they are concerned will be affecting their small business. It is simple demand-side economics, something the Treasurer seems to have an aversion too.</para>
<para>In speaking with local councils, community groups, social support groups as well as the community at large, I can tell you people are concerned about when this tap gets turned off, not just about the money in their bank accounts but also the conditions that workers may be subjected to.</para>
<para>The fair work amendments contained in this legislation introduce a new legacy employers tier, being those previously eligible for JobKeeper but now with a downturn in revenue of between 10 per cent and 29 per cent who will no longer receive JobKeeper but will retain access to the JobKeeper workplace flexibility provisions. This is at least a concession, I guess, to the arguments that Labor has been making with respect to not extending the flexibility arrangements to businesses that have not completely recovered. However, the government must explain why companies which the government has determined no longer need financial support are going to be given these additional rights.</para>
<para>The provisions relating to the commitment to a minimum of only 60 per cent of ordinary working hours would result in many low-paid workers previously receiving JobKeeper experiencing a substantial pay cut. What we are concerned about are the work arrangements permitted by the JobKeeper flexibility provisions, the kind of flexibility that employer groups have wanted for a long time regardless of the pandemic. This really looks like the government is using the pandemic as a cover to introduce broader flexibility measures that would otherwise have been subjected to lengthy legislative scrutiny and negotiation. Ultimately, it will not just undermine workers' rights but will place them at financial risk and at greater vulnerability.</para>
<para>The risk in allowing the JobKeeper flexibility provisions to be extended beyond companies that are eligible to receive JobKeeper is that they'll be used as a Trojan horse for permanent changes that permit employers, with minimal consultation, to alter their employees' conditions of employment. Employer groups will claim that these provisions have worked so well during the pandemic that they should be retained indefinitely. However, to date, employees of businesses with access to these provisions have also all received JobKeeper. That is the bit that's fundamentally changing here. But this should not be an opportunity for the government to soften workplace laws. Businesses have ebbs and flows. We need to make sure that the new eligibility criteria for JobKeeper are appropriate. We need to extend support for longer. We can't just have a cliff where one day financial support is there and the next day it isn't.</para>
<para>Then there are the people who have been missing out since the beginning and still need help. I'm talking about our hospitality workers and other casual workers, who were working for 10 months, not 12, before COVID-19 hit. Only a few weeks ago I spoke to a worker in the tourism sector in Western Australia who had been working one week shy of 12 months before the entire operation she worked for had to be closed down. Situations like that have been writ large across our nation. I'm talking about the performers who are paid show-to-show, not year-to-year. I'm talking about airport staff at council owned airports or at council owned fitness facilities, and, of course, dnata workers. I'm talking about local government workers who have had hours significantly reduced across the board.</para>
<para>Victoria is still in lockdown and many states are on the edge. So the question must be asked: why is action being taken now to reduce payments? Why not extend just a little bit longer until we know for sure that our nation is actually coming out of this crisis? And why not extend support to industries and to the workers who need it but have been missing out?</para>
<para>JobKeeper was initially costed at $130 billion, just through to September. Now, after recalculation of the actual costs, plus this extension of JobKeeper at a lower rate, it will incur a cost of only $101 billion. The government has room in its own estimates from the beginning of this crisis. We know there is money set aside to support more people, so why not support them? I was having a conversation with some young people last night about good debt and bad debt. I think keeping people in work and spending money, keeping the economy ticking over instead of having it fall into a heap, is a pretty good example of the concept of good debt. That being said, there's only one person we need to convince to put their hands back into the proverbial national piggy bank. It's the Treasurer. Surely he can see that these industries and Aussie workers need support. Why withhold it now? We can afford it. Come on, Treasurer, have a heart!</para>
<para>We support these measures today, but it must be known as well that we think the government can and should be doing better. The most important test for the Morrison government's management of this recession and its aftermath is what happens to jobs and the businesses that create them. We can't afford to see more Australians left out and left behind because the Prime Minister and the Treasurer are not prepared to respond to the labour market or come up with a proper plan for jobs. Throughout this crisis, Labor has worked responsibly and constructively with the government. But being constructive doesn't mean being silent when there are very serious failures in the implementation of what the government is doing. These failures are covered across the board and they've seen long unemployment queues.</para>
<para>We saw the failures that resulted from their blunders managing myGov and the Centrelink system. We saw that the supports were too slow to be rolled out and information was not provided quickly enough. We saw that three million vulnerable Australians were forced to raid $33 billion from their super accounts. We've seen JobKeeper completely withdrawn from childcare centres across the country and fees reintroduced, when we need to do the opposite so that we can help people to get back into work, not to mention to support the people working in the childcare centres, not to mention to support the businesses that are running those childhood, early learning and childcare centres themselves.</para>
<para>The Australian economy is in recession for the first time in 29 years. The unemployment rate is at 7.5 per cent and expected to climb to 10 per cent. The government's announced changes to JobKeeper are not a comprehensive plan to create jobs. As I said before, the government's own plans expect an additional 400,000 people to become unemployed. Not only is that not a plan for jobs, that's a plan for no jobs. Labor's priority is to protect jobs, help Australian workers, businesses, families and communities through this difficult time and ensure that vulnerable Australians are supported. That's what responsible governments and parliaments should do. Australians have worked together to combat this virus, but more work must be done by the Morrison government to ensure that our hardest hit Australians are not left out and not left behind in the recovery.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PEARCE</name>
    <name.id>282306</name.id>
    <electorate>Braddon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It goes without saying that we are in the middle of one of the worst recessions that we've ever seen. It's potentially our greatest economic challenge since the Great Depression and our greatest health crisis since the 1919 Spanish flu pandemic. There have already been immeasurable impacts in many spheres of our nation's economy.</para>
<para>I want to take this opportunity to extend my condolences to every family, right across the nation, who have lost loved ones, and I also want to recognise that there have also been significant impacts upon their livelihoods, on their businesses and on people's jobs. As a government, we've acted swiftly, decisively and effectively. We've provided unprecedented targeted support. We have implemented the most comprehensive suite of economic support measures in the nation's history.</para>
<para>On a personal note, and from my own experience as a business owner—I sit on this side, on the government side, and I listen to the other side and their approach to what being a small-business owner is and the relationship that an employer has with their employees. It's a vision of taking advantage of the employees, of exploiting them and corrupting them. But the truth is that it's a very different matter. The truth is that the vast majority of our employers care deeply for their employees. I paint my own example as the case example today.</para>
<para>I ran a small business which was designing and manufacturing prefabricated concrete for the agricultural sector in Tasmania. I employed between six and eight people. It was a seasonal business, where we'd do the majority of our sales during the summer months, but, during the winter months, cash flow was almost non-existent as people weren't buying our products and we couldn't get onto farms due to the environmental constraints of winter in Tasmania. But I still had those six blokes. They were still looking at me every day. And, rather than put them off for the winter period, I knew that they still had to have food on their table. I knew that they still had a family to look after, and I knew that they still had bills that they needed to pay.</para>
<para>And so, as an employer, you go without yourself. You make sales, you sell off things or you sell cattle so that you can go without yourself in order to keep your employees connected with your business. Because that business needs the employees post-winter. It needs those employees to stay connected to your business so that you can come out of that slump in sales and in cash flow and you can continue to thrive and grow as a business. And so you go without. It's this very paradigm that I consider a similarity with the JobKeeper program that I'm here to speak about today. It's that connection between employers and employees that's important.</para>
<para>As a government, we understand the connection is important. It's vital and it underpins that business' future. After all, we as employers understand that our business is all about our people and our employees. In saying that, our JobKeeper, our JobSeeker, the cash flow assistance, our instant asset write-off, our apprenticeship support measures—and the list goes on—these programs have been the pillars of support and they have been the economic lifelines for many Australians. They're something that they've needed in their time of dire need.</para>
<para>Since the outbreak six months ago, I've spoken to literally hundreds of businesses from my local electorate, many of whom have accessed and benefited from at least one of the assistance programs. These are hardworking folk. They live right across the north-west, the west coast and King Island in Tassie. They're from all walks of life. Many of them, through no fault of their own, are really battling. They're struggling in more ways than one—battling to keep their businesses afloat or to pay their bills or to provide for their family. What they have said, without exception, is that the federal government's assistance has been their real lifeline. It has allowed them to pay the bills that I spoke of, retain their staff and keep their doors open. The centrepiece of the government's support has been the JobKeeper program. Australia wide, it has supported over 3½ million people and nearly a million businesses. The program has provided payments of more than $42 billion to date, which has been the boost that individuals, businesses and the economy have needed during this important time.</para>
<para>Driving around my electorate and meeting with locals, I met with the owner of Print Domain in Burnie, a town where I have an electorate office. His name is Michael Gates and he is a mild-mannered gentleman who works well with his community. He's got a fine business and he's renowned for being a great bloke. Michael spoke to me and he said this has been 'a real blessing'. He said that the JobKeeper program had had a positive impact on his business. While not back to a full order book, Mr Gates's business continues to improve each week. Being a print and design business, he has specialty skills required with his employees. They're specialists and they do a fantastic job, and I use some of their product in my electorate office. But the beauty of this program, he said, is that he can retain those specialised staff, with their specialised skill set, and it will allow him to scale up to full operations without having to worry about retraining somebody post the pandemic, when his cash flow will inevitably improve. 'This program,' he said, 'has been a real blessing for me and I know many others as well.' I wish Michael all the best in his Print Domain business in Burnie, Tasmania.</para>
<para>Just across the road, where we wander up for a coffee, is a cafe called Liv-eat. It's owned by a lady called Mieke Bacon. The JobKeeper allowance has allowed her to stay open during the COVID-19 outbreak. She said it was 'a lifesaver'. The story of Liv-eat is a great example of every cloud having a silver lining. When we had the outbreak in the North West General Hospital and the AUSMAT team was deployed to Burnie, under the federal government's assistance program, Mieke and her business were able to stay open because her business was able to take the opportunity to provide the catering for the AUSMAT team. So you can see the secondary flow-down benefits that the JobKeeper program has had, just in her business alone.</para>
<para>There are many other examples to cite, like Robyn's Hair Studio in Latrobe. Robyn is the owner and proprietor. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We were really struggling there for a while and the Federal Government support honestly kept us alive.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">A lot of our clientele are elderly people and while we still aren't back to 100%, the work that the Prime Minister and Premier have done has been brilliant.</para></quote>
<para>She also went on to thank me for responding to her during the pandemic. We were inundated, in the electorate office, with people who were just scared, apprehensive and unsure about their future. We kept our phones on 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and we provided that support when they needed it most, and that underpins our paradigm from the federal government's perspective also.</para>
<para>Just down the road, at Belly's Bar & Grill, owner Mark Radich said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">JobKeeper was instrumental in keeping our business afloat. When the decision was made to shut down all nonessential businesses on the north-west coast when we had the outbreak of coronavirus in April, had it not been for Federal Government assistance we would have closed our doors permanently. Now that we are able to resume trading again, the Federal Government support is still doing its job, helping our business as we get back on our feet.</para></quote>
<para>He thanked the government for all that they've done.</para>
<para>It is not only the JobKeeper program that has had benefits and flow-on effects for the great state of Tasmania; the instant asset write-off has also been important for our businesses. I spoke to the owner and executive director of Lending4U in Devonport. His name is Justin Delanty. Mr Delanty met with me and we discussed some issues he was working with. That was possibly in the last week of May. It was prior to us extending the $150,000 instant asset write-off to the end of the calendar year, giving businesses a further six months to take up that opportunity. Mr Delanty had had difficulties processing his applications due to the backlog that financial institutions like his were experiencing, trying to get everything through on time. Mr Delanty said his phone was 'ringing off the hook' with regard to both government support mechanisms, but the 30 June cut-off would have made it hard to process much of the backlog that he was experiencing. He said that, upon hearing about the extension of the instant asset write-off scheme, he was ecstatic. He said that he could help farmers, business owners, people in the construction industry and other clients right across the electorate, due to the federal government's support. His business does equipment financing as well. When a farmer or a business owner buys a piece of equipment, you need to remember that someone needs to operate that equipment, and, often, ancillary equipment is purchased at the same time. Again, our programs, such as the instant asset write-off, continue to improve and continue to benefit many people downstream.</para>
<para>The owner of the John Deere tractor dealership in La Trobe is James Darcey. I've spent a bit of money there myself. He runs a fine business in Tasmania. He said his books were full. He also highlighted to me that the lead time for ordering a piece of equipment that needs to come from America or Europe often means that farmers will miss out on the instant asset write-off. He also commended our extension of this program.</para>
<para>Just down the road from John Deere is Delta Hydraulics. It's owned by a bloke called John White, a visionary in our business sector in Tasmania. It's a Devonport based business that has a wide range of clients, from the defence industry—he supplies parts to the Collins class submarines and F/A-18 maintenance teams—to heavy industry partners such as the Elphinstone Group. He has verbally confirmed to me that he's a big supporter of the instant asset write-off, as well as JobKeeper, and this has helped his business no end. 'Wise, wise, wise,' he said, 'from the federal government.' His business has remained open.</para>
<para>Capitalcorp Equipment Finance, also just down the road, is owned by a bloke called Alan Hogge. Hoggy approached me just prior to our announcement of the extension of the instant asset write-off. He had a dilemma: he couldn't process his applications quickly enough. He said the extension of the scheme to the end of the calendar year meant that he could service his clients better. Again, the financial benefits flowed downhill and across the electorate.</para>
<para>The initial phase of the federal government's plan has been to focus on the health crisis, save jobs and protect the economy as best we can. The government have been clear about our approach to this crisis. We've implemented the programs needed as the health and economic situation evolved. We have been, and we will continue to be, responsive and adaptive. We have announced that the JobKeeper program will be extended by a further six months. This will give businesses who need it extra time to recover. This could support up to 1.4 million people for an extra six months. Importantly, JobKeeper will remain open to new participants.</para>
<para>I also want to take this opportunity to congratulate our Premier in Tasmania, and his government's steadfast, responsible approach to the recovery. He has worked hand in glove with the federal government, and Tasmania has fared well as a result.</para>
<para>This is a time like no other. It is an incredibly challenging time for many people right across Australia. But I want one thing to remain clear today, and that is that we will always be there for them and that the good folk of the electorate of Braddon can always rely and count on me and the Morrison government to be there for them. I commend the bill to this House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr THISTLETHWAITE</name>
    <name.id>182468</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingsford Smith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The coronavirus pandemic has created an unprecedented economic crisis in our nation. Our economy is in recession. Millions of workers have lost their jobs, been stood down or had their hours cut. Mortgages and rental payments are on hold. Small businesses have folded, and people have lost their jobs. Kids have been taken out of child care. Family holidays have been abandoned. The nation is doing it tough. Australians are doing it really tough. But what's worrying and sad about the predicament we're in at the moment is that things are predicted to get much worse economically. We know that the government's own estimates are that an additional 400,000 Australian workers will lose their jobs before the end of this year. That's backed by the Reserve Bank's analysis.</para>
<para>Just yesterday, Qantas and Jetstar announced a further 2,500 ground staff workers would lose their jobs, many of them, unfortunately, in the electorate that I represent. I say to those workers: I and my office are here to help you. If you wish to discuss any of the elements of your redundancy or what occurred for you, or just want someone to talk to about it, please feel free to call my office. That extends to all workers in our community who've been impacted by this terrible pandemic and the recession.</para>
<para>In times of crisis like this, it's up to government to step in and provide leadership to support businesses and jobs and to provide the plan to get Australians back to work and get the economy up and running again. Unfortunately, sadly, I don't think we've got that plan from the government yet. I think, really, that the government underestimated just how bad this pandemic would be and how long-lasting the effects would be economically. That's evident in the fact they were late to the party in coming up with policies and proposals to support people in our economy. They were late to the party not only around some of the health elements, particularly those associated with aged care and developing a plan to deal with coronavirus in aged-care facilities, but also when it came to supporting jobs and ensuring that Australians had the relief that they needed to get through this difficult period. It was Labor that called for the establishment of a wage subsidy. It was Labor that called for rental relief and mortgage holidays for homeowners and tenants throughout the country. It's been Labor that's been calling for the government to develop a jobs plan to bring our economy out of this recession and to get people back into work.</para>
<para>Thankfully, the government listened to what Labor was saying and implemented JobKeeper, a wage subsidy that would support Australians during this difficult period, particularly those that have been stood down from their positions because demand in the businesses that they work in had dried up. There've been problems in JobKeeper that Labor has pointed out in this parliament, but we've supported the notion and we've supported all of the legislation that's gone through the parliament on this.</para>
<para>There have been problems with university staff missing out—people who work part time and casually, particularly those in the education sector. There are people in the arts industry and the hospitality industry who've missed out as well. Despite the fact that the people working in these industries are all Australians, they all pay taxes and they all deserve support, this government abandoned them in their time of need. It was harrowing to have to go to Sydney airport a couple of months ago and stand with and listen to dnata workers who have been abandoned by this government simply because of the corporate structure that they happen to work for. We have the ridiculous situation of people who make the food for airlines in this country not receiving JobKeeper but the people on the plane who hand the food out getting it. That's not fair. Labor has pushed these issues and encouraged the government to extend that to those workers. Unfortunately, they have failed to do so.</para>
<para>When the government initiated JobKeeper I thoroughly believed that they thought this crisis would be over by September, that we would have got it under control and things would be back in hand and we'd be able to open up the economy once again. That's evident in the fact that the expiry date of the JobKeeper program, and the legislation, is the end of September. That's why this bill is required—to extend those provisions beyond September and well into next year to ensure that workers, businesses, families and individuals have the support they deserve. That's why I'll be supporting this bill and that's why Labor is supporting this bill—to extend that important support to Australian workers and to businesses and to families that need it.</para>
<para>We're saying that this is simply not enough. Simply coming into the parliament with a bill to extend JobKeeper is not enough. The government needs to develop a plan that supports jobs beyond the recession, brings the economy out of recession and gets demand up and running again and supports businesses. We all know that this economic crisis is going to last well beyond the pandemic. Australians deserve to know now what the plan is to get the economy up and running again and to get people back into work. We know that the economic shock is going to last well beyond this year. You don't need Labor to tell you that. All the economic commentators, including the Reserve Bank governor, are saying unemployment is expected to peak late next year at 10 per cent—not late this year but late next year. There are still going to be a lot of people out of work towards the latter half of next year. And particular industries are going to do it really tough over the coming two years. They include the construction industry, the retail industry, travel and tourism, which has been absolutely smashed, and the aviation sector. We are all going to feel the burden beyond the pandemic. The economic crisis is going to last for a very long time.</para>
<para>I say to the government: what's the plan to ensure that, when the pandemic ends, there is support for businesses to get up and running again, for people to be employed once JobKeeper runs out? Where is the plan to stimulate that economic growth in our economy once again? It's not there at the moment. Australians deserve to know what that plan is, or indeed what the government is working on, because to date they have had zilch from the Treasurer and the Prime Minister about that.</para>
<para>When Labor was in government and we were hit with the financial crisis, the Prime Minister and the cabinet worked immediately on establishing a plan to support jobs and build our economy. It included programs like the Building the Education Revolution, which provided important upgrades to school infrastructure and facilities and boosted the educational opportunities of our kids. Importantly, it provided jobs for people in the construction sector within local communities, with a focus on employing locals. We invested in social housing, building public assets that provide a welfare benefit to people in our community who are struggling, alleviating some of the problems we had in the country around homelessness and a lack of access to housing. They are some of the things that Labor did when we were in government, that we came up with, that were a plan to support jobs beyond the global financial crisis, and the results speak for themselves. Australia was the only developed economy in the world that avoided a recession, that managed to ensure that people didn't lose work on a wholesale scale throughout the country.</para>
<para>The government needs to do a similar thing. It needs to heed the advice that Labor took when we were in government in developing our plan to support jobs beyond the global financial crisis, and it needs to do it now. The Australian people deserve to know what the government's plan to support jobs and businesses beyond the pandemic is going to be. They deserve to know what its prospects for employment are going to look like beyond this year. Labor has been again constructive in offering suggestions to the government about areas in which we believe we could almost immediately begin rolling out programs that would improve public infrastructure and support jobs. One of those areas is social housing. We all know as local members the backlog of maintenance and issues with social housing that exist within our communities. These are problems that can be fixed and provide jobs for tradespeople and other people working in the construction sector—that vital sector of our economy—in Australia almost immediately. In doing so we would improve and upgrade publicly owned assets, assets that are important in providing a roof over the head of many Australians, particularly those who are on low incomes, those who have mental health issues or disability issues and aren't able to work and those who have been homeless in the past and need a roof over their head. It's a targeted outcome that would support better social outcomes and support jobs in our economy.</para>
<para>There are plenty of opportunities to begin programs of upgrading existing infrastructure. Here's an idea: why don't we look at improving Australia's road network to make it safer, particularly rural and regional roads, where we know there's a history of accidents and injury? Look at programs to widen shoulders, introduce audible markings along the sides of the roads and introduce anticollision wires that run down the middle of roads. These are upgrades to public infrastructure that could be undertaken almost immediately and would support jobs in the construction sector and ancillary industries associated with that but, importantly, would at the same time upgrade public infrastructure and assets and provide a productivity benefit to the country. Labor has also said that the government should look at and investigate getting on with the development of high-speed rail up the east coast of Australia. That could begin with the process of reserving the corridor. Procuring the land is the greatest expense in a project like that. It could begin almost immediately and would provide jobs for Australians.</para>
<para>Those are three areas in which Labor has suggested constructively that the government could act, but so far, we've heard nothing from this government. Australians can't wait. They're in desperate, dire need of leadership from this government, and it's not coming.</para>
<para>I'll turn quickly to the industrial relations changes that the government has made. This bill contains an extension of some of those changes to industrial relations laws. Workers, unions and Labor have been cooperative around suspending some of the provisions of awards and enterprise bargaining agreements. We've done this in good faith to get the nation through this pandemic and this difficult situation. This bill provides a further extension of some of those provisions. Labor will again support it in good faith, but my concern is that you can't trust those opposite. I am concerned that members of this government will attempt to turn these temporary measures into permanent measures.</para>
<para>We've already seen Senator Bragg say that the changes to early-release superannuation should be made permanent and that people should be able to access their superannuation whenever they want and raid their superannuation accounts. Well, that's not on. Labor won't support changes like that that dud Australian workers. I warn those opposite: don't try and dud Australian workers. Don't seek to make these changes permanent, because we will fight you. We'll fight you because that will be dishonest, that will be deceitful, that will be immoral and that's not the right thing to do by Australian workers during this time of difficulty when they've placed their trust in you and given you the opportunity to suspend some of those provisions in good faith. Don't dud Australian workers, because if you do we will fight you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ARCHER</name>
    <name.id>282237</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For employers and employee, the reality of coronavirus hit like a tonne of bricks in March. The decisions made by the Morrison government were made quickly and decisively to protect the health of all Australians while trying to balance the devastating economic impact this unprecedented crisis has brought. The decision around JobKeeper was made in the context of the new social-distancing arrangements, which were announced following the national cabinet on 24 March. This would see the prohibition of a number of activities and precipitate the temporary closure of a number of businesses, including pubs, restaurants and cafes. Months on, we are far from out of the woods. We have a government debt that none of us dreamed possible at the beginning of this year. But I am proud of the work done by our government to protect the lives and livelihoods of Australians, and none more so than JobKeeper, which continues to keep many Tasmanian businesses going and their valued employees connected.</para>
<para>In my electorate of Bass there are currently some 2,800 organisations who are is recipients of JobKeeper, and I'd like to share some of their stories today. I begin in Launceston, Tasmania's second-biggest city and one with a fierce entrepreneurial spirit. Launceston has the highest number of JobKeeper recipients in the state, which is unsurprising given the make-up of our workforce. A report released in 2017 showed that 83 per cent of the Launceston workforce was employed in the private sector, compared with just 76 per cent in Hobart. As the Launceston Chamber of Commerce has stated, the city is primarily a private sector economy that relies heavily on small and medium businesses.</para>
<para>In early April the chamber sent out a survey to their members seeking feedback on the Morrison government's JobKeeper scheme. Of those who responded about half were eligible, and 75 per cent of those were planning to access the program. The survey also found that the payment would save at least 1,500 jobs. The chamber lauded the government's decision to implement JobKeeper, stating, 'From a practical point of view, there will be many local businesses who will reap great benefit from this, and it will be the difference between a business closing for good and one which can hibernate until the inevitable recovery occurs. The government has taken the view—the correct view—that it is better to keep people within the employment relationship, rather than having them in the social security system. It makes good business sense and good sense from a community point of view.'</para>
<para>The extension of JobKeeper, which brings us here today, is also welcomed by the chamber, who state, 'The extension will provide much-needed reassurance that many will be able to keep their business afloat and their staff employed. This is particularly encouraging for those businesses in our community who have been significantly impacted by the disruption caused by the pandemic.'</para>
<para>We know that tourism and hospitality were hit hard by the pandemic and the subsequent restrictions. In my island state, tourism contributes more than $3 billion to Tasmania's economy each year, or about 10 per cent of gross state product. Prior to the pandemic, tourism employed about 17 per cent of Tasmania's workforce, the highest rate in the country, with just under 1,700 tourism businesses across the state employing over 43,000 people. A large number of these businesses are accessing JobKeeper.</para>
<para>Adam from Luxury Golf & Scenic Tours Tasmania stated early on that the package would allow his business to survive the downturn, allowing them in uncertain times to have a regular stream of income, and applauded the government for doing a really good job in working to keep businesses afloat, making sure that they can come out the other side.</para>
<para>Another entrepreneurial business in our community has told me of the importance of JobKeeper in ensuring their business can stay afloat: 'As a software development company, JobKeeper ensured we could keep our team in place while our customers adjusted to the new normal. The default position from our customers was to pause or cancel their projects while they ascertained how their business or department would respond to change. JobKeeper gave our business the ability to not knee-jerk and let staff go, and instead be able to pivot towards new opportunities and markets. In essence, it gave us the opportunity to hang in there and try a different path, which has worked.'</para>
<para>The impact of JobKeeper has also been far more wide-reaching for some. A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of meeting with the manager of the Tailrace Centre, in Riverside. As owners of a function and events centre, Tim and his wife, Sharon, were anticipating their biggest year yet when COVID brought everything to a crashing halt. They lost close to $750,000 due to the immediate closure of their children's play centre, function facilities and popular cafe. Before JobKeeper was introduced, most of the workforce was stood down and the 10 staff who remained faced pay cuts of up to 50 per cent. Instead, JobKeeper has kept them connected to around 20 staff. The Tailrace cafe, Jude's, provides a pathway to employment and career support for local youth and others who have battled difficulties in their past. For one employee at Jude's, who has worked so hard to turn her life around and gain meaningful employment, JobKeeper has allowed her to stay on a positive path, keeping engaged with her employer and continuing to flourish.</para>
<para>Peter Barron, owner of Flinders Island Aviation, is providing essential passenger, freight and mail deliveries to the Furneaux islands. Peter's business is receiving JobKeeper for his four employees, from pilots to admin staff, to keep his operation afloat. It was incredibly important for these remote island communities that the business was able to carry on operations and not suspend those essential services.</para>
<para>For Mathew Cooper and the team at the award-winning Fannys Bay whisky distillery, tucked away in Lulworth, their popular and much-loved cellar door had to temporarily close. Access to JobKeeper has assisted in keeping them afloat. With their cellar door now reopened, I was thrilled to pay a visit to the distillery a few weeks ago.</para>
<para>At Seahorse World, in Beauty Point, JobKeeper provided certainty to its 11 employees. A first-rate tourist destination, Seahorse World is also dedicated to conservation and education. Rachelle and her team run a breeding program to save the critically endangered Tasmanian handfish from extension, with only 80 red handfish and just 1,000 spotted handfish left in the wild. Getting tourists through the door plays a significant role in funding the programs and supporting their staff. COVID, understandably, had a major impact on their operations, but with the assistance of JobKeeper they were able to keep their employees and reopen just in time for the July school holidays. Without interstate or international tourists for some time to come, JobKeeper continues to provide much-needed certainty.</para>
<para>The beauty industry also suffered a hit when restrictions were put in place. Beauty salons, often owned and run by women, employing other women, closed their doors in March. For Elysian Beauty and Wellness Salon, near my office in Launceston, JobKeeper allowed Bronte to keep on her two full-time employees. When restrictions were lifted in early June, the salon was able to reopen with its skilled employees still in place.</para>
<para>These are just a few examples of some of the 2,800 businesses in my electorate receiving JobKeeper. From my work with these business communities over the last few months, it's very clear to me that the Northern Tasmanian region extending JobKeeper will be necessary, particularly as border restrictions continue to impact. The economic effects of COVID are still keenly felt in the communities I represent, and I'm proud that the government is extending this payment through to 28 March 2021 while also working to better target the JobKeeper payment to support businesses and their workers as they manage and recover from the economic effects of coronavirus.</para>
<para>The temporary amendments to the Fair Work Act were put in place to support the practical operation of the JobKeeper scheme and to help keep Australians employed and connected to their workplaces. Many business owners in Northern Tasmania have told me that they have been critical to keeping more people in work. A survey of employers commissioned by the Attorney-General's Department shows that the flexibility measures introduced under the temporary fair work amendments have been vital for businesses to survive the impacts of the pandemic and save jobs. I have heard from business owners who expressed concern that some staff were refusing to take shifts or take on reasonable tasks to help keep them engaged with their workplace. The change in rates outlined in the bill will go some way towards addressing this issue, while also providing certainty and security over the next six months.</para>
<para>I'd like to finish today by sharing some words from Kate, who works at Grays hotel in my home town. Kate perfectly highlights the situation business owners in Northern Tasmania have faced, why JobKeeper has been a lifeline for so many and why it is so important to continue with this critical support. She wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In late February we began experiencing the effect of the virus on our business; fears of its transmission and the introduction of stay at home campaigns meant that people weren't coming out. For the last 5½ years my husband and I have operated a pub in the small Municipality of George Town, Tasmania. Gray's Hotel is well supported by locals and we operate a gaming and sports bar and the towns busiest Bistro seven days a week. We employ our 2 teenage children in our family operated business as well as 19 other members of our community.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">When the announcement was made on Sunday, 22 March that we would be closing as at 12pm the following day and restricted to takeaway meals (which has not previously been of our business plan) the world as we knew it collapsed before us. The weight of having to stand down our staff members was a difficult and emotional time for us as we understood that they were financially dependent on the income they were receiving from us and that they enjoyed being part of our team and that relationship was now on hold, as was their lives…</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Quickly we developed a short term business plan which would see the delivery of close to 500 takeaway meals delivered over three evenings per week—this business plan would not have been sustainable long term as it involved myself completing close to 50 hours per week on top of my full time employment at a local manganese smelter, simply to ensure that we were running as lean an operation as possible. The introduction of the job keeper program has had a positive effect on our business for many reasons. We were able to re-engage with our workforce and instead of a team of 3 we now had a team of 15 ready and able to assist with prep work, during service, cleaning etc.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We have someone dedicated to our phones each day which has eased the problem of people not being able to get through and we have turned all of our bistro staff into delivery drivers. Job Keeper has provided some financial relief to enable us to operate additional hours. The comraderies is exceptional and morale is at an all-time high—our staff stand beside us as we navigate the uncertainty as to what each night will bring us and respect us exponentially for the lengths we have gone through financially to be able to participate in the job keeper scheme. We have proudly taken all eligible employees onto the job keeper system and have not made any terminations.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The stimulus package released by the federal government has delivered us some timely relief with credits on our BAS statement reducing the amount we will be liable for in the coming weeks; this is a huge benefit to our business as we continue to navigate our way through the commitments of paying for stock on hand that is not deemed returnable but currently not useable, a rent reduction that is still very high for the single supply of takeaway meals, while still having to pay full tariffs on electricity and gas costs as we are deemed to be a higher user and not eligible for any discounts or rebates and the costs involved in regular financial advice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Our aim during this period is to remain viable and limit the loss so that we are in a strong position to re-open when restrictions are fully lifted and programs such as Job Keeper and the stimulus packages and initiatives at a State and Federal level will put us in a good position to maximise our staff retention and to minimise our exposure during this time.</para></quote>
<para>These words that Kate has provided to me are so true of so many businesses that I've spoken to across my electorate in Bass. It is the reason why it is so important to extend this support as we make our way through this coronavirus pandemic.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I welcome the government's decision to extend the provision of JobKeeper to March 2021. I know that, for the small businesses and workers in my electorate of Lilley who are eligible for the continued payments, this announcement will be a lifesaver and removes some of the anxiety about what the next few months look like for them and their families.</para>
<para>While there are aspects of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020 that I do not agree with, I'm not going to stand in the way of getting support to workers and small business who still desperately need it. Throughout this crisis, Labor has worked responsibly and constructively with the government on the passage of legislation through the parliament to support Australians, and my priority will always be to protect jobs, to help Northside workers, businesses and families through this difficult time and to ensure the most vulnerable people in our community are protected. I'm glad that the government has listened to Labor's suggestions to improve this amendment bill by including a number of safeguards in the modified JobKeeper, enabling directions for legacy employers, including the longer seven-day notice period and consultation requirements, and continued access to the Fair Work Commission to arbitrate disputes, as well as the repeal of the annual leave provisions, which we never supported.</para>
<para>Labor have tried to be as responsible and as constructive as possible, but being constructive does not mean being silent when there are some very serious failures of implementation going on. It has become clear that the JobKeeper wage subsidies are a very good idea being very badly implemented. Too many Australians are being left out and left behind, some accidentally but many deliberately. Our childcare workers were first off the boat, kicked off JobKeeper despite the essential work that they do as a whole and their particularly vulnerable work in the global pandemic this year. University workers are an entire sector neglected by the government in JobKeeper despite many months now of the evidence bearing out that these people need to be included in the scheme. In lieu of adequate support from this government, around 2.7 million people have now withdrawn $33.3 billion from their own super funds, more than has been paid through the JobKeeper scheme. Almost 500,000 of these people who have withdrawn their super are under the age of 35, placing their long-term financial security in serious jeopardy.</para>
<para>What's also clear is that the government are using this bill to test out their future plans for industrial relations, a trial for how their IR flexibility fever dream might look. But we don't need to test out industrial relations flexibility, because I have brought real evidence from Northside workers who can tell you exactly how increased IR flexibility pans out for workers. I have 6,600 aviation workers in my electorate, and their livelihoods have been shattered by this pandemic. In March of this year, right at the start of the pandemic, I wrote to the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister asking for specific support for aviation workers and their families. The response was that they are already doing enough. In addition to JobKeeper, they had committed $715 million to the aviation industry assistance package and $298 million to the regional air network. But let's have a look at how this support has trickled down to the workers over the past six months. Spoiler alert: it has not trickled down to workers over the past six months. Five thousand five hundred dnata workers were told in May that they were ineligible for JobKeeper payments because they were employed by a foreign owned company. Not long after that, Virgin collapsed, putting 10,000 direct jobs and 6,000 indirect jobs at risk. But apparently workers could rest easy knowing that a foreign capital investment company would do absolutely everything it could to protect these jobs. Then, at the start of August, Virgin announced that it was cutting 3,000 jobs, a third of its workforce, to stay afloat.</para>
<para>Then yesterday we saw the most jaw-dropping example of corporate greed possible: Qantas announcing that it was outsourcing 2,500 ground crew jobs—not cutting but outsourcing, taking secure and permanent employment away from Australian workers to create new insecure and casual jobs to save money. Our national carrier, which has received more JobKeeper payments than any other company—money that has come from Australian taxpayers in a covenant of trust that business would use JobKeeper to keep workers tethered to their employment through the pandemic—has made this outrageous decision, and it ranks among the greatest acts of industrial vandalism that we have seen in this country since the waterfront dispute.</para>
<para>This is exactly why we need stronger laws, I would argue, to protect workers. No Australian worker can afford a race to the bottom on wages and conditions at a time like this. Under this third-term conservative government, the labour market has become increasingly casualised and increasingly insecure. The answer to that is not to make work more precarious and more insecure with IR deregulation. Wage theft has become not only rampant but seemingly acceptable under this government. In one of their first acts this year, when the parliament resumed in February, this government created an amnesty for dodgy employers who had not paid their workers their adequate super entitlements. It was an amnesty for dodgy employers to continue to be dodgy and rip workers off. That's where their priorities lie. There is a false promise being thrown around by LNP backbenchers that these foreshadowed IR reforms will boost productivity, create more good jobs, lift wages and boost international competitiveness all at once. Everyone will have control over their destiny. To me, it looks like people who do not understand throwing away the umbrella in a rain storm, because they themselves are not getting wet.</para>
<para>Conservatives and business lobbyists claim that the current system is union dominated, but union membership, union activity and enterprise agreement coverage have all declined dramatically. Where unions are absent, wage theft and erosion of employee protections are rife and ethical businesses who comply with the law are placed at a competitive disadvantage.</para>
<para>It's time the LNP stopped spreading false hope to the Australian public. Weaker workplace laws do not create more jobs. They allow underemployment, they allow stagnant wages, and they allow insecure work to fester. Instead of attacking the rights of workers under the guise of creating jobs, it is time this government steps up and does their own job. The government's announced changes to JobKeeper are not a comprehensive plan to create jobs. It does not extend support to millions of workers deliberately excluded from JobKeeper. It does nothing for the hundreds of thousands of people who have lost their jobs or will lose their jobs, including the 400,000 additional workers who are likely to lose their employment by Christmas.</para>
<para>The wind-down of JobKeeper will come at the worst time for workers and businesses in Victoria and other parts of Australia. Australians have worked together to combat the virus, but more work must be done by the Morrison government, who have their hands on the levers of power today, to ensure that our hardest-hit Australians are not left out and left behind in this recovery.</para>
<para>In the short term, the Treasurer holds the power with the flick of his pen to extend the JobKeeper to workers who are still falling through the gaps. Despite this extraordinary power given to him at this time, millions of workers and struggling businesses continue to be excluded from the JobKeeper payment, including casual workers, childcare workers, university staff and dnata workers. I note that we are able to pass this through the House today, what is purely an extension of the scheme, because the rules that govern the scheme are yet to be finalised, yet to be presented to us and remain solely in the hands of one man—the Treasurer.</para>
<para>In the long term, the most important test for the Morrison government's management of this recession and its aftermath is what happens to jobs and to the businesses which create them. We need a plan for businesses who are no longer eligible for JobKeeper and who, despite some growth in the last month, still face a precarious and uncertain future. Workers on the north side need and deserve a plan from the Morrison government to promote growth, to promote and create jobs, to support business and to set Australia up for recovery. We cannot afford to see more Australians left out and left behind because the Prime Minister and the Treasurer are not prepared to put workers first in their response to COVID. A plan for jobs is needed for developments in the labour market and to come up with what is most needed now.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SIMMONDS</name>
    <name.id>282983</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to support these important measures in the substantive bill, which are in the national interest. We all know that we are facing not just a health crisis but an economic one. Australians have been impacted in ways which we would never have imagined, and we continue to adapt to it. Australians are resilient. We are strong, and we have been the envy of the world when it comes to the way that we have dealt with the twin economic and health crises.</para>
<para>Though we would never have been able to foresee such a crisis as COVID-19, through sound economic management we did go into this crisis with a strong budget position and, because of that, with the best possible opportunity to support Australian workers and businesses. It has enabled the government to act swiftly and put in place measures that helped and continue to help protect families and businesses from the severe economic impacts of COVID-19. As this crisis hit, I, like many of my colleagues, spent every minute I could speaking to my constituents, hearing their concerns, giving them the latest advice and assisting them in any way that I could.</para>
<para>In those first few weeks, some of the toughest calls I took were from local small businesses: from tradies, from coffee shops and from gyms. They'd all been impacted, some of them forced to shut down entirely. They knew it would not be something that would simply pass in a matter of weeks, and they very quickly had to adapt and be resilient. For these business owners, despite having their livelihoods impacted in some of the most dramatic ways under the COVID restrictions, their No.1 concern whenever you spoke to them on the phone, particularly in those early days as everything was unfolding very quickly—and this is to their absolute credit—was: how do I pay my staff? One business owner said to me: 'I support so many families. I have to pay my staff. I cannot let them down.' That is the epitome of the Australian spirit and what our small businesses mean to our local communities.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister and the Treasurer heard their concerns and, in March, a historic wage subsidy program was introduced in the form of JobKeeper. As the Prime Minister said as he announced JobKeeper:</para>
<quote><para class="block">We will give millions of eligible businesses and their workers a lifeline to not only get through this crisis, but bounce back together on the other side …</para></quote>
<para>Importantly, unlike other furlough schemes that we have seen across the world, our JobKeeper program focuses on keeping that connection between employers and employees. When the economy comes back—and it will, and we will all be here to work together to ensure it does—these businesses will be able to restart again at full pace and their workforces will be ready to go because they will remain attached to the businesses through our JobKeeper payment.</para>
<para>On this side of the House, we have always shown that we will do everything we can to support Australian jobs. The JobKeeper payment showed Australians that this government has their backs. And, as a way to keep people in jobs, JobKeeper has been enormously successful. Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been supported and retained because of the JobKeeper payment. Unlike Labor members opposite, we on this side of the chamber don't just talk about supporting workers and jobs, we live it and we do it—we get on with the job. And that's what we've done with JobKeeper. That is what this government does through strong economic management.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SIMMONDS</name>
    <name.id>282983</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I hear the mirth of the Labor members on the other side. They know that, if they were faced with this position, they would not have been able to support Australian workers the way that we have, quite simply because they would have had the extra $387 billion worth of taxes that they promised at the last election. They would have put them in place. They wouldn't have had a balanced budget. They wouldn't have been able to inject the huge amount of financial support that we have been able to into the workplaces of Australia. And, even with all that, even with the extra $387 billion worth of taxes that Labor promised at the last election, that's still not enough. We've seen the member for Lilley parade in here—and she's a very apt successor to Labor Treasurer Wayne Swan, 'Chairman' Swan, who never saw a blank cheque that he didn't want to sign. Even then, even at the historic level of over $100 billion, the member for Lilley would still be very keen to see tens of billions more spent, to be taken out of the pockets of Australians who are already struggling. On this side of the chamber, we've been very pleased that we have come into this place from the election with a balanced budget and with strong economic management so that we are able to support Australian workers without putting further strain on the pockets of everyday Australians.</para>
<para>In the electorate of Ryan, the businesses I'm speaking to have been very quick to take up the program and very supportive of it. I'd like to take the time I have to give a few examples of how, in my own electorate, the JobKeeper payment has saved local jobs and supported the families that I stand here with the privilege of representing. There are business owners like Dean. Dean is the franchisee of JAX Tyres in Mitchelton. He employs local staff in his workshop, where they service cars and change tyres. Before JobKeeper, Dean was concerned that he would have to let go of some of his staff. This is what he said to me after accessing JobKeeper: 'The support has provided peace of mind, especially to my long-term casual staff who, without JobKeeper, would have been the first stood down.' Luke, the owner of Suburban Social in Chapel Hill, was quick to adapt his business, a local restaurant and bar, which had to shut its in-house dining, of course, and switch to takeaway and drive-through service. By doing that, he was able to keep his six staff on board, with the help of JobKeeper. Luke put it to me plainly. He said, 'Julian, it saved our bacon.'</para>
<para>Gyms were also hard hit, particularly initially when they had to be shut down. One day their doors were open, and the next, because of the need not to spread the virus, they were shut. Lisa, who owns the F45 gyms at Indooroopilly and Pullenvale, was quick to find a way to support her customers. She launched a virtual studio, recording three sessions a day that could be done at home by her clients. Her permanent and part-time trainers were able to access JobKeeper, and this meant the business was also able to keep on her newer casual staff. This was a great example of local businesses making sure that they worked with the JobKeeper program to keep and support their staff.</para>
<para>The JobKeeper program not only supported staff; it enabled business the flexibility to reinvest in their business and reallocate staffing resources to different tasks which could help the business once it could return to trading again. A local example from my patch comes from Michael, the manager of the family oriented Taylor Range Club at Ashgrove. He said: 'With the assistance of the JobKeeper scheme, we have almost all of our employees working at the club. They've all left their club shirts hanging up at home for now and instead are getting stuck into painting, varnishing, water blasting, gardening and cleaning jobs around the venue before we can welcome back our clientele.' That is a practical example of the IR flexibility built into these measures.</para>
<para>Labor members opposite, like the member for Lilley, as the good union operative that she is, can stand in here and rail against the ideology of having flexibility in IR, but on the ground for these businesses who are struggling this is the practical example of how, when they're forced to close or forced to reduce their customer intake, they can reallocate staff and they can make sure they continue to support those staff members with roles. In the case of the Taylor Range Club, it meant that, while they were closed to their clientele, their staff were in there renovating the club so they could come back with a vengeance when restrictions were lifted.</para>
<para>Clare in Ferny Grove, who runs her own coaching and career transition business, saw the opportunity not only to access JobKeeper but to use the cash flow boost available to reinvest in her business and help other local businesses at the same time. She said: 'JobKeeper and the cash flow boost have really helped me and my business, and I'm investing what I can back into local businesses to refresh my website. Both my web designer and photographer are local businesses I'm supporting.' That's the attitude our incredible small-business owners have. Not only do they want to look out for their own business; they're also using the mechanisms and the financial support provided by the federal government to look after their fellow small businesses in the area.</para>
<para>It's important that we recognise these real-life stories, acknowledge the importance of the decisions that these businesses are making and congratulate them on their efforts to keep their businesses going and support their staff with the help of the incentives provided by the federal government. Not only have the Morrison government acted quickly to implement JobKeeper but we've also always acknowledged that this is not a set-and-forget policy, and nor is our overall response to this ever-changing crisis. As we continue to be impacted by COVID-19, the Morrison government are responding by extending the JobKeeper payment by an additional six months. As these effects are still being felt by many businesses, the government are extending and better targeting the JobKeeper payment to support businesses and workers as they manage and recover from the economic effects of COVID-19. In addition, two tiers of payments will be introduced from 28 September.</para>
<para>The bill extends the prescribed period of the coronavirus framework for the JobKeeper payment from 31 December 2020 to 28 March 2021. This will allow the Treasurer to extend and make changes to the JobKeeper rules up until 28 March 2021. Businesses around the country, despite being dealt such a severe blow, have adapted, changed, rejigged, resourced and even redesigned their entire business and business model in order to keep serving our community. The changes in this bill and the flexibility afforded to businesses by this bill demonstrate that this government is listening and adapting with them. Our retargeted JobKeeper will see the support focused on those businesses and sectors most in need, and it's a continual reminder to Australian businesses who are working so hard, to Australian staff who are supported by JobKeeper, to all Australians throughout this crisis, that, no matter how hard it gets, we are with them.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I don't know who that bloke was, but he's very entertaining! I'll keep coming back in when he's here. He has come into a seven-year-old government that has never turned a surplus and has racked up the highest deficit and debt in the history of the nation while promising that it was going to deliver a surplus in its first year and every year after that. To hear him come in with that—I reckon he's pretty amusing. I hope he's back, and, when he's back, I'll be here and I'll be ready with the motion for an extension of time!</para>
<para>The other thing that is very easily forgotten—and, when you listen to the speeches of the government here, I'm not sure anyone on their side has acknowledged the fact—is that they were dragged to having a wage subsidy. We on the floor of the parliament were calling for them to establish a wage subsidy at the exact same point that they said the only answer was to push people onto the welfare system. Let's not forget that the initial and only response of the government was for JobSeeker to be increased, and it wasn't until they saw the enormity of the outcome of the Centrelink queues that, having mocked our recommendation, our constructive suggestion, of a wage subsidy, they were then eventually dragged there. So, when we hear them say how important it is to support those businesses—yes, that's why we argued for it, even when the government was ridiculing the idea. When they say it's important to keep the relationship between an employer and their workers—yes, that's why we called for it. And, when they mock the relationship with the union movement, do they forget that it was the union movement in Australia that was first to be calling for a wage subsidy? We joined those calls. Eventually employers joined those calls. And the last to the party were the members of the government. I'm glad that they're there now, but please don't pretend that something that they opposed and opposed here on the floor of the House is somehow a core principle of being a member of this government, because it wasn't when they were knocking out the idea.</para>
<para>We argued for them to introduce a wage subsidy, they rejected it and then they got there. We then argued that it had to be extended because, in September, the economy was heading towards a cliff and it was going to result in mass unemployment and mass closures of businesses if the tap of JobKeeper was turned off in one hit. They rejected that for a long time, and now they have come to the view that, yes, you do need to continue it. They also rejected the concept—when they're there wanting to talk about the signing of cheques and the throwing-away of money—that a wage subsidy should be a subsidy rather than an increase and that it shouldn't be the case that somebody who was still living at home, working one shift a week, should suddenly get $750 a week. There were better ways to target taxpayers' money. But that was an argument made by Labor. The signing of the cheques and the throwing-away of money was a decision of the government's.</para>
<para>One of the reasons that it was interesting to hear the member who spoke before me—whom I'm told is a member of the parliament—was that everything he pointed to was inaccurate, everything. Not many people can deliver that, so full marks, well done! But, on each of those issues, the characterisation that he was pointing to and wanting to ridicule was a characterisation of his own party at the beginning of this crisis, because everything that he referred to was the exact position that he was calling out 'Hear, hear!' for when the Prime Minister was articulating it about two metres from where I stand now.</para>
<para>We warned the government that they shouldn't be extending the emergency industrial relations powers to businesses that had fully recovered. I should explain. As well as the JobKeeper payment itself, there have been changes made to the Fair Work Act. There were two different pathways through which this could have been done: either by using the industrial commission, where the trade union movement was already working cooperatively to make some variations, or by making changes through the Fair Work Act. We preferred the former because it was a more flexible way. The government ended up deciding that they would do it through the Fair Work Act, and we've been constructive with that. That then needs to be extended. The reason for that flexibility is that JobKeeper can't work without there being either flexibility through the commission or flexibility through the Fair Work Act. The reason for that is really simple. Some people have received the wage subsidy and have continued to work their normal hours, and the wage subsidy helps the employer pay part of their wage. There are other people for whom the employer was not in a position to be able to pay their wage at all. You couldn't expect someone to keep working a 38-hour week if that meant a cut in their hourly rate with the $750 JobKeeper payment. So the only way you could make this operational was to have, either through the commission or through changes to the Fair Work Act, those sorts of flexibilities.</para>
<para>So as well as the extension of the payments—that's the Treasury part of the bill, which the member for Rankin has already responded to on behalf of the opposition—you had the Fair Work Act changes. They go in two parts. The first of them is the extension of the exact sort of flexibility that I just described. Where people are still on the JobKeeper payment, the employer would effectively be cutting their rate of pay if they were continuing to work their normal hours. The employer can reduce their hours down to the rate of the JobKeeper payment and do so without breaching other workplace conditions. It's therefore a very practical measure. We supported it last time and we support its extension this time.</para>
<para>The government then said they wanted to extend this flexibility for people who were no longer receiving JobKeeper. Might I say this is a complete shift from what we were told when we first supported the Fair Work Act changes. We were told that the only reason the government wanted these sorts of changes was to make the JobKeeper payment operational. Now we discover they want those same flexibilities to continue for workplaces that used to be on JobKeeper but are no longer on it. We have shifted from a circumstance where it was simply to make the payments operational to an argument from the government that part of the recovery is—they say on a temporary basis—to cut some of the conditions of workers in Australia. That's a big shift. That's a really big shift.</para>
<para>There have been a few different elements to it. On one of them the government has backed down, and I welcome that. Only a week ago, the government was arguing that any business that used to be on JobKeeper should, if they fall off JobKeeper because their business has improved, retain the right to be able to reduce the terms and conditions of employment for their workforce. That included companies that were now trading better than they were 12 months ago. It included businesses that have been recording profits after a long period of having the wages of their workforce paid by the taxpayer. The government was going to give all of them this extended flexibility. It has backed down on that, and we welcome that.</para>
<para>Where the so-called legacy payments are now is that they are for companies that are no longer eligible for JobKeeper but are still recording a 10 per cent downturn from the year before. That is a better position than the one the government had a week ago. The position they had a week ago was ridiculous. The position they have now is still problematic, and I want to explain why.</para>
<para>First of all, let's clarify exactly what businesses we're talking about. The thresholds for JobKeeper are different, depending on whether a business's turnover is more than or less than $1 billion a year. If their turnover is more than $1 billion a year, then to qualify for JobKeeper they have to have had a 50 per cent downturn. If their turnover is less than $1 billion a year, they have to have had a 30 per cent downturn. So, depending on the size of the business, we're talking about businesses that used to receive JobKeeper no longer receiving it because either a big business has gone over the 50 per cent threshold or a medium-sized or small business has gone over the 30 per cent threshold. But they're still 10 per cent down on where they were before. They're the companies we're talking about. The government is saying that it wants those businesses to retain the right to effectively reduce the terms and conditions of employment for their workforce for the period that this amendment would last.</para>
<para>When the government says those businesses are still struggling, yes, they have had a downturn. We don't dispute that. But let's be clear: these are businesses that are doing well enough that the government has decided that it will not support them any longer. These are businesses where the government has made a decision that, yes, they're still struggling a bit but they're doing well enough that they no longer deserve support from the government. Yet, even though the government has decided they don't need support from the government, it has also decided that the need to support these businesses should be transferred from the government to the worker. With these sorts of flexibilities, the government will often talk about the example of being able to direct someone to do duties other than what they would normally do. But here's the big one that you rarely hear the government talk about: it allows somebody to reduce the hours of employment. It was one thing when you were doing that with JobKeeper, because it was to enable JobKeeper. Now we're talking about the government giving workplaces—ones that the government has already decided aren't doing badly enough to warrant a dollar of extra support from the government—the right to tell a full-time worker that they're now part-time for this period. It will often be the case that there will be mutual agreement that the employer is in a situation where they can't keep everybody on and people will say, 'I'll agree to cut my hours so that it can work for everybody.' Unions, workers and employers deal with these sorts of mutual agreements every day. That is not what this legislation does, though. This is not about mutual agreement. This is about the employer being able to make the decision.</para>
<para>There are some things the government has put in, following consultation with unions and others, that are better than where I suspect they started, and I acknowledge those. There's a consultation period now, and there's an appeal that a worker can make to the industrial commission. But that doesn't change the core of what we are being asked to enable. We are being asked to enable a circumstance where a business that the government has decided is no longer worthy of financial support from this government will have the right to cut a worker's hours to 60 per cent of what they already are.</para>
<para>Let's have a think about how this works in the real world, particularly for people who are on modest wages. Let's say you're a full-timer on the minimum wage, which is $753 a week. Because previously you could only be cut to the JobKeeper rate, you would only be taking a pay cut of $3 a week—or, to be precise, $3.80 a week. But now you don't have JobKeeper as the reference point. The government may not have thought this implication through, so I want to give them the chance to look at this and work this through, because this one is a real problem.</para>
<para>A 40 per cent reduction for a worker on minimum wage would mean that they would lose $300 a week. Previously, someone on the minimum wage, under the fair work amendments we put through the parliament last time, could have a $3 pay cut. Now their take-home pay can go down by $300 a week. There are many workers who are paid more than the minimum wage but not a lot more. A cleaner earns $804.90. A 40 per cent cut to their hours would mean they would lose around $330 a week, falling below the current JobKeeper rate and more than $100 below the new JobKeeper rate. A full-time retail employee—and we've all seen retail workers on the front line, along with cleaners, as the people who have been essential workers during this crisis—is on the minimum award rate, as a full-timer, of $813.60 a week. A full-time retail worker, under what's in front of the parliament right now, could lose $325 a week. That means they would fall well below the current JobKeeper rate and more than $100 a week short of the new JobKeeper rate.</para>
<para>This creates a situation where a worker, at a time when the business they work for is doing better, will see their pay cut. The business might only be taking a 10 per cent turnover cut, but the worker could be getting a 40 per cent cut. Let's not forget that it could actually be much more than that, because it's a cut to hours. If the hours that are cut are hours that attract penalty rates, then a worker may lose much more than 40 per cent of their take-home pay.</para>
<para>This gives rise to two critical issues. The first is that the concept of the legacy employers at all is a case the government have not made, because they haven't wrestled with the one critical issue. They make the argument that these businesses are still doing it tough, and we get that. But they don't make the argument as to why they are completely withdrawing their support and transferring the full liability to the workforce. The government have not made that case.</para>
<para>The second thing is: how can you justify to an employee that, as the business they work for is doing better, the parliament has given permission for their take-home pay to go down—and to go down many more times in percentage terms than the cut to the company's turnover. This parliament is being asked to give permission for a business suffering a 10 per cent hit to give their workforce a 40 per cent hit. The government, in arguing 'But the businesses are still doing it tough', isn't answering the question 'Well, why aren't you offering them support anymore?' Who is most able to provide support during this time? Is it the workforce or is it the government?</para>
<para>Let's not forget that the workforce has already taken significant cuts during this time. Going down to the JobKeeper rate has kept people in work, and that's good. But it has also meant that a whole lot of people have been putting off other debts and liabilities. Many of these people have been faced with a circumstance where, because their liabilities have been more than what the JobKeeper rate was providing, they are now in a position where they have no superannuation left. The government are boasting as though that's somehow an act of self-determination on their part. If they've got no other way to get money, then they're in a circumstance where they have raided their retirement, which will probably be one of the biggest examples of intergenerational theft that we will see during this crisis.</para>
<para>In the future, not only will they lose the power of accumulation that happens in accumulation accounts—which is why everyone in this room has got one—but every other taxpayer will have an increased liability to support them. Our debt isn't the only liability that the government is sending into the future. The way they're handling superannuation is a huge liability that is being sent to the next generation—through people who have had no choice but to clean out their own accounts; through people who have seen their accounts raided through other rorts; and through all taxpayers, who will be left with the liability because of the ideological obsession of members opposite.</para>
<para>The pandemic has created certain opportunities for government in terms of the public wanting the government to succeed; that's real. But we are starting to see the government abuse that trust. We are starting to see the government use the pandemic as cover for ideological obsessions. That is what is before us right now—an ideological obsession to increase the power of an employer to reduce someone's hours; so someone who thought they had a full-time job suddenly will not, even though the business they work for is recovering. That ideological obsession is being pushed through under the cover of the pandemic. We were first told it was only to implement JobKeeper, but now we are told it is only for legacy firms. Does anyone not believe that they will try to normalise this during this term and say, 'It's going to be a long recovery; we need to put this into the Fair Work Act for good'?</para>
<para>On superannuation, we were told it was only because of the emergency on that first one-day sitting we had here in the public. And yesterday we heard the Prime Minister trying to normalise it by saying, 'Use it to pay down your mortgage.' It's nothing to do with the pandemic at all, but the Prime Minister is now using the pandemic as cover for an ideological obsession with making sure that the only people who end up with superannuation accounts are people on higher incomes—like it used to be, like the so-called good old days before we ended up with a situation where working people had the audacity to want to have a nest egg of their own.</para>
<para>We've seen it here right now on working hours. We saw it yesterday on superannuation. We have seen it with both the Australia Post changes and the Australian content quotas—and I have argued it previously with respect to the minister at the table. We are seeing an increasing creep of the pandemic being used as cover for issues that the government has long wanted to do. When they came in the first time, they said it's only for an emergency. When they came in a second time, they said it's only for a little bit longer. We know where this is heading. With what is in front of us now, you would have to be completely naive to believe that it is only planned to be for the next few months.</para>
<para>If we were to take the government at their word we would have trusted them last time, when they said it was only there to be able to properly implement the JobKeeper provisions. Of course, now you don't get JobKeeper but you still have a way of having your hours cut, without it having to be by mutual agreement. We know where this is heading. We know what the government's up to. With that in mind, we'll be moving two amendments here in the House today. The first is one which we know the government won't agree to. We get it, but we don't believe they've made the case for the legacy businesses being counted at all. So we'll have an amendment to take those out. We know the government won't agree to that.</para>
<para>The second amendment that we will move will be an amendment to give people a safety net. I know the government won't be agreeing to it tonight, but this is something the government should consider and work their way through, because there is an anomaly in how they have drafted this that will hit low-paid workers really badly. I suspect, or I hope, the government simply hadn't thought about how this anomaly would work and that they had simply worked it through based on people on average earnings, where you go down to 60 per cent of your hours and you're still above the JobKeeper rate. We can't have a situation where we've given permission for people who work in businesses that are recovering, who were full-time, to now be paid less than the JobKeeper rate. You can't have a situation where a worker is better off if the business they work for is more distressed. As the business is improving the workforce will be dreading it, because the employer is given the new power, at that point, to cut their hours to below the JobKeeper rate.</para>
<para>I get that if the government are going to agree to this second amendment it will take some time, but they really should be agreeing to this. There needs to be a safety net so that you cannot have your hours reduced to the extent that you are being paid below the applicable JobKeeper rate. Of course, some people would already have hours that are below the JobKeeper rate, in terms of the regular hours that they've worked. And if their hours remain where they are then there's no change. But when these provisions are going to be actioned they should not be actioned in a way that takes people to below the JobKeeper rate.</para>
<para>Think of the counterpoint. Think if the government rejects this amendment and the bill as drafted goes through. This parliament will have voted for people on the minimum wage to be allowed, without their agreement, to get a pay cut of $300 a week, but we'll be providing support for people on JobKeeper. This parliament will have said, 'As the business improves it's okay for you to be paid less because your boss is doing better.' That is an absurd situation. That is what the bill currently says. I dearly hope it's an anomaly that the government has not thought of. We want to deal constructively with the government in dealing with this. We will move both of those amendments. I get that the government are committed to the legacy case issues. We still oppose it. We'll move the amendment. We know that the government won't agree to that.</para>
<para>In terms of there being a safety net, people on high incomes will be unaffected by the safety net, because if they were to go down to 60 per cent of their normal hours they'd still be above the JobKeeper rate. We can't be agreeing to changing the IR system to allow people, who at this time have been struggling already through the pandemic, to be in a circumstance where they then face further cuts because the business they work for is doing better, and cuts that could be so severe that they take them below the JobKeeper rate. There'll be two amendments, the second of which I urge the government to consider.</para>
<para>All this said, arguments that we made last time JobKeeper was before us are still there and there are still problems. It would be wrong of me to not refer to them. JobKeeper still excludes more than a million casuals. JobKeeper still excludes local government workers. JobKeeper still excludes childcare workers. JobKeeper still excludes a very, very large number of arts and entertainment workers, freelancers, university workers. Those people have jobs, pay taxes and should not be left out in the way that they have been. So we still make that case. We still urge the government to have a wage subsidy that accepts that workers who need help to keep their relationship with their employer should get it. I don't give up on this for one very simple reason: while the government say no today, a week ago they were saying that companies that had improved their position should be on the legacy list. A few months ago, they were still arguing against a wage subsidy altogether. They've been dragged to each of the positions. JobKeeper should cover those who are currently being left behind, and we should not, as a parliament, be voting to allow people on low wages to have $300 a week cut from their take-home pay simply because the business they work for is doing better. It's an absurd situation. I hope it's a mistake, but, whether it's a mistake or not, the government should revisit it, just as they've revisited so many other issues on this. If people don't keep their relationship to their employer and we keep seeing incomes drop, the hit to the country will be huge.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FALINSKI</name>
    <name.id>G86</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I always enjoy a good speech from the member of Watson in this chamber. No-one else can stretch 30 seconds of thought into a 30-minute speech quite like him. While the rest of this House is in here talking about how to help Australians, the Labor Party is in here talking about how to help their donors out. It is absolutely appalling. We had 25 minutes of how this will adversely impact the unions' capacity to enter workplaces. Only five minutes out of 30 minutes was about how this piece of legislation will continue to help all Australians during this pandemic. They stand over there and they criticise us. We know that comparison is the thief of joy, but for the Labor Party to come in here and talk about government debt over and over again—you are just making yourself miserable and you should stop.</para>
<para>As for the arguments around how reducing the power of the union movement to intervene in conversations at workplaces between bosses and workers is somehow adverse to Australians at this time of all times, this an idea so cunning that, if you put a tail on it, you'd have to call it a weasel. We are in here today talking about how to help ordinary Australians and businesses trying to get through this. The whole idea that the union movement that represents fewer members in the private sector than the CEO of Woolworths, the CEO of Coles, the managers at Rio Tinto and BHP somehow speaks for Australian workers is absurd.</para>
<para>The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in one of the biggest dual health and economic crises we have ever seen. Globally, over 800,000 lives have tragically been lost and many more livelihoods have been destroyed. As I stand here today, my thoughts are with the families of all those who have lost loved ones and are in mourning. I also stand with the people of Victoria through this difficult time of extreme lockdowns as a result of their second wave. Finally, I thank all the frontline emergency service personnel and health workers who have endured many challenges through this crisis. I particularly want to thank pharmacists who, at the beginning of this crisis, were not able to move to telehealth and took on the role of dealing directly with the public, giving the public assurance around what they could do. Many of them were not able to get hold of PPE equipment. Therefore, they were very brave in the way that they continued to assist their community during this period. We have to thank our doctors and our nurses, who don't receive enough praise for what they do, as well as the police, the paramedics, the Australian Defence Force, counsellors, social workers and everyone who is contributing to keeping Australians safe and getting us through this crisis.</para>
<para>The economic effects of this pandemic cannot be understated. The OECD has projected a drop in GDP of over 10 per cent for countries including Spain, France, the UK—which recently announced a 20 per cent drop—and Italy. New Zealand's GDP is expected to fall by nearly nine per cent, while the OECD estimates Australia's GDP will fall by around six per cent.</para>
<para>As someone who has started his own business, I understand the day-to-day struggles of keeping one afloat. As I speak to business owners across my electorate, like Simone and Kosta of Illie in Narrabeen, they tell me how important JobKeeper has been to keep their business operating. But JobKeeper doesn't just keep them open; it keeps employees getting paid, which means the economy keeps moving.</para>
<para>As the impacts of the coronavirus are still to be felt by businesses across Australia, the government is responding by extending the JobKeeper payment by an additional six months, targeting support to those organisations which have been significantly impacted. This bill extends the prescribed period of the coronavirus payment framework for the JobKeeper payment from 31 December 2020 to 28 March 2021. This will allow the Treasurer to extend and make the changes to the JobKeeper rules up until 28 March next year. The bill also amends the information-sharing arrangements to enable the ATO to share JobKeeper payment information with Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies to assist them in their efforts to address the impacts of the coronavirus.</para>
<para>The lower JobKeeper payment rate will be paid for those whose total hours of work and paid leave were less than 80 hours over the two most recent consecutive fortnightly pay periods or the four most recent consecutive weekly pay periods that ended before 1 March 2020 or 1 July 2020. The period with the higher number of hours worked is to be used for employees with 1 March 2020 eligibility. Having two tiers strikes a balance between making payments more aligned with usual hours worked and limiting complexity for employers.</para>
<para>The Australian government is focused on measures that will help keep businesses in business and employees in jobs. These key objectives are driving everything the government are doing through our response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Temporary amendments were made to the Fair Work Act in April to support the practical operation of the JobKeeper scheme and help to keep Australians employed and connected to their workplace. These provisions have been absolutely critical to keeping business going and keeping more people in work. Research has found that three out of four surveyed employers used the flexibilities provided for by the provisions. Almost all surveyed employers that used the flexibilities saw them as 'important to essential' for the continued operation of the businesses and for employees to keep their jobs. Eighty per cent of surveyed employers support the continuation of the JobKeeper flexibilities for a further period of time, with job losses and business closure being the most commonly cited impacts of not being able to use the provisions into the future.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 of the bill extends the flexibilities in the Fair Work Act for a further temporary period out to March 2021 for employers who remain on JobKeeper after 28 March 2020 and for those who are no longer on JobKeeper but have not yet recovered and remain in financial distress. The annual leave flexibility provisions will not be extended. These will be repealed on 28 September 2020 as originally proposed, with parties reverting to their standard annual leave arrangements from this date. Qualifying employers will be able to access the same temporary flexibilities in the Fair Work Act, with the exception of the annual leave provisions for those employees in relation to whom they are entitled to receive the JobKeeper payment. Qualifying employers will have satisfied the relevant decline-in-turnover test to qualify for the JobKeeper payment and are therefore still experiencing substantial financial hardship. It is appropriate that these employers are able to continue to access the full range of flexibility measures for employees receiving the JobKeeper payment, aside from the ability to request the employee to take annual leave.</para>
<para>There are safeguards to protect employees. Legacy employers must meet the 10-per-cent-decline-in-turnover test and must have obtained the relevant certificate from an independent eligible financial service provider attesting to this before giving a JobKeeper-enabling direction in relation to duties and location of work or making agreements with employees around days and times of work. Small-business employers with fewer than 15 employees will have the option of making a statutory declaration to this fact for a relevant quarter. Legacy employers will no longer be able to use a JobKeeper-enabling standdown direction to reduce employees' hours to zero. This reflects that they are in the early stages of recovery and expect to gradually return to their normal levels of operation. Instead, they will be able to reduce an employee's hours down to a minimum of 60 per cent of the employee's ordinary hours as at 1 March 2020 and cannot require an employee to work less than two hours on a day on which the employee performs work. This means employees who are no longer receiving the JobKeeper amount will have a minimum guaranteed threshold of the number of hours they will work. This 60 per cent level reflects variations made to modern awards with the support of employer groups and unions.</para>
<para>These are uncertain times. However, since the beginning of the pandemic, the government has been on the front foot in fighting the virus, protecting Australians and securing as many jobs as possible. The coalition government will continue to support employees and employers, saving lives and livelihoods.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRENDAN O'CONNOR</name>
    <name.id>00AN3</name.id>
    <electorate>Gorton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak to this important bill, the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020. It's important because it will at least extend the JobKeeper payments, however diminished, over the course of six months, to those workers who are in need of the support. Of course, we supported wage subsidies in response to this global pandemic earlier than the government did. Indeed, I stood here and asked a question of the Prime Minister in March this year as to why the government was not going to proceed down the path of initiating wage subsidies. The Prime Minister, at that time, indicated that there was no need for a wage subsidy and that the government would be primarily relying upon cash payments and some tax relief for businesses but would predominantly allow people to be paid a JobSeeker amount, which was effectively shifting people from the labour market to social security benefits. We didn't think that was a very wise choice of the government.</para>
<para>It was actually at that same time, in that same week, that the Prime Minister announced we were going to close the parliament until August, that we were not going to reconvene until this month. A lot has changed since that day when we asked the Prime Minister why the government would not be supporting wage subsidies for workers, and not just wage subsidies for workers but subsidies for businesses so that they could survive. We are very happy that the government ultimately agreed with Labor that a wage subsidy was required, and we do support, in the main, the JobKeeper initiative, although we have outlined, over the course of the last five months, the deficiencies as we see them in relation to this wage subsidy. Namely, we are concerned that many businesses are not sufficiently supported because they employ employees who are ineligible for JobKeeper. We know that many of the sectors of our economy hit hardest by the pandemic have a significant and relatively high proportion of ineligible employees—for example, casuals, who, if they hadn't been employed for 12 months in March this year, were not supported by JobKeeper. That of course meant that many, many workers found themselves in the unemployment queues in this country, and many, many businesses were not sufficiently supported. It just so happens that sectors like food, accommodation, hospitality and tourism employ casuals—as every sector of our economy does, but they employ more casuals relative to many other sectors—and yet they were getting the least support, even though they were being forced to close down, for legitimate health reasons. We think the government still has an opportunity to attend to that.</para>
<para>The Treasurer of this country has the capacity to change the eligibility for JobKeeper and to provide support for those workers and those businesses that miss out because of the fact that the eligibility is too narrow. The eligibility is too narrow. The initiative was also a little too late. It should have been initiated as urgently as possible. Instead what happened was that the government closed the parliament and said that we were not to return until this month, six months hence. Instead, two weeks later we were reconvened and the government initiated JobKeeper, which was important, however deficient it might be in some respects.</para>
<para>We also indicated to the government that there would be no snapback to the economy in August. It was a premature forecast by the Prime Minister that we would return to normal. It was clearly hope over experience to indicate that we would return to normal so quickly. For that reason, we're here today debating the extension of a wage subsidy that was of course proposed by Labor many months ago. We do, of course, support the extension of JobKeeper. We know that the economy is suffering. We know this is an unprecedented time; the health and economic challenges are great. That's why we have been constructive. Whilst we have raised concerns about the response by the government, we've also supported legislation of the government to look after businesses, workers and our economy.</para>
<para>We're here today to support the predominant provisions of this bill, to extend JobKeeper, but we do have reservations and concerns about the fact that there are cuts to those forms of support from September to the end of the year and then from January to March. There's a declining level of support for businesses, whether they've recovered or not. We think that it may be too harsh and too early to remove that support. As the support was too late and too narrow in the first instance, this could be too quick and too difficult for businesses that have yet to recover sufficiently. We need to work and partner with businesses and we need to look after workers in this country.</para>
<para>The member for Watson foreshadowed earlier in this debate the need to move amendments to this bill. Some significant amendments need to be moved because the government either has a terrible idea about what it can do to help working people in this country or has not thought through the consequences of some of the provisions contained in this bill. As the member for Watson quite rightly outlined, this legislation would allow a business that had recovered by at least 90 per cent in turnover to cut unilaterally the working hours of its employees by up to 40 per cent. Under normal circumstances, you can't cut unilaterally the hours of permanent employees unless you're discussing and negotiating some form of partial redundancy or some other arrangement that has to be agreed by the employees and the employer or indeed the unions, employees and employer or employers. But this sanction that the government wants to ensure is legislated would allow for workers to have their wages cut, even when the government will not see fit to support those businesses. These are businesses, so-called legacy employers, that no longer receive any support from the government because the government has deemed that they have recovered. Yet they are in a situation that if they've recovered between 70 and 90 per cent, in the case of businesses with a turnover of less than $1 billion, they are able to reduce the working hours of their staff by up to 40 per cent. Large businesses, those with a turnover of at least $1 billion, if they've recovered by between 50 per cent and 90 per cent, if they're still in that phase, don't get support from the government but are enabled through this legislation to cut the working hours of employees by up to 40 per cent. For those workers, particularly those below the median wage in this country, that could be a very significant cut, because there will be no JobKeeper in place to act as a safety net for income. So the government effectively is saying, 'You have recovered sufficiently for us to withdraw our support to you,' but indeed there doesn't seem to be any concern for workers who may bear the brunt of the changes in this legislation. That is unconscionable and unfair.</para>
<para>It is Labor's view that there should not be the ability for employers just to reduce hours by 40 per cent if they've recovered sufficiently. I'm not sure whether the government intended to do that. I'm not sure whether the government really has clearly considered the implications for thousands upon thousands of workers who may find themselves losing their permanent full-time hours or permanent part-time hours in this way. I agree that, as the member for Watson has said, we'd be very willing to talk to the government about the implications that this legislation will have for thousands if not hundreds of thousands of Australian workers. I'm not sure whether, in fact, it was intended. It may well be that some employer bodies and some employers have put to the government that this is a fair proposal, but, frankly, it is not a fair proposal. The Prime Minister has made it clear, and says often, that we're all in it together. I don't know how he can continue to say that if he says, 'There are now businesses that have recovered to the extent that they won't receive taxpayer support, yet we're going to change the arrangements to allow employees to potentially suffer a 40 per cent loss to hours worked.'</para>
<para>In the case of workers on the minimum wage—and at least one million workers are on the minimum wage in this country—if they have their hours cut in a company that no longer gets JobKeeper, they can lose $300 of the $750-odd that they're paid per week. I believe—I'm hoping—that that is not the intention of the government. If it's not the intention of the government, they have an opportunity today, and through the course of the negotiations in relation to this bill and the amendments that are being moved by the member for Watson, to discuss with Labor a better, fairer way that does not hurt low-paid workers in this country. Many of those low-paid workers have been on the front line. Certainly many workers in my electorate have been working on the front line in relation to this pandemic, in retail, logistics, storage and the like, often placing themselves at risk, particularly in areas where there have been clusters and where there's been high density of the virus. The idea that some of these workers who have placed themselves at risk could find themselves subject to a law, if it is enacted by this parliament, that could mean they have their hours unilaterally reduced by 40 per cent by an employer who has been deemed, as far as the government's concerned, to have recovered beggars belief. I have difficulty believing that even this government would contemplate doing that to those workers. So there's an opportunity, I believe, for the government to reconsider the implications of the legislation to the extent that it impacts on those workers.</para>
<para>We agree with the government about extending JobKeeper. We agree that wage subsidies are critical for workers and businesses. We know that workers need to remain connected to the labour market for our economy to recover. We know wage subsidies have been the predominant form of support for them during this unprecedented pandemic. But it seems to me that suggesting that we can remove any form of government support and place the entire burden of dealing with the final recovery stages of that company on the workforce leaves it to those workers to fight through this pandemic economically.</para>
<para>There are other implications too. If you see continued reduction in hours of work and reduction of wages in an anaemic economy, we are not going to recover sufficiently. Our economy will recover when businesses have recovered, when wages are being paid and when workers are spending on goods and services so other businesses recover. That's how it works. The idea that you would say instead that you're going to strip away the wage subsidy for employers but allow most of them to cut the hours of work of permanent employees without any other form of support would be bad for those workers and bad for our economy. There's no sense to this at all. I think the government needs to rethink those provisions. If they choose not to, there are going to be some very significant economic and social implications for thousands and thousands of workers, their families and the economy as well. This is an opportunity for the government to fix this. The Prime Minister likes to say we're all in this together. If we are all in this together, the government, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer will support the amendments moved by the member for Watson and we will then be looking to support this bill to extend JobKeeper until March next year as we fight through this very difficult time and ensure that we are there for businesses and Australian workers.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a pleasure to rise in this place and speak about the government's continued commitment to supporting our economy and, importantly, supporting our business community, and the employees employed by those businesses, through the coronavirus pandemic. As I look at this bill, the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020, and the initial bill for JobKeeper, I think of the thousands of employers across my electorate of Forde who have told us time and time again how important JobKeeper has been for them in keeping their employees engaged. As many on both sides of the chamber have already said in their contribution to this debate, keeping employees engaged in the workforce is enormously important. That is why we're extending and better targeting the JobKeeper payments to support the businesses, and the employees they employ, as they manage through and recover from the economic effects of the coronavirus.</para>
<para>Already around 5,300 organisations in the electorate of Forde are benefiting from JobKeeper. These are small and family businesses, community clubs, our local manufacturing businesses, our cafes and restaurants. They are all doing their part to keep people in jobs. Club Beenleigh is a community club just down the road from my electorate office. It supports sporting clubs and community organisations across the Beenleigh district. The club was shut down for a total of 102 days during the peak of the pandemic but, through the availability of JobKeeper, they were able to retain 32 staff. JobKeeper means that these 32 staff continue to get a pay cheque, which allows them to provide for their families. While the club was in hibernation it was able to get the staff to do some little renovation jobs around the place to get it ready to welcome guests again when restrictions were eased. They were busy painting, mowing, cleaning the tennis courts and doing online raffles to support local sporting clubs who were doing it tough. It just goes to show the community spirit and ingenuity of many of our businesses across the electorate of Forde and, I'm sure, across all electorates represented in this House.</para>
<para>Another fantastic example is Good Life Kindergarten and Child Care. I met recently with Casandra and Kayla Lipsett, who opened their new childcare centre in Park Ridge on 10 February this year. At that time, they never dreamed that the coronavirus pandemic would have such an immense impact on their business. As parents were anxious about sending their children to child care, their incomes dropped dramatically. Casandra told me that JobKeeper saved them as a new small business in what I am sure and have no doubt was a distressing time for Casandra and her staff members. They were able to keep everybody employed because of JobKeeker. The support that it provided to a small family business like theirs at a time when it was needed most meant that she could retain all nine of her hardworking team members, including the early childhood nurses, who had worked tirelessly to ensure the safety and wellbeing of the children at the centre.</para>
<para>Casandra and her team are immensely grateful for the support that they received and recently even went on radio to offer the Prime Minister a virtual hug. When I spoke with them recently, we also spoke at length about the government's new childcare package and how that is helping support families and allowing the kids to return to child care. Gullivers Coomera, a local outside-school-hours care provider and swim school, were able to retain 33 of their staff thanks to JobKeeper. They said that JobKeeper has been so beneficial to them that, from September, they will be able to operate without it while continuing to support the over 1,500 families on the northern Gold Coast who use their facilities.</para>
<para>These are not unique stories. Harvey’s Towing in Park Ridge was one of many businesses impacted by the initial restrictions as Australians were urged to stay home and the roads became quiet. I met Joe Andriske recently, the owner of Harvey’s Towing, and Joe told me that JobKeeper saved their business. He said, 'Our company was hit at its peak and was thriving when the pandemic hit, but the restrictions resulting from it made doing business just that bit more difficult.' Access to JobKeeper meant Joe could retain his team of 29 specialist personnel within the tow truck industry, with 25 of those on JobKeeper.</para>
<para>We recognise the fact that many business, including those in my electorate of Forde, like Harvey’s Towing, are still feeling the effects of the coronavirus pandemic and the ongoing economic restrictions. That is why the government is extending and better targeting the JobKeeper payment to support those businesses and employees as they continue to manage and recover from the effects of coronavirus. It is this investment that sees the bill extend the prescribed period of the coronavirus payment framework for the JobKeeper payment from 31 December 2020 to 28 March 2021 and allows the Treasurer to extend and make rule changes to the JobKeeper rules up until 28 March 2021.</para>
<para>Further changes were made to the turnover test for the extension and the employment reference date to help more businesses qualify for JobKeeper. From 28 September 2020, businesses and not-for-profits seeking to claim the JobKeeper payment will be required to reassess their eligibility for the JobKeeper extension with reference to their actual turnover in the September quarter of 2020. The introduction of the two-tiered payment will also ensure JobKeeper payment rates are more reflective of the income prior to the impacts of the pandemic. The measures in this bill also enable the Australian Taxation Office to share JobKeeper payment information with relevant Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies, where that information will aid in the delivery of programs that support businesses affected by the impact of coronavirus.</para>
<para>But what's important is that JobKeeper shouldn't and doesn't, importantly, work in isolation from other economic measures and that it plays a key role and an important role in ensuring and informing our economic response from all levels of government. Other measures that this government has taken include the extension of the $150,000 instant asset write-off. I was recently speaking with the owners of Beaurepaires in Beenleigh. They were telling me that that allowed them to buy three new trucks. Their business has actually gone from strength to strength during the coronavirus because they changed what they were doing with their business and focused on a different segment of the tyre market. I have many stories like that, of businesses who have used this opportunity to change the way they do business and it has resulted in significant growth in their business.</para>
<para>In addition, we provided the Coronavirus Small and Medium Enterprises Guarantee Scheme to support finance for our small and medium-sized businesses. Importantly, it allowed them to maintain the cash flow requirements they needed. Previously, this government has provided tax cuts to the small- and medium-sized enterprise sector. Also, we've provided an extension to the wage subsidy scheme for apprentices and trainees.</para>
<para>I've heard those opposite wax lyrical about their economic policies and their belief in what we should or shouldn't do. I note, just for the record, that they haven't referred to the $385 billion of new taxes that they took to the last election and that are still part of their policy platform. So I think our economic measures stand in stark contrast to what those opposite actually believe in.</para>
<para>Schedule 2 of this bill extends the flexibilities in the Fair Work Act for a further temporary period, out to March 2021, for employees who remain on JobKeeper after 28 September and for those who are no longer on JobKeeper but have not yet recovered and remain in financial distress. This is an important measure that is absolutely critical to keeping business in business and Australians in work, considering the fact that three out of four surveyed employers used the flexibilities provided for by these provisions. The measures will provide continued operational flexibility for business in the recovery from the coronavirus pandemic to maximise the ongoing viability of these businesses and, importantly, as a consequence, maintain employees' connections to the workplace and their jobs.</para>
<para>JobKeeper has played a key role in ensuring businesses stay operational and can keep Australians in work. As I touched on earlier, over 5,000 businesses and organisations in Forde have been able to retain staff and maintain that important and valuable connection with their staff. JobKeeper has saved households and ensured Australians can provide for themselves and their families during these uncertain times. Speaking with constituents and business owners across my electorate, I know that JobKeeper will continue to play a vital role in assisting them in their recovery moving forward. This bill will ensure that we can extend and continue to provide the economic support necessary that has saved so many jobs and businesses in Forde and across the country. I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CATHERINE KING</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
    <electorate>Ballarat</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I, too, am very pleased to join in this debate on the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020. I support the amendments that have been flagged by the member for Watson—very necessary amendments to this bill.</para>
<para>We are, of course, in historic times. The pandemic has shaken everything that we knew. It's brought our lives and our world to a halt. Events like this are what we read in history books. They're events that don't fit in with our economic plans. They're what our public health professionals spend their lives planning for but hope never happen. Nobody who starts a business expects a pandemic to force them to close their doors. No year 12s expect to miss out on their formal because of social-distancing requirements. No nurse or doctor expects to be put up in a hotel so that they don't infect their children. No cleaner or supermarket worker expects to be the front line of a pandemic response. And nobody expects to be unable to visit their parents in aged care—or in my case, my dad, who has just spent 42 days in hospital—in case they introduce a contagious, deadly disease to the people they so love.</para>
<para>At times like this, we are all in it together. We must all take responsibility for social distancing, wearing masks and washing our hands, and we also need to take responsibility for looking after one another. Sadly, though, not everyone has been supported through this pandemic. There are countless Australians who have been left behind by the government's decision not to extend JobKeeper to them and many more who will continue to be left behind by the bill that we debate today.</para>
<para>The government introduced JobKeeper only after Labor, unions, economists and businesses called for it, after there were queues and queues of Australians at our Centrelink offices around the country. The government planned to end JobKeeper next month, driving our economy off a fiscal cliff until, again, Labor, unions, businesses and economists all called for them not to. This government introduced JobKeeper only after massive political and community pressure was placed on them. They're extending it today, again, only because of that same pressure.</para>
<para>The wage subsidy we'll vote to extend today unfortunately still leaves many in our community behind. It leaves behind the arts workers who create our cultural institutions and enliven our cities and towns. It leaves behind the council workers who teach disadvantaged children to read in our libraries. It leaves behind those who run local museums and those who watch over us in our public swimming pools. It still leaves behind many casual workers, who in a fairer industrial system would be permanent workers but whose bosses are allowed to exploit loopholes to strip them of their rights. It leaves behind childcare workers—those taken off JobKeeper too early as part of a misguided snapback. It leaves behind workers at council airports, the men and women who keep vital air links open in towns like Longreach, Exmouth and Bendigo. It leaves behind the workers at dnata—5,500 Australian workers who carry out essential work at our airports across the country. Every time you've flown in the past, or hopefully will fly in the future, it's been a dnata worker that you need to thank. But those workers have been denied JobKeeper because of a decision to outsource their jobs from Qantas, not because of who they are but who their boss is. It's left behind the 6,000 Qantas workers who were sacked the day after the Prime Minister refused to provide assurances to the airline regarding the future of this JobKeeper scheme. And it leaves behind the 2,500 workers who were told that most of their jobs would be outsourced by Qantas just yesterday.</para>
<para>The government give this support to businesses in the form of JobKeeper and other supports but they have not asked enough of businesses in return. Qantas has benefited to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, but under this government they can decide to outsource their ground staff, pushing them into insecure, likely lower-paid work. This at a time when we are seeing firsthand just how dangerous insecure work can be. The government should have secured these jobs and the jobs of thousands of aviation workers.</para>
<para>Over this year, I've spent many days speaking to heartbroken aviation workers—cabin crew, maintenance workers, ground staff, pilots and cleaners. They all love their job and their industry and they're terrified about their future. They know what they contribute to Australia. They know their importance to our economy and our society. But now, in a time of their greatest need, they know that the government have not got their backs, and they certainly have not got a long-term plan for aviation to help them recover. It's frankly shattering. They've worked all their lives. They've paid taxes. They've raised their families. They've contributed to their communities. But when the future of their industry is, frankly, in crisis, they've been left mostly to face it alone. That is only one industry, but I know that there are countless around Australia like that where the government has failed to put in place a plan to protect jobs, let alone to preserve and rebuild jobs as we head into recovery.</para>
<para>We hear a little less these days from the government about the snapback. But we can't forget that that is exactly what the government thought would happen. It seemed to think that we were somehow in a short-term crisis, that if you just waited six months and put a few things in place that somehow it would all just go back to normal. We can never forget that, in fact, the government is deciding that it is slowly withdrawing its support to Australians. A snapback, we know, would break many communities. Businesses simply would not have been able to survive.</para>
<para>My own community of Ballarat, of course, thought we were on the way out of this. But, like many, we were wrong. Our community did everything right. We followed the rules, we stayed at home, our health staff have done a remarkable job and we drove new cases in our community down to zero. We thought it would stay there, but it didn't. That is the nature of a highly infectious virus, without a vaccine. It comes back. I saw the Prime Minister in question time yesterday decide to use what's happening in Victoria as a political opportunity to distract from his problems in aged care. This problem, this re-emergence of the virus, can happen anywhere. It's happened in our community. It is foolish for any of us to think that it has just passed us by and that we have won. We haven't won until there is a vaccine. Over the past few months, Ballarat has been relatively lucky. We've avoided the worst of the second wave. Our hospitals have remained uncrowded and our aged care facilities, despite some positive cases in Bill Crawford, have remained secure, thanks to some remarkable work by our local health service.</para>
<para>But so many in our community have connections to Melbourne. So many of us have lived there in the past, our families live there, our friends are there and many work there. We know how quickly this virus can come back, and that's why we've been so prepared in our community to prevent its spread. To stop the spread, we're again staying home. Our bars, our restaurants and our stores are shut. So many of our, again, lowest paid workers, the ones who've been at the frontline of this crisis, have kept our freight moving, have ensured that we have food in our supermarkets, have cleaned our hospitals and aged care services and often the very streets that we walk on. It is more essential than ever that the rights of working Australians, particularly those low income earners, are protected throughout this crisis.</para>
<para>The stripping away of workers' rights was, we were told by the government, necessary to implement its JobKeeper program. Now, ridiculously, the government is telling us that the stripping away of workers' rights needs to apply where workers are no longer eligible for JobKeeper or workplaces are no longer eligible for JobKeeper. The thought that low income workers could have their hours unilaterally reduced by 40 per cent by an employer that the government has basically deemed has recovered, seems absolutely ridiculous. For those businesses that are still eligible for JobKeeper, and for whom the bill doesn't propose to strip JobKeeper away, the bill proposes to reduce the rate at which it is paid. In Victoria, these changes will hurt businesses and individuals, just at the moment when they need the help most. We know we're in for the long haul here in Victoria. We know that we're going to need assistance for a long time to come. The government needs to think about what the implications are for the economy in Victoria, which provides a substantial economic contribution to the state, and they need to think about what that means in terms of the reduction of rates here in the Victorian community.</para>
<para>It is very clear that the pandemic won't be over in a few weeks, or even months, and that government support needs to be there for the long haul. We've had a government that was reluctant to bring a wage subsidy into place in the first place. We've had a government that was reluctant to, and in fact almost opposed to, extending the wage subsidy beyond the time that they thought it was going to be needed. We've had a government that has been reluctant to take responsibility for those areas in which it has direct responsibility and accountability—whether it be quarantine, or aged care, or supporting businesses more broadly as we recover from this terrible health crisis.</para>
<para>What we're seeing in this bill is an important extension of the JobKeeper payment. It will provide a very necessary lifeline for many small businesses and many businesses across the community. The reduction in rate, particularly for those in Victoria, is problematic and remains so. I think the government needs to think long and hard about what is happening here in Victoria, what support businesses are going to need for a longer period of time and what the very nature of those businesses are when you think about that support more broadly.</para>
<para>What the government is also continuing to do, as it has done throughout this crisis, is to try to hide, through the crisis, some of the very bad things that it wants to do in relation to industrial relations. We're seeing that writ large in this bill. The thought that you could have a 40 per cent reduction of your hours from a business that has largely recovered, makes absolutely no sense at all. If the government believes the business has recovered and if the business is negotiating on working with unions, it needs to also ensure that there are protections in place for workers so that they don't unilaterally have their hours reduced. That will be huge amounts of money out of their pockets, particularly of many low-income earners, as we recover through this.</para>
<para>Again, I encourage the government to think more broadly about how they are looking at recovery. We haven't seen a plan for aviation. We've seen a patchwork of various initiatives that the government has put in place for aviation. None of the initiatives look at a plan for aviation, referring to the future. None of them articulate what the jobs are that we want into the future, in terms of aviation, and how we make sure that we protect those workers. At a time when we're seeing mass job losses from the aviation sector—whether it be from Virgin, with 3,000 lost, or from Qantas, with 6,000 lost and then 2,500 lost yesterday—we've seen employers such as Qantas take the opportunity to outsource some of those important workers that they've had in their employ for a long time and create more insecure work for those workers. At a time when we should be protecting the rights of those workers, we have a government that's seeking to continuously undermine them.</para>
<para>Again, while Labor will be supporting this bill, I think it's important for people to understand just what it means. Whilst it does mean that JobKeeper will be extended, it also means the rates for those who are on JobKeeper will be reduced. It also means that, for the very important workplace rights that many workers have fought for for so long and rely on so desperately, many of those workers will find themselves in circumstances where they will have no negotiating power at all to work with their employers to ensure that they don't have such significant job losses.</para>
<para>While I commend the government for extending JobKeeper, a very important initiative that Labor was very pleased to push and get the government to bring in place in the first place—we're very pleased to support the extension; we've been calling for it for some time—I do encourage the government to look seriously at the amendments proposed by the member for Watson and make sure that it is ensuring that those vulnerable workers, particularly those low-income workers and those workers in Victoria who so desperately need to be able to rely on JobKeeper well beyond March, are actually able to do so.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GILLESPIE</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Time being what it is, this will just be a small tempter before hearing the full details of the JobKeeper amendments in another time and place. In this limited time I would just like to point out that it is a real lifesaver. It's more than a job keeper. It has kept so many businesses in my electorate with their same employees. The businesses are still serving people and managing to get by during one of the greatest economic disruptions in the history of the country.</para>
<para>I'll give a few practical examples. I spoke to the owner, Gabriel Darzi, of the Sicilian Restaurant, now known as Cafe Toscano, and Cafe Giardino. It has basically kept their business going and sustainable. They haven't been able to have wedding-sized functions, but they have kept their company of 60 intact, with five people on JobKeeper. Up the road, in Taree, Jack & Co is another great food outlet. Basically, before JobKeeper, their income was in freefall, like that of many businesses. The upgrades they had planned were shelved, JobKeeper was introduced and they were still down, but they called in some of their contractors and their regular workers and put them all back on. The trade and contractor work had gone over a cliff, as had happened for many Australian businesses, but they also helped them by getting their business up and running, so it had a positive knock-on effect. Also, they've taken advantage of depreciation allowances and initiatives for improving cash flow. That instant asset write-off, combined with JobKeeper, has allowed them to keep their 25-person workforce intact. Another operator in my region, running several hotels in Port Macquarie and Lake Cathie, would have been in serious trouble if it weren't for JobKeeper. As you can appreciate, pubs and clubs have been seriously affected.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265991</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>45</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Disability Services</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I speak to and on behalf of people with disability. I ask all Australians to think about what this pandemic is like for them. They've watched COVID-19 rip through aged-care homes, wondering, 'Are we next?' Melbourne woman Ricky Buchanan explained it well to the Disability Royal Commission, which helps the rest of us to understand. Self-described as bedridden and disabled, 45-year-old Ricky has severe chronic fatigue syndrome such that she can't walk more than 20 steps a day. She's tried to lighten her fear of the pandemic by listening to the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra online. Like many with disabilities, she has wondered whether COVID will come to her through the workforce who work in aged care and are also coming through and working in disability. Workers often work in both aged care and disability services. Ricky tells of a friend who waited nine days to get a COVID-19 test at home. The service providers for her friend pulled all the services until she showed a negative test. This meant that she had no care. She had to lie in bed and survive on muesli bars. Ricky and her friend deserve better. The COVID-19 plan of the federal government didn't mention disability once. Let's remember people with disability and the millions of their family members who love them. Have their fears respected. Ricky Buchanan and her friend deserve better. All Australians deserve better.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Menzies Electorate: North Eastern Jewish War Memorial Centre, Alexander, Mr Benjamin, OAM</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>HK5</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm delighted to be able to participate in this direct hybrid parliament. Today I want to acknowledge one of the many ethnic and multicultural communities here in my electorate of Menzies—namely, the North Eastern Jewish War Memorial Centre and synagogue. For many decades now, the North Eastern Jewish Centre has played a vital part in the vibrant multicultural community here in Menzies, and I was delighted recently to be able to announce, along with the assistant minister, the member for La Trobe, a community safety grant for the centre. This centre sits in an exposed, isolated location, and it's important for the safety and wellbeing of members that they can feel that they can go to the various activities in the centre in all safety. So just yesterday the member for La Trobe, the assistant minister, and I spoke with members of the centre via a teleconference link, as we have to these days, and they were delighted with this further funding for the centre.</para>
<para>Finally on this note, I extend my condolences to the family and friends of the late Ben Alexander, one of the founding members of the centre, who died recently. He was a stalwart of the community who made a huge contribution not just to the Jewish centre here in Menzies but to the broader community. May he rest in peace.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bean Electorate: Norfolk Island</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>While it only takes me 10 minutes to drive to Parliament House, the furthest corner of Bean is 1,800 kilometres away: Norfolk Island. As you can imagine, the pandemic challenges have provided an additional layer of isolation and economic uncertainty to the Norfolk community, but it is a strong community that works together.</para>
<para>The issue of provision of education and health services, currently contracted to the New South Wales government, is of critical concern to the Norfolk community. The existing contracts run out in July 2021, and the New South Wales government has for some time indicated it's withdrawing its services. No providers have been agreed. In correspondence with the minister and in meetings last year, I raised concerns that uncertainty around the provision of education services would have an impact on the students and community well before the 2021 deadline. Since then, there have been no updates from the minister despite the rising anxiety amongst students, parents and staff alike. A Year 11 student wrote to me, noting, 'All of my teachers that stay next year have been offered a six-month contract,' and, 'The uncertainty in the school is affecting me, my family, my friends.' They are asking for help.</para>
<para>The situation has now reached crunch time for both education and health services, and we need to see leadership now. The teaching staff have been put in an awful situation and may vote with their feet. This would be devastating for the community and could have been avoided if the government had valued the needs of this community properly.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Robertson Electorate: Men's Sheds</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs WICKS</name>
    <name.id>241590</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Men's Sheds build so much more than great woodwork; they build community, connection, mateship, engagement and belonging. To support the wellbeing of local men's sheds in Robertson, the federal government has provided $4,090 in combined funding to the Gosford Men's Shed and the Wood Glen Workshop under the National Shed Development Program. These grants will support men's sheds to be able to purchase tools, facilitate training and maintenance, and provide PPE for their members. I recently had the opportunity to visit Larry and the team at the Gosford Men's Shed to see firsthand how their grant is assisting the shed. They're not only working on traditional woodwork projects; they also restore bicycles and fix lawnmowers and power tools to help people in our community. The men at Gosford Men's Shed gather together to share a skill, learn something new or simply sit and chat, usually over a tea or coffee and a treat from the local bakery. These acts of supporting one's community—sharing skills and life experiences, and working together on a new project or challenge—create the social cohesion and supportive environment that men's sheds are known for. I commend the Gosford Men's Shed and the Wood Glen Workshop on being successful in this grant and for the incredible work they do in our community. I'm really looking forward to visiting the Wood Glen Workshop this Friday to be able to thank their members in person as well. I'm really proud to be part of a government that remains committed to supporting important community organisations like these.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Nespolon, Dr Harry</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's appropriate that the House recognises the passing of Dr Harry Nespolon. He died recently after a short battle with pancreatic cancer. He had practices in the Sydney CBD and at Neutral Bay. He was a caring and compassionate general practitioner, but he was also a strong advocate for public health and for general practice. Harry was actually the first person I rang when I was appointed shadow minister for health. In fact, I rang him before it was even announced, to talk to him about policy issues, and he was a very strong interlocutor every day after that. In fact, on my phone there are text messages from Harry about policy matters relating to COVID-19 which I received just days before he died.</para>
<para>Harry was also a lot of fun. He was a great character, he was great company, and his conversations would reflect his very broad interests. As well as a medical degree, he attained while working as a general practitioner a Master of Business Administration, an economics degree—a man after my own heart!—and two law degrees—a bachelor's degree and a master's degree. He played a vital role—and I'm sure the Minister for Health would agree—in our COVID-19 response, suggesting to the government how to deal with telehealth and better incorporate general practice. He was always trying to achieve more. He said at the RACGP general conference in 2019: 'We should always endeavour to do better, to break the mould, to include voices that haven't been heard, to innovate and to learn.' I will miss Harry. I know that the member for Ballarat, my friend the former shadow minister for health, will miss Harry, and I'm sure many honourable members will miss Harry Nespolon.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Goldstein Electorate: COVID-19</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TIM WILSON</name>
    <name.id>IMW</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Victorians need the support of their leaders now more than ever. While our Premier issues diktats without explanation, our Prime Minister is listening and engaging. Last Thursday the Prime Minister joined a Tele-Town Hall with over 8½ thousand Goldstein residents to answer questions and reassure them that Canberra has Melbourne's—and Victoria's—back. Nearly 405 questions were asked—on our recent vaccine deal, support for self-funded retirees, economic recovery and many other issues. Alison asked, movingly, about access to essential mental health services for younger residents doing it tough during lockdown. Sadly, a personal example of a friend was used to bring about the truth of the situation. John put a particularly incisive question to the Prime Minister regarding the likelihood of a cooperative industrial relations system coming out of this pandemic. We all know how critical reform will be to drive recovery from the COVID recession. My thanks go to Raymond, Thomas, Denise, Damien, Joanne and Janie for also asking their questions and also to everybody who participated at this time when we feel apart. Thank you also to the Prime Minister for offering his time to connect directly with the Goldstein community.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Procurement</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The uncertainty and confusion surrounding the future submarine build continues in South Australia. We still have no clarity about where the bulk of the work will be done, and now we find out not only that local content is diminishing with each government response but that there is no guaranteed minimum local content written into the contract. At $90 billion, the future submarine contract is one of the largest government outlays I am aware of. Yet, at a time that COVID-19 is wrecking the Australian economy, the Morrison government is sending Australian jobs to other countries, whilst, according to Roy Morgan research, around 3½ million Australians are unemployed or underemployed, and that includes hundreds of shipworkers who have the skills required for this.</para>
<para>In South Australia, the unemployment rate hovers around eight per cent and is much worse in Adelaide's northern suburbs. Unemployment is predicted to rise. We have skilled workers in South Australia in need of work, and skills are being lost because the work they could do is being sent overseas. The future submarine contract has been bungled by this government from the start. I call on the Morrison government to end the uncertainty, to back Australian workers, to maximise Australian content in the future submarines and to deliver on the 90 per cent local content promised by former minister Christopher Pyne. And it's time that South Australian Liberals, including those in this place and in the Senate— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Beirut: Explosion</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MARTIN</name>
    <name.id>282982</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to extend my sympathies to those who have experienced the tragic loss of loved ones following the two large blasts in Beirut on 4 August. We've all seen the horrific vision and the extensive damage across the city. Many who have survived are now dealing with physical injuries and psychological trauma. My electorate of Reid has a large number of Lebanese Australians, and they make up more than 230,000 Australians of Lebanese heritage who are mourning this tragedy. I personally know constituents who have had family and friends affected by the explosion. I especially extend my condolences to the family of Australian toddler Isaac Oehlers, who tragically died in the explosion.</para>
<para>Religious groups in Reid have come together in prayer and goodwill. I would like to acknowledge their fundraising efforts—in particular, Bishop Antoine-Charbel Tarabay, the eparch of the Maronite Diocese of St Maroun, and Mr Samier Dandan, President of the Lebanese Muslim Association. I would also like to acknowledge Mr Tony Ishak of Radio 2Moro.</para>
<para>The explosion has compounded many issues facing Lebanon—an impending economic collapse, corruption, poverty, famine and a global pandemic. For this reason, the Australian government moved quickly to commit $5 million in humanitarian assistance, which has been provided through international organisations. The Australian Defence Force has also delivered urgently needed humanitarian supplies to be used on the ground in Beirut. We will continue to provide support to Lebanon in this period of recovery and know that their spirit of resilience will see them overcome this period of devastation.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Airborne Research Australia</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last week I went to Parafield Airport to meet with two Adelaide Hills scientists and toured the facilities of their non-for-profit organisation Airborne Research Australia. Dr Andrew McGrath and Associate Professor Jorg Hacker are directors, chief scientists and pilots for this aerial environmental data collection and analysis venture that began in the 1980s. In recent times, Airborne has, in detail, mapped seagrass along the coast of Adelaide and uncovered submerged ancient Indigenous structures off the Western Australian coast. Of significant interest was their mapping of the Cudlee Creek and Kangaroo Island firegrounds in Mayo. They've collected detailed information, and I'm pleased to say that this specialist data is publicly available; landholders just need to contact Andrew and Jorg on airborneresearch.org.au. Their work at Airborne Research is of profound value to South Australia. To any philanthropists out there listening to parliament today, this organisation does have DGR status and they need funds to survive, and I would encourage you to consider connecting with Airborne Research, as they do fantastic work.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Polio, Rotary International</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZIMMERMAN</name>
    <name.id>203092</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Amidst the gloom of the coronavirus pandemic, there has been some positive and, indeed, exciting news on the global health front. Today, health authorities have declared the entire African continent free of wild polio. It means that polio can be found now only in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and in very small numbers. This is a stunning achievement for the global health community. It is also a credit to those who have worked to fundraise for the international efforts to eliminate polio, particularly Rotary International, which has led the charge by making the elimination of polio their global mission for many years. Every one of the tens of thousands of Australian Rotarians can be proud of their contribution to this outcome.</para>
<para>At this time of year, Rotary Clubs across Australia have their annual changeover events—a little bit different in 2020—where they reflect on their achievements and install new presidents and executives for the year ahead. I'd like to congratulate the new presidents leading the clubs in my own electorate: Peter Kindred and David Brand, of the newly merged and formed Chatswood Roseville branch; Julian McVittie, of Chatswood International; Keith Chaffey, of Chatswood Sunrise; Ian Pocock, of Crows Nest; Michael Parsons, of Hunters Hill; Silvio Gmur, of Lane Cove; Toni Field OAM, of North Sydney; Kelvin Tattrie, of Northbridge—and, gee, we missed the Northbridge fireworks this year; and Catherine Glinka from my own club, North Sydney Sunrise, the best club in Sydney, of course. I also want to pay tribute to the outgoing presidents and executives who have completed their terms. I know our communities are grateful for and proud of all you have achieved for them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australia Post</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUSIC</name>
    <name.id>91219</name.id>
    <electorate>Chifley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to object to the lies and the mistruths that have emerged out of Australia Post's senior management that have affected their workforce. People have been genuinely worried about their jobs as a result of a very calculated campaign to create a sense of crisis in the organisation, using COVID as a cover to push through changes that have resulted in greater job insecurity and cuts to pay. We've already seen some of that. For example, van drivers have lost one week of annual leave and traditional take-home pay with some of the Sunday overtime that's been removed, meaning that mail is piling up. We've had posties who have been working their guts out for less, with cuts to their overtime impacting on their take-home pay.</para>
<para>There were all these suggestions that posties weren't able to do a whole range of things because so many parcels are coming in now—that the bulk of the work being done by posties involves delivering parcels. But, all of a sudden, in the space of a few months, we've gone from a crisis in the organisation to having the head of Australia Post, in the <inline font-style="italic">Financial Review</inline> last week, saying 'every day is like Christmas' at Australia Post. They have used spin and lies to create a climate that would allow them to cut jobs and to cut pay, and they should be held accountable for it. The Australian public deserves much better.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Meals on Wheels</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VASTA</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today marks National Meals on Wheels Day, and this year it recognises the dedicated volunteer workforce who stepped up to help protect the health and wellbeing of vulnerable Australians during the COVID-19 pandemic. Over the past couple of months I've had the opportunity to volunteer my time to assist the Wynnum and Manly District and Mount Gravatt Meals on Wheels and meet some of the amazing volunteers. As recently as last week, I joined Janet Wishart to deliver hot meals to the Mansfield community.</para>
<para>At the peak of the pandemic, the Morrison government stepped up to ensure our Meals on Wheels services had the additional funding they needed to meet the increased demand for their services. Meals on Wheels and similar services were reinforced with a $59.3 million injection to ensure more prepared meals, food staples and essential daily items could be delivered to those who needed it most.</para>
<para>I recently received a kind note from Ken at Wynnum and Manly District Meals on Wheels, regarding this funding. He said, 'When all hell broke loose, we had to find additional resources to implement a COVID-safe plan, cover additional cleaning costs and print off communication and instructions for clients and volunteers.' Ken said, 'We would not have achieved this without the additional $35,000 funding, and we give thanks for that.' Ken, you are welcome, and thank you for sharing this positive story— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Domestic and Family Violence</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ALY</name>
    <name.id>13050</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's been just over six months since this parliament came together, united in its grief over the tragic murder of Hannah Clarke and her beautiful children, to condemn the scourge of family and domestic violence. Sadly, this week in Western Australia we've seen yet another gruesome case of family and domestic violence. Andrea, a young mother of two, was doused with petrol and set on fire, allegedly by her partner, in Perth's southern suburbs on Sunday, suffering burns to 35 per cent of her body. She is currently in hospital receiving treatment, and I wish her and her family all the best.</para>
<para>In 2018 a report by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare revealed that WA has the highest proportion of assaults related to family and domestic violence in the nation, and the victims are overwhelmingly female. I'm concerned that we're not doing enough. While helplines, public service advertisements and even speeches in parliament are great, they don't reach those women and those men who are isolated and, frankly, too busy trying to survive to pay attention and be switched on to what's happening here in parliament, albeit as well meaning as it may be. I'm concerned about reports that men from CALD backgrounds are not accessing the domestic violence helpline. At the time of Hannah Clarke's murder, we in this parliament vowed to continue to fight against family and domestic violence. I've not forgotten that vow, and I know that there are many here who also have not forgotten that vow.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bass Electorate: COVID-19</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ARCHER</name>
    <name.id>282237</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I rise to express my special thanks to our healthcare workers. When COVID first found its way to Tasmania the response was very swift. A COVID-19 screening clinic was set up outside the Launceston General Hospital, using a converted old bus that had recently had a fit-out thanks to $100,000 in federal government funding. A dedicated COVID-19 ward was also prepared in order to care for patients with the virus who do not require intensive care or the help of a ventilator. High-risk patients who present to the emergency department are immediately screened. For months on end, hospital staff on the COVID ward have donned full PPE to treat patients as they were admitted, an incredibly high-stress situation for the workers, who've shown up for every shift with the utmost professionalism.</para>
<para>During this time, when an outbreak occurred in north-west Tasmania, the ward cared for more than half the state's hospitalised positive cases. Staff consistently went above and beyond in difficult circumstances, and some negative media at that time left them feeling pretty flat. I put a call out to our local community, asking for their positive comments of support. There was an overwhelming response, leading to the creation of a book of thanks, including a personal letter to the staff from Minister Hunt, which I presented to the LGH staff last month, including nursing unit manager Robyn Hayes; Matt Carswell, who's a nurse; and Jenny Wood, a senior pharmacist at the Acute Medical Unit. On behalf of the Northern Tasmania community, I say thank you.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Industry</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The federal government is all smoke and mirrors on Australian defence industry—photo ops one day, cutting out Aussie businesses the next. Australian defence industry businesses need a fair go at winning defence contracts, but this government's idea of a fair go at local procurement is nothing more than a box-ticking exercise. This government say they have 'reviewed' procurement policy to make sure that they 'consider' Aussie businesses when looking at tenders. However, consideration does not bring with it any guarantees whatsoever.</para>
<para>This government's mismanagement of defence procurement is an insult to Australian defence industry. Aussie industry deserves to be able to compete in an equitable manner for work share in these programs. Our industry is often criticised as being too expensive, too inefficient and too risky, but none of these claims are a reality. Brent Clark from the Australian Industry and Defence Network told the naval shipbuilding inquiry just the other week:</para>
<quote><para class="block">There is no logical reason as to why an Australian company is any less efficient or productive or poses more risk if they are given the same specifications and access to technology transfer as the foreign companies.</para></quote>
<para>This government needs to work to ensure Australian businesses that have the capability to get into the defence supply chain can do so and support the development of long-term Australian sovereign capability. We need enforceable, measurable contractual requirements put into every single procurement contract with defence primes to ensure that they work with Australian companies so they are given a fair and equitable chance of securing work and we develop sovereign defence capability—now more than ever.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Moncrieff Electorate</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The entrepreneurial spirit required to create future Gold Coast jobs was reignited last week at the Reimagine Gold Coast jobs, skills and industry forum organised by the City Heart Taskforce that I chair and convened earlier this year, in May. The City Heart Taskforce has proven to be the vehicle and the Reimagine forum the platform for the engine room of the Gold Coast—that is, industry—to have a voice directly to the federal government when it comes to our opportunities to create jobs. I thank Ministers Stuart Robert and Karen Andrews for their support for my initiatives and for their commitment to Gold Coasters.</para>
<para>One such opportunity highlighted at the forum by Geoff Smith, from Sports Gold Coast, is to position the coast as the home of Australian women's sport, building on existing momentum—and superb weather, can I say—of a 300 per cent increase in AFL participation by women, the Suns AFL women's team and the Southport Sharks QFA women's team. The Gold Coast is in fact already the natural home of women's and girls' sport. The open girls team of one of Queensland's premier rugby league schools, Keebra Park State High, will be contesting the grand final of the inaugural Titans Cup today. The action will be live streamed by the Gold Coast Bulletin from 2 pm. I say to all girls on the Gold Coast and all women in sport that the Gold Coast will be the new natural home of women's sport in this country. I'm proud to be here today. I have two words to say to Keebra Park State High School: go Keebra!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Indigenous Flag</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BURNEY</name>
    <name.id>8GH</name.id>
    <electorate>Barton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This week is the 54th anniversary of the Wave Hill walk-off, which spurred the land rights movement. First Nations people are still fighting for possession of so many things that are important. I want to acknowledge Clothing The Gap. The Aboriginal flag is displayed in many places: schools, airports, public buildings and most Australian parliaments. It is also on clothing and features prominently in sport. Unfortunately, this uplifting symbol has become a captive of a private company. The legal issues are complex, but the moral issues of this saga are not. This flag is an image that should not be at the behest of a private company. The flag unites us all.</para>
<para>The Federal Court decision in 1997 determined that Mr Harold Thomas was the author of the flag. He sold all his rights to a company called WAM Clothing. The message today about the flag is simple: it is immeasurably important to First Peoples and fellow travellers. How are WAM's actions moral, telling the AFL, the NRL and medical services they are not to use the flag? I have to say that WAM should recognise that this flag is not about money; it represents resistance, survival, identity and pride. WAM should do the right thing and give the flag back to the people.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Sexual Abuse</title>
          <page.no>50</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SIMMONDS</name>
    <name.id>282983</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am passionate about ensuring our kids are safe in our community and online. The Morrison government can be rightly proud that it established Australia's first e-Safety Commissioner and passed new laws to create longer mandatory sentences. I recently visited the Australian Centre to Counter Child Exploitation, which is based in Brisbane. I witnessed firsthand our dedicated AFP officers, who are investigating over 18,000 reports of the most vile and disgusting child exploitation material. Their efforts tracking and engaging with perpetrators over the dark web come at a great personal cost to them. But they have one simple message for the rest of us and this parliament: don't underestimate how prevalent this vile behaviour is. That's why, in January 2019, the Morrison government announced funding to establish a national public register of child sex offenders, containing information about convicted child sex offenders, including names, aliases, offences, physical descriptions and postcode locations. The national public register is vital to deter offending, prevent reoffending and raise public awareness of the prevalent risk to our community. But, just recently, the state Labor government in Queensland voted against establishing the register. Plain and simple, their failure to support the register or contribute to it is endangering our kids, and it's time to send a strong message. I've established a petition on my Facebook page that I urge everyone to join. Let's work together to send a strong message to Queensland Labor that their de facto protection of paedophiles is not acceptable.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Ryan, I didn't quite hear everything you said—</para>
<para class="italic">Mr Watts interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I am addressing the House. The member for Gellibrand is about to be ejected. The member for Ryan needs to withdraw that statement.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SIMMONDS</name>
    <name.id>282983</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>At your direction, I withdraw.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Ryan will come back to the microphone. When you're asked to withdraw, you do so without commentary in any way, shape or form.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SIMMONDS</name>
    <name.id>282983</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My apologies. I withdraw.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Ryan.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Liberal Party of Australia</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROWLAND</name>
    <name.id>159771</name.id>
    <electorate>Greenway</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>More sordid details have emerged today about the backdoor kingmakers of the Liberal Party, who apparently determine who sits in parliament. <inline font-style="italic">The Australian </inline>notes their strategy was 'based on skin colour, gender, ethnicity and religious beliefs', set out in a document containing claims that are 'scurrilous and unprintable' relating to the private lives and health problems of MPs. I reflect on the Prime Minister's response to just one particular aspect, the revelations of Liberal Party operatives using an unrepeatable, degrading term to describe people of Indian background. I thought I'd seen this behaviour before from the Liberals. Sure enough, there were headlines from June last year where the same offensive term was used at their state council meeting. And further back in 2018, there was another report of the same racist term being used by the Liberals in their branch stacking follies. If there are people in the Prime Minister's party who clearly have form in such disgraceful behaviour, where was the disciplinary action then and where is it now? I'll tell you. It doesn't exist. Apparently it's all an organisational matter for the Victorian Division of the Liberal Party, according to the Prime Minister—except it's not. It's a test of how the Liberal Party perceives Australians of Indian background—and people of Indian background are now our largest source of permanent migration. It's a test of leadership over gestures. It's a test that this Prime Minister has failed.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>51</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mason, Mr Colin Victor James</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the House of the death, on 18 July this year, of Colin Victor James Mason, a former senator. Colin Mason represented the state of New South Wales from 1978 until 1987. As a mark of respect to the memory of Colin Mason, I invite all present to rise in their places.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">Honourable members having stood in their places—</inline></para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>51</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. Did the Prime Minister's decision to cut $1.7 billion from aged care leave aged-care homes better or worse prepared for the pandemic?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Once again the Leader of the Opposition comes to the dispatch box and asserts things that are simply not true. It's not just me saying that. The Labor Party have made these allegations before. In fact, the previous Leader of the Opposition made the same allegations, about a matter involving $1.2 billion, and, of all sources to actually agree with the government—it may come as some surprise—ABC Fact Check found that to be very 'misleading'. I table that for the benefit of the House.</para>
<para>What I can advise the Leader of the Opposition about is that we've invested $3 billion, since the 2018-19 budget, into home care packages, to support more Australians living in their homes for longer. We've released 14,275 new residential care places, including 13½ thousand residential places and 775 short-term restorative care places. We're investing $5.3 billion, from 1 July to June 2022, for existing Commonwealth Home Support Program service providers, to ensure continuity of in-home support services for over 840,000 across Australia. We've invested $21.9 million for My Aged Care operating costs. We've provided a $320 million boost to residential care subsidies. We've given providers operating residential and home care access to independent business advisory services. We've provided almost $50 million for a Business Improvement Fund to assist residential aged-care providers in financial difficulty, including prioritisation for those in regional, rural and remote areas and affected by bushfires. Applications opened for the BIF on 31 March 2020. We've provided an ongoing 30 per cent increase to the viability supplement to support services in rural and remote Australia. We've provided an ongoing 30 per cent increase to the homelessness supplement. We've established a new independent Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission. We've implemented new consumer based aged-care quality standards. We've introduced a new National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator Program. And we've committed over $1 billion to aged-care support to ensure that, in response to the outbreak of coronavirus in this country, Australia's record stands in a position that other nations have not even approached.</para>
<para>That's not to say there have not been failings. Of course there have. There have been four cases, in four facilities in this country, where the outcomes have been completely and totally unacceptable. There have been a total of 16 cases overall where we've had a significant impact. But, in 97 per cent of the aged-care facilities in this country, there has not been a single resident infection.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Economy</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ARCHER</name>
    <name.id>282237</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister update the House on how the Morrison government's plan for economic recovery is backing Australians by helping create jobs and new business opportunities across our nation?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bass for her question. She knows that, whether it's in her home state of Tasmania or anywhere else around the country as we deal with the COVID pandemic that has swept the world and the COVID recession that has followed that pandemic, it's important that our response gets the balance right, constantly assessing the impacts to ensure that we're both saving lives and saving livelihoods in addressing the twin crises. As we continue to work hard together with state and territory governments across the country to suppress the COVID-19 virus across Australia, and particularly now in Victoria after the significant community outbreak there, what we also know is that we must continue to ensure that we support Australians who are doing it incredibly tough as a result of the COVID-19 recession.</para>
<para>In the June quarter of this year, in the United Kingdom their economy shrank by 20 per cent. There were large falls also in the United States and Germany of around 10 per cent, and, I think, some 14 per cent in France. Our figures will come out next week, and the indicators are that Australia will, hopefully, not see any of those figures. But the impact will still be significant—very significant.</para>
<para>But we are making progress. We are making progress in bringing Australia back and getting the jobs back. The most recent payroll data shows that 43 per cent of payroll jobs have come back, as at 8 August, since the beginning of the COVID recession after those jobs were first lost. Importantly, in the two areas that were most significantly impacted by the job losses of the COVID-19 pandemic, we've seen a 52 per cent return in women's jobs that were lost and, for those under the age of 20, the comparison now with the pre-COVID period shows that jobs, on payroll data, are down by just 0.1 per cent. We have seen the jobs for under-20s, on that payroll data, come back to where they were at the start of the COVID recession.</para>
<para>As the numbers in Victoria continue to improve—and we look forward to more improvement in the weeks and months ahead—that will see confidence continue to rise. That is why it's important that we don't allow the country to go into some sort of economic retreat. We need the country to keep moving forward and, wherever possible, continue to open up and make sure that we can get those jobs back into our economy and we can get the businesses opened up again. It is so essential that we continue to press forward and not allow a retreat in our economic position. That is why we will continue to lead, with more than $300 billion of economic support into our economy and to support jobs. The JobKeeper legislation that is before the parliament now, extending JobKeeper again out to the end of March, is incredibly important support to the Australian people, because it keeps Australians in jobs. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Does the Prime Minister seriously deny he cut $1.7 billion from aged care when page 172 of his 2015-16 MYEFO says about aged care funding, 'The government will achieve savings of $472.4 million,' and page 101 of his Budget Paper No. 2 for 2016-17 says about aged-care funding, 'The government will achieve efficiencies of $1.2 billion'?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government increases funding for aged care by $1 billion every single year.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Aviation</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>E5D</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development. Will the Deputy Prime Minister inform the House how the McCormack-Morrison government is supporting jobs in the aviation industry through the COVID-19 pandemic?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I do thank the member for New England for his question and acknowledge his representation of regional Australia. At the outset of COVID-19 the aviation sector was hit first and hit hardest. At one stage domestic passenger numbers fell from more than a million per week to around 30,000, and domestic flights from 13,000 weekly flights to just 400. As a result of COVID-19 the aviation sector has experienced a 98 per cent downturn. On Easter Sunday last year Brisbane Airport handled 39½ thousand passengers, but just 31 passengers on the same holiday this year. These figures are stark. They are real.</para>
<para>Job losses have been significant. We know that any job loss is tough. Every Australian who has lost their job through COVID-19 is at the front of our minds as we put in place the measures to address the health pandemic, and, certainly, to address the issues around the economy and workers. We acted quickly. Our continued assistance measures are designed to maintain employment and crucial services around the sector. I'm in daily communication with members of the aviation sector. Planes in the air equals jobs on ground.</para>
<para>Recently, there was a ludicrous situation at the Queensland and New South Wales border, prohibiting critical staff from travelling to Ballina airport. One Gold Coast aviation firefighter employed at the airport was told by Queensland border officials that he would need to isolate for 14 days after every shift—every shift! The pathway forward for aviation begins with a targeted and pragmatic approach to the opening of borders—not after election day on 31 October but right now. Border closures hurt aviation and they especially hurt the tourism industry.</para>
<para>To date, we've invested more than $1.3 billion in sector-wide assistance for aviation through various measures, like the $715 million airline assistance package to provide immediate and significant relief from fees and waivers. There are two regional aviation support packages: Regional Airline Network Support and the Regional Airlines Funding Assistance package, which totals $298 million to assist 16 regional airlines. Many of those are taking PPE, respiratory devices and other equipment—face masks and, perhaps most importantly, frontline medical personnel—to regional and remote centres which would otherwise not see a regular flight, or any flight at all. From this package, for the member of New England's electorate we've secured eight weekly flights from Tamworth and six weekly flights from Armidale. The Regional Airline Network Support program is currently supporting up to 269 returned services to 110 regional or remote locations across Australia. This is important support. We appreciate the fact that aviation has been hit very, very hard. We will continue to discuss these issues with members of the sector and continue to provide the measures that we need to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. The aged care royal commission's <inline font-style="italic">Interim report: Neglect</inline> revealed that up to half of all older Australians in residential aged care are malnourished. They're literally starving. Didn't the Prime Minister's decision to cut $1.7 billion from aged care leave frail and vulnerable older Australians worse off?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The care and respect for Australians who are living in residential aged care is something that all members of my government, and I know that all members of this House, take very, very seriously. We have all had personal experiences, no doubt, of our own loved ones being cared for in residential aged-care facilities and we know how important it is. That is why our government has continued to increase funding for aged care. When we came to office after the 2012-13 budget, in terms of aged-care places and funding, it was at 186,278 registered residential aged-care places. In the most recent budget, that has increased to 219,000 places. We inherited just 60,000 in-home aged-care places from those opposite. In the 2019-20 budget we've increased that to 150,756 places.</para>
<para>In response to the royal commission into aged care, which I initiated not long after becoming Prime Minister, there was an interim report released. It touched on three particular issues and we responded to each and every one of those three issues highlighted in that interim report, with 10,000 home-care packages established at a cost of $496.3 million; $25.5 million to reduce the use of medication as a chemical restraint on residents in aged care and at home; $10 million for additional dementia training and support for aged-care workers and providers, including to reduce the use of chemical restraints; and $4.7 million to help meet new targets to remove younger people with disability from residential aged care. These were the matters that were highlighted in that interim report, and we moved very quickly to provide the funding to support them soon after that interim report came down. When its final recommendations are made next year, we will have the opportunity to respond in full to those in the budget next year. In the meantime, in the budget this year, we will continue to address the many challenges there are in aged care—not only the more than $1 billion we've already put in to support our efforts to respond to COVID-19 but the other many issues that we continue to be aware of and have been acting on.</para>
<para>In my earlier answer, I ran through a series of funding commitments. Those funding commitments that I outlined in answer to the Leader of the Opposition's first question are only those that we've announced since the royal commission was established. So we'll continue to look after our older residents, and we'll do it in a way that ensures their dignity and their respect.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. <inline font-style="italic">The Mercury</inline> newspaper reports that there have been no unannounced safety checks at Tasmanian residential aged-care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic. By comparison, the aged-care regulator has carried out 63 unannounced visits in New South Wales, 63 in Victoria, 55 in Queensland and 20 in South Australia. In other words, the federal government is flying blind in Tasmania and hoping for the best, which amounts to wilful and dangerous ignorance considering what we've seen in aged care elsewhere. Prime Minister, how can older Tasmanians feel safe in these circumstances? How does the government explain the lack of inspections, and what are you going to do about it?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Minister for Health may wish to add to this answer. This is a matter that I've been speaking directly with the Tasmanian Premier about. Of course, the aged-care quality commissioner undertakes their processes in relation to Tasmanian facilities. But I know, through the work that has been done through the minister for aged care and agreements we've been able to reach with the Tasmanian government, we'll be working through the very issues you have highlighted. You're right to raise them, and it's important that this is undertaken. It's happening all around the country and it will also happen in Tasmania. The Minister for Health may wish to add to that answer.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to add to the Prime Minister's answer. On 31 January the department contacted aged-care facilities around Australia on early preparation. All aged-care facilities were contacted. That was then followed in terms of actions which were taken on 7 February in relation to aged-care facilities being contacted around the country. In addition to that, on a national level, what we've seen is that on 6 March the minister for aged care and the Chief Medical Officer convened the Aged Care COVID-19 Preparedness Forum, which was open to aged-care facilities around the country. In addition to that, I'm advised that the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commissioner has indeed been in contact with all facilities around the country. That includes direct interviews. A number of those facilities around the country were deemed not ready in preparation in March off the basis of that, and standards were lifted and addressed across the country in relation to all aged-care facilities. A further survey of all facilities has been conducted by the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commissioner, with subsequent and additional contacts around the country.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Economy</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ALLEN</name>
    <name.id>282986</name.id>
    <electorate>Higgins</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on the historic levels of support the Morrison government is providing to help workers stay connected to their employers and to assist families as we make our way back to economic recovery?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FRYDENBERG</name>
    <name.id>FKL</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Higgins for her question and acknowledge her experience as a professor of paediatrics, and 28 years at the Royal Children's Hospital. COVID-19 is a one-in-100-year event and its economic impact is devastating. The OECD is estimating that the global economy will contract by about six per cent this year, in comparison to the GFC, which saw the global economy contract by just 0.1 per cent. We know from the June quarter GDP figures in other countries that they have seen substantial falls—more than 20 per cent in the United Kingdom; around 14 per cent in France; and around 10 per cent in the United States as well as in Germany. Yet, here in Australia, we've maintained our AAA credit rating, and, of the 1.3 million Australians who either lost their jobs or saw their hours reduced to zero at the start of the crisis, more than half of them are back in work—around 700,000.</para>
<para>Approaching this crisis from a position of economic strength has allowed us to announce and commit to $314 billion worth of support—$314 billion worth of support, nearly 16 per cent of GDP. According to Treasury, that support has helped save 700,000 jobs. The unemployment rate would have been around five per cent higher than it is today if it were not for our government's economic support. With JobKeeper, already $42 billion has gone to Australian workers. The cash flow boost—more than $23 billion—has gone to Australian workers, and more than $9 billion with the $750 payments, and more than $9 billion for the coronavirus supplement.</para>
<para>Right around our great country there are great stories—great stories about what JobKeeper is doing to support businesses and families—like a great story from the electorate of the member for Higgins about a group called Very Special Kids, a children's hospice providing vital counselling and clinical support. The CEO wrote to the member for Higgins—and that organisation has been supported well by the member for Higgins and her predecessor, Kelly O'Dwyer. This is what the CEO said: 'If not for JobKeeper, our position in sustaining essential services would have been significantly reduced. JobKeeper has enabled us to keep the engagement of our highly experienced and trained nurses, personal care workers, social workers and bereavement counsellors, who provide essential care to some of the most vulnerable families across Victoria, with 80 of the staff on JobKeeper.' JobKeeper is doing a remarkable job.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COLLINS</name>
    <name.id>HWM</name.id>
    <electorate>Franklin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. The aged care royal commission's interim report, titled <inline font-style="italic">Aged </inline><inline font-style="italic">c</inline><inline font-style="italic">are in Australia: a shocking tale of neglect </inline>drew attention to aged-care residents sitting or lying in urine or faeces. Did the Prime Minister's decision to cut $1.7 billion from aged care contribute to these shocking circumstances?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I've already addressed the misleading statements made by the opposition that they continue to—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Rankin!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I have already informed the House of the significant increases in investments made by the government when it comes to aged care.</para>
<para>When I called the royal commission into aged care, when I undertook that soon after becoming Prime Minister, I said to the Australian people that we would have to brace ourselves for some very hard information about how older Australians were faring when it came to aged-care facilities in this country. What we pointed out at the time, and what has been widely accepted, is that these challenges are ones that governments, our own, those that came before us, have been wrestling with for many years over many decades—that the things the royal commission is looking at are not just issues and failings that have occurred in more recent times, but over the last 20 years. What we have seen as aged care demands have increased on the system is that they have increased not just in number but in the nature of the care that has become necessary. For those of us who have had to make decisions about putting our own family, our own parents, into aged care, we have known that when we've done that we are putting them into pre-palliative care. We know it won't be long in many cases, and that was certainly the case in my own experience, in the decision that my family had to make, that my brother and I and my mother had to make when my father went into residential aged care. So I don't accept the interjections coming from those opposite and I would ask them to show some respect on this very personal, sensitive issue.</para>
<para>When we make those decisions, we know—and the aged-care sector knows—that they are having to deliver a much higher level of acute care today than was the case 10 years ago or 20 years ago. That means the demands are greater, and that means the actions need to be greater. That's why our government has continued to increase funding in aged care by more than $1 billion every year. We will continue to do that, and we will do more. You will see more in the budget and you will see more in next year's budget. Just as people have seen in every statement now, going back several years, there will be increased places made available, particularly in in-home aged care. It is a challenging area and we must show respect for the dignity of people who are living in residential aged-care facilities, or wherever they are receiving our care. And that is our commitment to the Australian people.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Vaccine</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs WICKS</name>
    <name.id>241590</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Health. Will the minister update the House on the Morrison government's investment in vaccine research and development, including the molecular clamp being developed by the University of Queensland?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I think the member for Robertson, who has been a great advocate for medical research—in particular, with regard to the development of the new Central Coast campus for medical research in her own area.</para>
<para>I want to welcome as a sign of hope, not just for Australians but for people around the world, the latest findings from the University of Queensland in regard to the development of the molecular clamp vaccine candidate. These are what are known as preclinical trial findings, and they were announced and released today. What they show is that the early testing indicates that antibodies are being developed and the virus is being neutralised. I just want to repeat that: antibodies are being developed and the virus is being neutralised. That is what we seek with a vaccine. That is what gives hope and that is what gives protection. That is the process—whether we are dealing with smallpox, measles, polio or so many other conditions over the course of the last century—which has allowed us to offer transformative hope and medical outcomes.</para>
<para>The next thing that occurred was that phase 1 clinical trials began in July. Those phase 1 clinical trials, for which we don't have the data yet, are about establishing the safety of this vaccine. We are hopeful that the vaccine candidate, the molecular clamp, will be successful in those. All of the early indications are positive. That is why this government, through an independent assessment process, has provided $5 million of Medical Research Future Fund investment. It's part of a much broader approach—the vaccine strategy which the Prime Minister announced last week. Firstly, there is research, for which there is $358 million available for vaccines, preventions and treatments. Secondly, there is direct procurement. We've already reached the first agreement in regard to AstraZeneca and the first stage of that, which was announced last week, for whole-of-population vaccines supply in this nation. Thirdly, there is the international coalition—the work with Gavi and the Covax Facility. Funding was announced today for Australia to assist less-developed countries in our region to have access to this international outcome. It was an act of national commitment to our own region. Finally, there is the development within our own nation, through CSL, of production facilities—production in Australia, for Australians.</para>
<para>So we welcome today's announcement by the University of Queensland that the molecular clamp is making real progress in helping to fight coronavirus and give Australians hope and protection.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms OWENS</name>
    <name.id>E09</name.id>
    <electorate>Parramatta</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. The Productivity Commission revealed older Australians with high-care needs in New South Wales are waiting almost three years for a home-care package. Did the Prime Minister's decision to cut $1.7 billion from aged care leave these older Australians better or worse off?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I've already addressed the misleading statement that has been made by those opposite regarding funding and what ABC Fact Check actually demonstrated on issues relating to where there were integrity matters within the aged-care sector, of overpayments. Despite that and those measures that the government introduced, the funding for aged care was increased by $1 billion and has continued to be increased by $1 billion—in fact, more than that—every single year. One of the most significant areas where we've continued to increase funding has been in the area of in-home aged-care places. As I said before, in-home aged-care places, under our government, have risen from around 60,000 when we came to government to over 150,000 now, and we're going to keep increasing those places as we go forward, as we did immediately after we received the interim report of the royal commission, when we immediately put a further 10,000 places into the in-home aged-care network.</para>
<para>We will keep increasing our funding in aged care, in residential aged care and in in-home aged care. I invite those opposite to support those increases and to support the reforms that I believe will be necessary when it comes to aged care in the future, just as we, when we were in opposition, supported the Labor Party. The shadow minister for emissions reduction will recall when he worked with the opposition members at that time to introduce important changes in aged care. I would hope that, when we deal with the royal commission into aged care, we might be able to deal with it in a similarly cooperative fashion and that aged care will not be used for political purposes.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Vocational Education and Training</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
    <electorate>Lindsay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is supporting training and skills as part of our plan to drive Australia's economic recovery?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the hardworking member for Lindsay. I know that she is very proactive in promoting local businesses in her electorate and assisting them with their skills training so that she can create opportunities, particularly for young people, in Western Sydney and in her electorate of Lindsay.</para>
<para>This week is National Skills Week. As Australia recovers from the economic impacts of COVID-19, supporting a skilled workforce has never been more important. Our government—</para>
<para>An opposition member interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Don't start. Just don't start. Our government are committed to ensuring that we make the skills sector more responsive to industry need, more flexible and more attractive to potential students of all ages. For too long, skills training has been viewed as the second-class citizen, the second-rate option.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You ripped $1.2 billion out of skills.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Members on my left!</para>
<para class="italic">Ms Plibersek interjecting —</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Sydney is warned!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We recognise how important skills are going to be for the future and to lead us in this recovery. We need to make sure that we are supporting businesses to help them to produce the pipeline of skilled workers that we need, because that is going to assist them as they come through this crisis. We are investing over $6.5 billion to keep apprentices in jobs, to help out-of-work Australians to reskill, to promote vocational training and to fill skills shortages.</para>
<para>Let me take you through just some of the ways that we are helping that to occur. We're partnering with states and territories to establish a $1 billion JobTrainer fund, to rapidly provide more Australians with access to free or low-cost training places in areas of identified skills needs. The JobTrainer fund is going to create almost 350,000 training places, starting from next month, to help upskill and retrain school leavers and jobseekers. This fund targets training that is going to give people the best opportunity of getting a job in the future and provide the skills that businesses truly need. There are many things that we are doing as a government, and I've just gone through some of them, but it is important that we recognise how significant it will be to our future to make sure that we have the skilled workforces that industry need right across Australia. We have done a lot of work in the vocational education sector to rebuild the sector, and we are now turbocharging it with JobTrainer.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MULINO</name>
    <name.id>132880</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. On Monday I asked about a 95-year-old resident at the Kalyna Care aged-care facility who had ants crawling from her open wounds. The royal commission report called <inline font-style="italic">Neglect</inline> drew attention to the inadequate prevention and management of wounds, leading to septicaemia and death. Does the Prime Minister take full responsibility for the consequence of his $1.7 billion cut to aged care?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Once again, I reject the assertion that is made by those opposite, because aged-care funding under our government has increased by $1 billion every year. In fact, it's more than that; it's $1.2 billion each year.</para>
<para>Yesterday I had the opportunity to respond to the member's question and I added further to the answer in relation to Kalyna Care and what led to that outbreak and the actions the government took in relation to that outbreak. I can provide further details to the member, should he wish to receive them, outside of the chamber, because I won't delay the chamber with the extensive information we have in relation to that particular facility.</para>
<para>In all cases, we will continue to increase our support and funding for aged-care facilities, be they residential aged-care facilities, as required, or in-home care facilities. We will continue to increase the number of places available and continue to invest in expanding the workforce in the aged-care sector, where there are significant demands. The demands will only grow, as will be the case for the disability-care sector, where we have to build a very big and very substantial workforce.</para>
<para>One of the things we're doing right now is ensuring that, as we are going through this COVID-19 recession and this COVID-19 crisis, we will be using those places that we have available and that we're creating through the JobTrainer program, which the minister was just referring to, to train more and more people to be able to move from one sector where they might be working now. In fact, many of those working in the hospitality side of the aviation sector are being retrained to go and work in the care sector, whether that be in the aged-care sector or the disability-care sector. There'll be opportunities as we go even through the difficult processes of a recession to see more workers go into the areas of employment that will be available in aged care as well as in-home care and disability care. It will be a key demand for people to come into those jobs and provide that support. We will continue to pursue those strategies to address the very issues that the royal commission have already started to identify. As they identify other issues and as their recommendations come forward, we will be able to consider those fully in the budget for next year. In the meantime, the Treasurer, when he hands down the budget in October, will also be addressing even more pressing and immediate needs in the aged-care sector, as we have already done so in relation to COVID, with more than $1 billion already committed in our COVID response to aged care.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Small Business</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VASTA</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
    <electorate>Bonner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is providing critical support to small businesses to help drive Australia's economic recovery as we come out of the other side of the corona pandemic?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bonner for his question. He understands small businesses, because he has owned and operated a small business, just as I have and just as many people on this side of the House have. We understand from firsthand experience how challenging it is to run a small business. It's because of that understanding and that firsthand experience that our government has understood the enormous difficulties and challenges that businesses, particularly small businesses, have faced due to the restrictions and the disruptions that have been brought about through the COVID-19 pandemic.</para>
<para>Without a doubt, small businesses are the engine room of our economy. Throughout this crisis they have demonstrated agility, they have demonstrated innovation and they have shown enormous determination to get through this crisis. Whether that's through pivoting to a new type of production, whether it's taking their business online in a very short space of time or whether it's modifying their work practices so that they continue to operate in a COVID-safe environment, they have done what has been required of them so that they can adapt to live and work in this COVID environment. They've done that because it is essential to their survival to do so.</para>
<para>We have backed them with some very practical programs such as the JobKeeper program, which so far has meant that over $40 billion has flowed to almost a million businesses with over 3½ million employees. That's giving them the certainty and confidence that they need to stay in business. I'm sure that the member for Bonner, like every member in this place, has had local business owners tell him what a lifeline JobKeeper has been for them and how it has done exactly what it was intended to do, which was to help businesses retain their staff and to keep their doors open. There are a number of other measures that we have put in place, including tax measures to boost cash flow. That's delivered about $20 billion in support. Our COVID resource hub which we have established has had about five million views since March, and we've responded to over 65,000 direct inquiries.</para>
<para>Small business is in the coalition government's DNA, and we back them all the way. Common sense, throughout this, must prevail, and I can assure our hardworking small businesses that we will be rolling up our sleeves and doing all that we can to keep them working every single day, because Australia is open for business. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Northern Territory: Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SNOWDON</name>
    <name.id>IJ4</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, sadly, the Productivity Commission has revealed that four out of five older Territorians are not having their care needs met. This rate's doubled since your cuts to aged care. Prime Minister, do you take any responsibility for the $1.7 billion cuts to aged care and the impact that they have had on older Territorians, which has left them a lot worse off? What are you going to do about it?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Once again, what is put forward by the member opposite in relation to the funding of aged care is not correct. It misrepresents completely, as I've already outlined to the House. I'll ask the Minister for Health to respond further.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In adding to the Prime Minister's answer, I think simple facts will help address the question. When we came to government, there was an approximate budget of $13 billion for aged care. That has now grown, in the year just completed, to almost $22 billion and to $23 billion, $24 billion and $25 billion over the course of the forward estimates. Most significantly, what we've also seen, as part of that, is the growth in home care from, as the Prime Minister said, 60,000 packages to 164,000 packages over the course of this budget—from 60,000 to 164,000 at the end of the current forward estimates period. That's an increase of 150 per cent. There were some comments before: 'Gosh, the population has continued to age.' With all of these figures—home care and residential care, both in terms of places and in terms of funding—overall aged-care funding has grown at a significantly faster rate than the rate at which older Australians have increased.</para>
<para>The reason we've done this is that we have realised that that which was there before us was inadequate. That's why we are nearly doubling the funding over the course of our time in government compared with what it was under the previous government. That's a commitment that has entailed very serious ongoing work from the Expenditure Review Committee and from the cabinet and others. It's meant that in 2020, for example, we've provided more than $1 billion in funding to assist older Australians in aged care during the COVID-19 pandemic. What we've been able to do is invest $3 billion since the 2018-19 budget to provide an additional 50,000 home-care packages. I might draw an interesting comparison here, though. Given the opportunity to invest only a year ago, how much did the opposition invest in new home-care places? Zero. As they went to the election, how much did the opposition invest in new residential care places? Zero. So for all of this discussion, at a time when the Prime Minister had called a royal commission, had highlighted the importance of this issue and had emphasised the importance with the investment in residential care and home-care places, there was nothing from the opposition.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Industry</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONNELLY</name>
    <name.id>282984</name.id>
    <electorate>Stirling</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. Will the minister outline to the House how the Morrison government is creating jobs in the defence industry to support our economic recovery as we come out through the other side of the COVID-19 pandemic?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's always a pleasure to get a question from the member for Stirling. I want to thank him for his service to our nation and also thank him for his passion and interest in Australia's defence industry.</para>
<para>This morning, the Prime Minister and I had the pleasure of travelling to Datapod in Fyshwick together with the Minister for Defence, where we met—and I'm sure the Prime Minister would agree—some very, very impressive systems engineers. This is a great credit to Datapod and a great credit to those young people who've got, they tell me, their 'gem' job—it's the job of their dreams—so congratulations to them. Whilst we were there, we had the pleasure of announcing our government's $1 billion jobs and recovery plan for defence industry. Proudly, that will create around 4,000 new Australian jobs.</para>
<para>This package includes around half a billion dollars of further investment in estate and infrastructure. What's important about this package is that the majority of this work will be done in regional Australia, with a great focus on those areas that have been impacted by the bushfires. A couple of good examples—out at HMAS <inline font-style="italic">Albatross</inline> at Nowra and also out at RAAF Base East Sale in Gippsland. During the coronavirus, many of the bases' major contractors had issues with getting human resourcing materials across state borders. That enabled the local tradies and the local contractors, those regional contractors, to get opportunities that they ordinarily wouldn't have got. So this half a billion dollars is critically important for those tradies who are still trying to get ahead, who've been impacted by bushfires. This is going to be an incredible injection for those local regions. It's great news for them.</para>
<para>In more good news, the package also includes an increase to a number of defence skilling and innovation grant programs. In particular, there is what we call the SADI grant program, Skilling Australia's Defence Industry, and we've increased that from $4 million a year to $17 million a year. This is important because we need to continue to develop our defence industry skills for Australia. We need to help businesses who want to get into defence industry. We need to give them the skills they need, even just to tender for that work. We need to make sure that those individuals who want to transition from one career or one industry into defence industry get that opportunity, like ex-Qantas or like ex-Virgin technicians who are looking for a long career with maintaining our aircraft. There are great opportunities for them.</para>
<para>As I've said in the House here a number of times, our government has continued to back defence industry, in particular with the payments of invoices. Since March, we've paid 190,000 invoices, valued at $15 billion—$11 billion of that has been paid early. We continue to back Australians. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COLLINS</name>
    <name.id>HWM</name.id>
    <electorate>Franklin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. The Productivity Commission has revealed that complaints about the quality of aged care rose by more than 50 per cent in the two years before the pandemic. Did the Prime Minister's decision to cut $1.7 billion from aged care leave frail and vulnerable older Australians better or worse off?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm very pleased to answer this. One of the things that we have done is to establish the first ever Aged Care Quality and Safety Commissioner. This is an important role designed precisely to ensure that we are investigating the situations of individuals, that we are allowing for overall quality control. This was something which was done on our watch, in our time, to ensure that there is oversight and that there is visitation; there have been over 620 visits during the course of this pandemic alone.</para>
<para>In addition to that we have established and put in place the National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator Program. That, so far, has already established indicators and put in place indicators which measure pressure injuries, use of physical restraint and unplanned weight loss in particular—so a focus precisely on issues in relation to nourishment and care. There are further elements being developed right now in relation to falls and fractures, and all of these are in line with the actions reducing misuse of medicines in aged-care settings which we have taken with regard to the budget.</para>
<para>More broadly and more generally, as I said earlier and as the Prime Minister has said, we have gone from a $13 billion investment in aged care under the previous government to a projected $25.444 billion investment in the final year of the current forward estimates. The average increase has been $1 billion and more, and what we are seeing at the moment is that being put into place.</para>
<para>With regard to home care packages, I think it is worth emphasising that there were 60,000 home care packages under the previous government and that that has now grown to 150,000, and will grow to 164,000 over the course of the current forward estimates. The elderly population has not doubled in that time, but our funding has more than doubled; our funding has close to tripled, and the places have more than doubled. So it is very important to understand, on the opposition's own terms, that the ratio of places to elderly people is dramatically higher under us. And that does lead to increased quality of care. That does lead to the passionate commitment that we have to supporting elder Australians being put into place.</para>
<para>Every day we fight for these things because we believe in them. That's why we've invested, that's why we've more than doubled the places, that's why we've almost tripled the funding, that's why we've increased the ratios—all of these things coupled with the royal commission, the cop on the beat. The quality indicators are about saving lives and protecting lives. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. Will the minister update the House on how the gas-led recovery supports the Morrison government's plan to create jobs and secure affordable and reliable energy?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:52</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. He knows we are absolutely focused on delivering affordable, reliable gas for hardworking Australians, including in his electorate of Forde. He knows that an affordable, reliable supply of gas is crucial to powering our way to recovery, job creation and the investment we need. He also knows that gas keeps the wheels of industry turning, including in his electorate.</para>
<para>Even before COVID struck, we were seeing significant reductions in gas prices at the wholesale level—42 per cent reductions—and we have seen further reductions since then. It has recently been confirmed by reports from the AER, the Australian Energy Regulator, and the ACCC, and they both point out that this is helping to put downward pressure on wholesale electricity prices. Again, before COVID struck there was a 40 per cent reduction in wholesale electricity prices.</para>
<para>At the same time, we know gas provides the firm power necessary to balance the record levels of investments we are seeing in solar and wind. Indeed, last year we saw a record level of investment in solar and wind—6.3 gigawatts of investment last year, $9 billion. The Clean Energy Regulator is expecting to see similar levels of investment this year. Far from competing with renewables, gas complements those renewables by helping to stabilise the grid and reduce emissions at the same time. Gas also provides that critical feedstock for industries like chemicals, like fertiliser for agriculture, like plastics for PPE—essential industries for this country.</para>
<para>There is more to do. We need to see those low spot prices, short-term prices and the lower international prices being passed through into longer-term contracts for their customers. Our competitive advantage as a nation has been, for many years, reliant on low-cost, reliable energy, and it is essential that we see our local manufacturers getting access to those longer-term contracts. We also need to see a strong supply of gas. We have seen a strong supply of gas in Queensland. We need to see in it the southern states. That's why we have entered into a state energy deal with the New South Wales government that includes a 70 petajoule commitment to gas in a market of 120. That will mean further projects and further supply in the southern states, which is essential for this country. When it comes to gas, we, unlike those opposite, know exactly where we stand. Unlike those opposite we are committed to the strong, reliable, affordable supply of gas necessary to create jobs coming out of COVID-19.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. The government's report on the deadly COVID outbreak at Newmarch House said families reported weight loss, dehydration, pressure sores and increases in urinary tract and skin infections amongst fragile residents. Why hasn't the Prime Minister taken full responsibility for the consequences of his $1.7 billion cut to aged care?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. I have already addressed the misleading remarks that he has presented, again. It would seem that the opposition that is being presented here, the Labor Party that is being presented here, is just an outdated version of what was rejected by the people at the last election. They continue to go forward and put these false things forward, just as they did before the last election. And here they are again, doing exactly the same thing.</para>
<para>But to address the serious issue of the Newmarch House report, the Commonwealth government has already made significant changes on how providers are experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks, as a result of what was done with the report into Newmarch:</para>
<quote><para class="block">To ensure the earliest possible identification of all COVID-19 cases, the immediate and repeated testing of all residents and staff should be implemented as soon as a single case is identified …</para></quote>
<para>Yesterday, I went through quite a number of cases in questions raised by those opposite about how that initial testing was done immediately after the Commonwealth was notified. The Older Persons Advocacy Network is now automatically engaged at every outbreak to provide access to advocacy services for providers, residents and their families, as I indicated in response to the cases that we saw yesterday when I was referring to matters that had occurred in Victoria. The department, and now the Victorian Aged Care Response Centre in Victoria, provide communication support to providers in the event of an outbreak, including funding for that work, which was also one of the lessons from the Newmarch report. The Commonwealth has expanded the number of surge workforce providers available for services directly impacted by COVID-19—for example the RCSA—and the department is engaging greater support for new staff, including with practical infection control, including support from AUSMAT members.</para>
<para>There were many lessons from the Newmarch report. Those lessons were actually discussed openly amongst premiers and chief ministers and myself, and it has worked its way into the response that has been provided both by the Commonwealth and the Victorian state government, presently, in dealing with the challenges that are there. That has enabled the number of facilities that have been identified as significantly impacted and are on that category 2 watch list, as it is known, to be reduced from 13 down to three. I can report again, based on the report I had this morning, that those three centres in Victoria remain in a stable condition, albeit they are under a close watch.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Mining</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr O'DOWD</name>
    <name.id>139441</name.id>
    <electorate>Flynn</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia—the place to be! Will the minister outline to the House how the McCormack-Morrison government is committed to the resources sector and explain why programs like Exploring for the Future are so important to job creation and securing Australia's economic recovery?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for Flynn for his question. I was up in the honourable member's area in recent weeks, and on the ground Ken O'Dowd is known as 'the member for coal'. He's known as someone who actually stands up for the resources sector and the jobs that it creates.</para>
<para>We know that regional Australia has been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic. But we know that they are resilient, we know that they are looking to recover and we know that the resources sector will be an enormous part of what this country does into the future. Over 240,000 Australians are still employed in the resources sector. In the member for Flynn's electorate, anywhere from Gladstone to Emerald, from Emerald to Taroom, and right across, they know the resources sector is keeping the lights on in this country. They are the ones out there working hard, all the way through the challenges of coronavirus.</para>
<para>Our JobMaker plan is for the long term. Our JobMaker plan is for a secure future for all Australians—for all Australians. This is why we continue to invest in the resources sector. This is why we on this side of the House actually support the resources sector—whether it's coal, thermal or met; whether it's gas; whether it's gold; or whether it's critical minerals. We actually support the people that work in this sector. We continue to support them.</para>
<para>Recently I announced $125 million for the Exploring for the Future fund. And why is that important? Because we know it works and, in the future, it will help create jobs. We know how successful the first Exploring for the Future was. In fact, on the back of the data produced through the Exploring for the Future program, over an area of about 130,000 square kilometres—that's twice the size of Tasmania, I'm advised—some 16 companies are out there doing exploration, looking for the next big thing. If just one of those 16 hits paydirt, there's an expectation they could create over 1,100 new jobs and up to $2½ billion worth of benefit to the local and national economy. So this is a very important investment for the future of our country, but it does require support for the resources sector from not only governments but also, in particular, those opposite. We need to be united in what will drive our country forward. We need to support the sectors which continue to support our nation and its growth, particularly when it comes to employing people like apprentices.</para>
<para>I've been in Cairns and Gladstone and Townsville and Emerald, and in Cloncurry and Mount Isa and all the way from Goondiwindi to Moree to Dubbo to Wagga to Orange in recent weeks, and the people of regional Australia are resilient. They know they will recover. They know the resources sector, the ag sector and others will be the backbone of our economy, as they have been over a long period of time. It is people like Ken O'Dowd and other members in regional areas who are out there fighting for their sectors, fighting for jobs and fighting for the resources sector—and long may it be so, because that is how we'll recover.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. I refer to comments yesterday by the Liberal MP for Monash, Russell Broadbent, who said he'd sounded warnings about the aged-care sector for years 'but I was ignored completely'. If the Prime Minister won't listen to Labor and won't listen to his own royal commissioners, will he at least listen to his own backbench and acknowledge that his cuts of $1.7 billion have contributed to the problem?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I note the comments made by the Leader of the Opposition referring to the comments by the member for Monash. The member for Monash, like, I think, all members of this place, feels passionately about the care that is provided to elderly Australians, and he has been passionate about that for as long as I have known him—from my very first speech in this place, my maiden speech, as we sat together on those opposition benches. I've always known the member for McMillan, as he was known then, as someone who speaks his mind and speaks passionately in our party room, and he will always stand up for his constituents in his community, and that's why, I believe, he has been returned to this place on so many occasions. In fact, back in 2017 he raised many of these issues and stood down from two parliamentary positions because he believed that his issues needed to be addressed. This was a significant factor, I can tell you, Mr Speaker, after I became Prime Minister. Because of the many times I'd heard Russell Broadbent get to his feet on this, I believed we needed to have a royal commission into aged care. I know that the member for Monash was very pleased to see that we introduced that royal commission into aged care.</para>
<para>The member for Monash said 'successive governments over 30 years', referring to the failings in aged care over 30 years. And he knows that. His comments reflect the frustration he has had over a long career in this parliament. The challenges we have to deal with in aged care address, and will need to address, failings over a long period of time by governments of all persuasions. These failings have occurred under private sector operators, not-for-profit sector operators and, indeed, public sector operators. In fact, the royal commission followed the terrible events that we saw at the Oakden aged-care facility in South Australia, which was a publicly run facility. Whether it's public, private or not-for-profit is not the issue. The issue is ensuring that we get the funding to where it needs to go and that we continue to train the workforce and continue to lift the standards and ensure the clinical training is there so that people who are in aged-care facilities get the care and the dignity and respect they deserve. That is something that the member for Monash and I agree passionately on, together.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Environment</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms HAMMOND</name>
    <name.id>80072</name.id>
    <electorate>Curtin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for the Environment. Will the minister update the House on how the Morrison government is streamlining environmental approvals to fast-track economic recovery while maintaining strong environmental protections?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Curtin for her question and congratulate her on her outstanding start on the floor of this parliament as an educator, vice-chancellor of Notre Dame university and someone passionate about young people and their learning.</para>
<para>As the Prime Minister said, we're working hard with our states and territories to focus our energy and our efforts throughout this pandemic not on wasteful process but on positive results. As part of this, the national cabinet agreed that all states and territories would move to single-touch environmental approvals, underpinned by national environmental standards. We're also fast-tracking assessments for 15 priority infrastructure projects, without reducing environmental protections. These 15 projects are worth more than $72 billion in public and private investment and they'll support more than 66,000 direct and indirect jobs. They include key WA infrastructure projects like the Metronet rail project, which will support growth of Perth metropolitan region, and Main Roads projects in regional WA like the Tonkin Highway, the Bunbury Outer Ring Road and the Albany Ring Road. The WA government is keen for these projects to progress, as are our Western Australian members like the member for Curtin, the member for Canning and the member for Forrest.</para>
<para>We know that WA will be one of the first takers of our single-touch model. Earlier this month, Premier McGowan made very strong statements in support, saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">This agreement will pave the way for important job-creating projects, while maintaining the highest environmental standards.</para></quote>
<para>He was most enthusiastic. The environment minister, Stephen Dawson, said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has never been a more important time to facilitate economic activity, while safeguarding the environment for future generations.</para></quote>
<para>I look forward to similar support from the federal Labor Party for our single-touch approvals. In fact, yesterday the Leader of the Opposition was thumping the table in support of WA Labor, moving motions to suspend standing orders, saying, 'We stand with WA Labor.' And so they should stand with their Labor counterparts, both premiers and chief ministers.</para>
<para>We're doing more. We're halving the backlog of outstanding decisions. We're improving assessment times. We're delivering quick and robust decisions. But it's not just about faster approvals; it's about better approvals, with strong protections for the environment. After this year's bushfires, we're taking a careful approach. We're working closely with proponents to ensure that, whether we need to secure additional offsets for species protection or maintain the high-quality habitat that is so important post fires, we're protecting the environment, protecting jobs and protecting our economic future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. Why won't the Prime Minister take full responsibility for the consequences of his $1.7 billion cut to aged care, which made older Australians worse off before the pandemic and left residents of aged-care homes more vulnerable to the deadly COVID virus?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Once again, the Leader of the Opposition comes forward and says there were cuts in funding to aged care. When funding goes up every year, that means there's more funding each year. When there's a cut to funding, it means there's less funding. These issues may be beyond the wit and wisdom of the Leader of the Opposition and his apprentice shadow Treasurer, with the training wheels still on, to understand—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCormack</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The sorcerer's apprentice!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The sorcerer's apprentice, the Deputy Prime Minister refers to him as!</para>
<para>When funding goes up every year by a billion dollars and more, that's a good thing. That is what has been happening with aged-care funding in this country. That's why the number of in-home aged-care places has risen from 60,000 to more than 150,000 under our government and will continue to increase. That's why the number of residential aged-care places and the funding for residential aged-care places have increased under our government. That is why we have put in place the aged-care quality commissioner. That is why we have continued to support reforms in the aged-care sector and, in particular—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Point of order: the question went to the $1.7 billion cut. The Prime Minister has to address the $1.7 billion cut that's in MYEFO and—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Prime Minister is in order.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I couldn't have been more relevant to the misleading remarks made by the opposition, which are exactly the same misleading remarks that were made by the previous Leader of the Opposition. He probably did it with a bit more credibility than this one. But what is true is that the government has been increasing its funding for aged care, as I and the health minister, in response to myriad questions today, have been able to demonstrate to this House and the Australian people. There is more funding. There is more than a billion dollars in additional funding, on top of what I've referred to, to go to our COVID response. That is why, despite there being extreme and severe impacts in four facilities in Victoria, and in Newmarch House and Dorothy Henderson Lodge—what happened in Victoria was even worse in those four centres; it was unacceptable. The government has made that very clear. I, indeed, have issued an apology in relation to those four facilities, and that's what's called taking responsibility. What the Leader of the Opposition does seem to have here is a blind spot for what is happening in Victoria. He seems to be the only person in this country who thinks there has been no community outbreak of the coronavirus in Victoria. But that has had an impact right across Victoria, which has got people locked up in their homes at the moment. They are under severe stress and strain as a result of what has occurred in Victoria. We have worked hard to mitigate the impact of that in the aged-care sector—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister's time has concluded. The Leader of the Opposition is seeking to table a document?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I am—two documents, in fact: page 172 of MYEFO from the Treasurer in 2015-16, and page 101 of Budget Paper No. 2 for the 2016-17 budget, which says the government will achieve efficiencies—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The cuts are there.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, well. I won't even go to the Leader of the House. I've made it clear on numbers of occasions that, if they're parliamentary papers and freely available, I won't even ask for leave.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Agriculture Industry</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management. Will the minister please outline to the House the Morrison government's commitment to supporting the agricultural sector, including through enhancing trade opportunities and freight and providing freight assistance?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LITTLEPROUD</name>
    <name.id>265585</name.id>
    <electorate>Maranoa</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Grey for his question and acknowledge the rich and proud history that the electorate of Grey has in contributing to the agricultural sector. We should also be more broadly proud of our farmers. Despite fires, drought and flood, and now COVID, they continue to be able to put the best food and fibre on the shelves for us every day, as well as contribute last year more than $54 billion worth of exports. We'll continue to support agriculture's ambitious goal of being a $100 billion industry by 2030. There's renewed confidence for agriculture to achieve that, particularly with recent rains and looking at bumper winter harvests. It's important that we continue to understand and we put the environment around them. That's why we announced a further $2 billion to the Regional Investment Corporation to allow farmers to be able to get $2 million loans to restock and replant, with no interest and no repayments for two years. That allows them to repair their cashflow with no burden from banks. That's a huge saving to these farmers to get them back up on their feet and achieve that goal.</para>
<para>But, as we increase our production, it's important that we also understand that we put the environment around them in trade agreements. This government has secured many trade agreements, whether it be with China, Japan, Indonesia, the TPP-11 or, now, Indonesia, an agreement which came into effect only on 5 July. This is a significant trading partner just on our doorstep. We continue to pursue trade agreements with the EU and the UK to give our farmers the opportunity to spread their risk. That's what we'll continue to undertake to support the Australian agriculture sector and the regional communities that support it as well.</para>
<para>We've also wanted to make sure that we protect brand Australia. We've done that not just through our environment in biosecurity—$850 million to make sure that we keep pests and weeds away from destroying our brand of having the best product in the world—but now through wanting to be one of the most reliable exporters to our export partners around the world. We've created an International Freight Assistance Mechanism. We've understood that, with the reduction in the number of passenger flights that has come as a result of COVID-19, we have to make sure that we can get our high-end agricultural product into those key export markets to make sure those export partners know that we are reliable. But it also gives us a competitive advantage because, when we come out of COVID-19, our trading partners will know they can rely on Australian farmers more than anyone else in the world. This will be something that Australia will lead the world on, giving our farmers the leading edge. There's over $1.15 billion worth of agricultural product that will be going out on planes, committed already, and this program continues to show the demand for Australian exporters to send their product around the world. This is an investment in Australian agriculture, but it's an investment in our Australian economy as well.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Morrison</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Parliament House</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>While members are still here, I have a brief statement I'd like to make for members to hear, and it's with respect to the medical advice that I and the President of the Senate received about the wearing of masks. In doing so, I wish to correct the record with respect to a claim in <inline font-style="italic">The Australian</inline> today.</para>
<para>As honourable members would be aware, the President of the Senate and I have advised you that all of our decisions regarding restrictions and actions since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic have been based on advice received from the Office of the Chief Medical Officer. Last Friday, the advice we received regarding the wearing of masks was communicated to all building occupants, all members and the media. We said in that statement, amongst other things:</para>
<quote><para class="block">While recognising that the wearing of masks is not mandatory in the ACT, at the specific request of the Acting Chief Medical Officer and out of an abundance of caution, in the public common areas of Australian Parliament House everyone is recommended to wear a mask at all times.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">As an additional precaution the wearing of masks is encouraged in the presence of others, especially where physical distancing is not possible, and by those at increased risk of COVID-19.</para></quote>
<para>The article in <inline font-style="italic">The Australian</inline> today claims that according to a source:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the CMO wanted a mandatory memorandum for the sitting fortnight, but was overruled by the presiding officers.</para></quote>
<para>This statement is incorrect. To allow this to go uncorrected would be to suggest that the President of the Senate and I had not followed the medical advice. Further, it would suggest our statement to all of you, that we have always acted on medical advice, was not accurate.</para>
<para>To make it clear, we have followed the advice of the Chief Medical Officer at all times when it comes to measures being adopted in Parliament House. Finally, if medical advice was obtained that recommended mandating the wearing of masks here in Australian Parliament House, without that requirement being present in the rest of the ACT, the President and I would, of course, present that advice to both Houses.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORRISON</name>
    <name.id>E3L</name.id>
    <electorate>Cook</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the statement made by the Speaker, and I'm sure the opposition would join me. Having been involved through my office in facilitating the requested advice being made available to you and the President of the Senate, I can confirm absolutely—not that it requires, I suppose, anything from me to confirm the statements of the Speaker—on behalf of the government that the advice you have received and that you've referred is entirely as you stated it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Just to ensure an element of bipartisanship today, Mr Speaker, can I congratulate you and the President of the Senate not only on the work that you've done in attaining and sticking to the medical advice to the letter but also on the work that you and other staff of the parliament have done to make sure that the democratic process can take place this week and, indeed, in the budget session going forward. It is important for our nation that we are here and that we're able to undertake in our democratic deliberations, and that wouldn't have been possible without your leadership and the leadership of the President of the Senate.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the House. I know that the staff who have worked so hard will be very glad to hear that statement from the Leader of the Opposition.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PORTER</name>
    <name.id>208884</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>():</para>
<para>Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</title>
        <page.no>65</page.no>
        <type>MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19</title>
          <page.no>65</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have received a letter from the honourable member for McMahon proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The shortcomings of the Government's ongoing COVID-19 response.</para></quote>
<para>I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Listening to the government over recent days their political tactics have become clear. In order to distract from their shortcomings, particularly in relation to aged care, they launch partisan political attacks on state governments. Apparently we're all in this together until it suits the Prime Minister not to be. Apparently the national cabinet is an important non-partisan decision-making body until it suits the Prime Minister to put it in the bin and launch an attack on state premiers.</para>
<para>If the Morrison government really wants to have a debate about shortcomings in relation to COVID-19 we're happy to have it. Let's bring on a discussion about the respective responses of governments in Australia to COVID-19, because back when Dan Andrews and Gladys Berejiklian were suggesting that this needed to be taken more seriously, that we needed sharper lockdowns, that we needed more action, the Prime Minister was going to the football. That's what this Prime Minister was doing—sending the wrong messages to the Australian people when the premiers of the two largest states were sending different messages. Premier Berejiklian said it herself: 'Premier Andrews and I did talk and both of us had similar concerns representing the two largest states. We felt we had to act quickly and strongly and I'm glad we did.' She was right then, Premier Andrews was right then and Prime Minister Morrison was wrong then. If we want to have this discussion, let's have it.</para>
<para>This is a government which says we're all in it together unless you're from Western Australia, unless you're a premier trying to defend your borders, unless you're a premier trying to keep your state safe. Then this government cosies up with their preference buddy and launches an attack on Western Australians and the Western Australian government. They should be ashamed of themselves. They pulled out when it was too late, when the damage was already done.</para>
<para>At least Premier Palaszczuk, who was attacked as late as today in this chamber—it's only rhetorical, at least they're not taking her to court. When the Prime Minister and Treasurer said that Premier Palaszczuk should open her state's borders to Victoria she was right and they were wrong. They need to be reminded of that regularly. Premier Palaszczuk was correct. Premier McGowan is correct.</para>
<para>On this side we've supported all the premiers making the actions they've had to take—all the premiers, regardless of partisanship. They've had to take tough decisions. They've needed to know that we've got their backs, and we've given them that. The other side of politics has played partisan politics. When the nation needed leadership they got politics from them.</para>
<para>We'll have a discussion about shortcomings. When it comes to shortcomings none are greater for this government than aged care. As was outlined by my friend the member for Franklin very well yesterday, these are people who built Australia. These are people who raised us and our nation and who in their retirement just ask to be looked after, just ask to be kept safe, just ask to be kept healthy and just ask to be kept alive. And they've been let down.</para>
<para>Latest figures are that 335 have died on our watch as a parliament. It is one of the highest death rates as a proportion of COVID-19 in the world—as much as the Prime Minister might want to deny it, as much as the minister at the table just denied it then—as the royal commission heard. We entered this pandemic in aged care from a position of weakness. The government says, 'Of course elderly people are more exposed.' Yes, we agree. That's the point. That's why we needed to be better prepared. That's why we shouldn't have had the budget cuts which this Prime Minister imposed, as much as he denies it. That's why we need an aged-care minister who's up to the job. This Prime Minister showed a lack of judgement in appointing somebody who's not up to the job, who's not in the cabinet and who can't do the job that Australia requires of him.</para>
<para>We know that this government ignored the warnings. Newmarch House, where 19 people died, should have been a warning to this government. Counsel assisting put it well. He said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… there is reason to think that in the crucial months between the Newmarch House outbreak in April and mid-June a degree of self-congratulation and even hubris was displayed by the Commonwealth Government. Perhaps they were reflecting the general mood in the country that we were through it.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">…   …   …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The time between the two Sydney outbreaks and the increase in community transmission in Melbourne in June was an important period … What did the Commonwealth do to ensure that the lessons of the first two … outbreaks … were conveyed to the aged care sector. We say it's not enough.</para></quote>
<para>That's what counsel assisting says, and we agree. We'll have the debate about shortcomings. We'll have the debate about shortcomings on the vaccine.</para>
<para>This time last week the Prime Minister was out there congratulating himself on every morning TV and radio program, announcing that we had a deal, that Australia had secured a deal to get the vaccine. Well, it wasn't true then and it's not true now. There is no deal. Other countries have deals. The United Kingdom entered their first deal in mid-May, signed and sealed—not a letter of intent, not good intentions, not hopes, not aspirations but a signed deal. The United States, which I must say has not covered itself in glory in response to this pandemic, has, at least, secured six deals—six advance supply agreements for vaccines. The United Kingdom's got five, Japan's got three, Indonesia's got one, Brazil's got one, Mexico's got one, Argentina's got one. Australia's got zero. There have been more than four billion doses of the vaccines under development accounted for by these advance supply agreements. We haven't got any. We've got none. The Prime Minister says we're ahead of the pack. No, we're not. It's demonstrably untrue. We're behind the pack. And the Prime Minister says we're going to make it here, in Australia. He says we're going to manufacture it here, at CSL. This time last week, he said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">If this vaccine proves successful we will manufacture and supply vaccines straight away under our own steam and make it free for 25 million Australians.</para></quote>
<para>There's only one large company in Australia capable of making vaccines, CSL. What does CSL say? They say: 'Well, we'll do whatever we can to ensure Australia gets a vaccine. It may well be, though, that ultimately it comes from another source.' Fair enough. They're moving fast.</para>
<para>Australians just expect a bit of honesty from this government. Just tell us what you can do and what you can't do. Australians will cut you some slack, just as the opposition has cut you some slack. We want the government to succeed. We want the government to do well. We want the government to do what is necessary. We supported the government on the app. We provided more support for the app than the National Party supplied to the minister and to the government. We said: 'Okay. We'll take you on your word. We'll back you. We'll download it.' We encouraged Australians to download it. We're in the middle of a significant outbreak. Do you know how many contacts have been traced by the app that hadn't been found manually? According to the latest information it's 14. Fourteen cases have been traced that hadn't been traced manually. That's the last evidence before the COVID committee. The Prime Minister uses numbers to say, 'There've been many more than that.' 'It's been involved in finding others,' he said. It's been involved. That means they were found manually and then the app found them as well. As the member for Gellibrand very eloquently pointed out, it's like saying that we're involved in an AFL game when we turn up to watch it. It's been 'involved' in finding them. It's found 14 cases in the middle of a major pandemic. That is not good enough.</para>
<para>When it comes to mental health, that's an area of some bipartisanship. And I don't doubt the bona fides of those opposite and the good faith of those opposite to try and get a breakthrough in mental health. I wish they'd respond to the Productivity Commission report. I wish the minister would release the Productivity Commission report into mental health so we could look at it, so we could discuss it—not necessarily debate it—so we could pursue it. I wish the minister would respond in the October budget; he's indicated he won't be responding until next year.</para>
<para>When it comes to mental health in this pandemic, the government has extended the Medicare rebates for mental health consultations from 10 to 20—good—in Victoria—not good enough. This pandemic's impacts do not stop at the Murray River. There are people undergoing great strains and stress because of the economic impacts, because of concerns about the health impacts, because of concerns about the impacts on their families. People are in a very dire situation right across the country. I say to the minister in good faith, in all seriousness: do what you've done in Victoria for all Australians. All Australians are doing it tough. All Australians need extra help at this point. Extend the rebates for mental health consultations from 10 to 20 to every single Australian who needs them. Give every Australian access to pandemic leave, not just Tasmanians and Victorians. All Australians need that. That's an important matter of public health.</para>
<para>This government has started a partisan debate when it comes to the response. They've chosen to attack Premier Andrews, Premier McGowan and Premier Palaszczuk. We will stand with those premiers and the other premiers as well. We will support the actions they need. We want them to succeed. We want this government to succeed. We just wish they'd do a better job.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HUNT</name>
    <name.id>00AMV</name.id>
    <electorate>Flinders</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In a world with 23.8 million cases and 817,000 lives officially lost and no doubt countless more, in a pandemic the likes of which we have not seen for 100 years, all countries have faced great challenges. Few have met them like Australia. The people of Australia have been through a hardship unlike anything seen in the course of the lives of virtually any Australian—certainly those that have been in this country in the period since the Second World War.</para>
<para>We know 25,205 Australians have been diagnosed. We know that 549 Australians have lost their lives, as of the latest figures provided to me by the national incident centre before coming to question time today. At the same time we have been through a first wave, where eight out of eight states and territories were able to follow the plans put in place by the Commonwealth and were able to beat back this disease in a way that few countries in the world have. Since then, seven out of eight states and territories have continued to maintain that low or negligible level of community transmission. Today we saw five states and territories with zero community transmission, and one case in Queensland, five in New South Wales and 149 in Victoria.</para>
<para>As I said yesterday, what we've seen is that 95 per cent of the cases in Australia since 1 June have been in Victoria. Agonisingly, 99 per cent of the lives lost and, at present, 100 per cent of the cases in aged care are in one state, overwhelmingly in one city and overwhelmingly in one part of that city. What we see is what we said from the outset—that community transmission is the greatest threat to the nation, and containment of community transmission is the single greatest and indispensable defence.</para>
<para>Having said that, we set out from the outset with a containment plan and a capacity plan. Both of those elements, to flatten the curve and to boost the capacity, have four pillars. In particular, in relation to the containment plan, the border controls that we put in place have seen 2,270 positive cases identified in hotel quarantine. These are cases which would otherwise have escaped into the community, which would have ravaged the nation. We put in place border protections as early as 1 February, for which we were criticised by many, including the World Health Organization and China. But we did that because we wanted to take all steps possible to prevent community transmission.</para>
<para>In so doing, what we also put in place was a second pillar of testing. We have now had almost 5.9 million tests done within Australia. The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine identified Australia as maintaining one of the highest testing rates in the world. We're maintaining that as many parts of the world struggle. We fought every day to make sure that Australia had the testing supplies and the testing quality. Perhaps most importantly, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine identified us as having one of the world's most accurate testing regimes, and that has protected Australians.</para>
<para>The tracing has been strong and powerful in seven out of the eight states and territories. In particular, we brought the ADF in to assist Victoria with the tracing. Over 400 ADF personnel have been involved in adding rigour. One of the elements here is that seven million Australians have adopted the COVIDSafe app. I will read from a NSW Health press release of 1 August 2020. It's a document that has been on the public record for over three weeks now. In relation to the use of the app, the NSW Health department said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For one of the cases where NSW Health accessed the COVIDSafe App data, a previously unrecognised exposure date from a known venue, Mounties, was identified. This resulted in the identification of an additional 544 contacts. Two people in this group presented for testing and were subsequently confirmed to have COVID-19.</para></quote>
<para>Those two people could have created an entire Victoria—that's what the app has done. New South Wales, through its tracing regime, has been able to ensure that at least six events, which each could have been of the magnitude of the Victorian outbreak, have been traced to the ground. That has meant that we now have single figure community transmission outbreaks.</para>
<para>The distancing has been important but, in Victoria, the distancing has been agonising. We see the state locked down, with people confined to their homes and with curfews, distanced movements, required masks and compulsory shutting of businesses. They're actions that are extraordinary in a democratic regime. At the same time, the Leader of the Opposition talked about the parliament being opened here. The parliament is closed in Victoria. The Victorian parliament should reconvene and teleparliament, if they need it as we have, can assist them achieve that outcome. It's a sensible, practical measure. However, all of these things were supported by our capacity. Whilst we flattened the curve, with the two significant breaches in Victoria of the hotel quarantine scheme and the challenges they faced with their tracing, on which we are now helping to support after having endeavoured for a long period of time to have the ADF included, we are seeing progress there.</para>
<para>The capacity has been fundamental. That's capacity in terms of primary health. We now have over 26 million cases which have been done through telehealth. A system that was to be 10 years in the making was developed in 10 days. It was implemented to save and protect lives, of which the most significant element has been mental health support, along with our $78 million national mental health package, along with the $48 million national pandemic response mental health package, along with the $20 million investment nationally in mental health research and along with the specific Victorian actions that we have also taken in relation to mental health in Victoria.</para>
<para>Significantly, with regard to aged care, what we see in Australia is not just a billion dollar investment but the four great elements that we put in place over March and April. First, there was the creation of a $101 million surge workforce package to provide a surge workforce for the moments when there would be threats to a particular facility. Second, on 13 March there was the national public hospitals partnership to provide additional surge workforce and capacity. Third, on 31 March there was the historic private hospitals partnership, which has seen over 450 patients transferred to private hospitals from aged-care residents in Victoria alone. Fourth, there was the national testing capacity contract, which ensures that wherever there is a case in an aged-care facility every resident and every staff member is tested. This was developed and put in place in April. All of these four elements were put in place months and months ago to prepare for what might come, but it is being utilised now. With regard to our hospitals, we've seen an 89 per cent survival rate with the near quadrupling of ventilator capacity—there are just over 20 Australians on ventilation—and with the research elements, which I set out today.</para>
<para>I very specifically want to deal with one thing which was raised by the shadow minister, and that's in relation to the loss of life and the comparison internationally. I think it's very important to reaffirm that Australia has one of the lowest rates of loss of life in aged care of any of the countries for which we have data. We have a tragic figure—because every life matters, and every life lost is a cause of sorrow and grief—of 0.19 per cent of residents in aged care who have lost their lives. In Canada, that figure is 600 per cent higher on a per capita basis. What we see is that in France it's 1,300 per cent higher. We see that in Spain it's 1,400 per cent higher, in Italy and Ireland 1,800 per cent higher and in the UK almost 3,000 per cent higher. To look at it another way, in terms of residential care deaths per one million population over the age of 65, in Australia it's 82 residents, in Belgium 2,258, in Canada 1,100, in Ireland 1,600, in Italy 694, in Spain 1,073, in the UK 1,364 and in the United States 1,280. All of this shows that lives have been saved on a grand scale in Australia. In a pandemic, lives have tragically been lost as well. So we will fight to make sure that the plans we put in place continue to save lives and protect lives.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms KEARNEY</name>
    <name.id>LTU</name.id>
    <electorate>Cooper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At the start of this pandemic, the Prime Minister loved to parrot the phrase, 'We're all in this together.' As someone who's spent my life working to the values of solidarity, I didn't quite believe that the PM could manage the 'we're all in this together' vibe, and yesterday the Prime Minister's true colours were on show as he and his fellow ministers spent the day attacking the people of Victoria. This has been on show again today, just now from the Minister for Health. My office has been flooded by emails from angry and despairing people who are affronted by this ugly display. The whole country knows this is nothing more than a blame-shifting tactic, but it is one that cuts to the very heart of every person who's gone through the hell that is having a loved one in aged care or, indeed, having tragically lost a loved one in aged care.</para>
<para>One of my constituents, Julie Game, emailed me just this morning to say the following: 'Our Prime Minister should not blame Melbourne and Victoria for this virus. Scott Morrison needs to remember that Victorians are still Australians. We don't need the blame factor. We don't need our Prime Minister and senior coalition politicians pushing us into a corner and treating us like naughty children. Our health workers are under extreme pressure and our health system is struggling. Part of the reason for this is the ongoing mismanagement of our aged-care system. This mismanagement has allowed the virus to impact dramatically on the aged-care system, which is largely controlled by the federal government. But our Prime Minister seems unable to take responsibility for this.' She goes on to say: 'Aged care has been under scrutiny for many years and the issues have been inadequately resolved. Our Prime Minister needs to show support and leadership to all Australians as we battle this pandemic. "We are all in this together, except for Victorians," seems to be the new catchphrase, and it's very disappointing.' Julie, I couldn't agree more.</para>
<para>There has been no bigger shortcoming than the government's complete failure in ensuring the safety and wellbeing of older Australians in residential aged care. The Prime Minister tried to blame Victorians for these tragic deaths, saying community transmission was to blame and that he could not put a special force field around aged-care facilities. Well, I'm here to tell you that that is exactly what he should have done. What else was he supposed to be doing other than putting a force field of well-skilled staff with plenty of PPE, ready to fight infection control, around nursing homes? Instead, we know that nurses were having to choose which hand to put a single glove on. The government ignored recommendations about how big the surge workforce needed to be, leaving aged-care facilities chronically understaffed. We know that only one in five workers undertook PPE training and that the government failed to prevent staff having to work between multiple facilities. The Prime Minister's plan was nothing more than guidelines offered up by an incompetent minister who never acted with the urgency this sector needed, and it failed. It's a nonsense and an absolute insult to say otherwise.</para>
<para>As of yesterday, 335 aged-care residents had died of COVID-19 in aged-care facilities, and there are now 1,100 active cases. They're not just numbers; they're people with lives, families and grandkids.</para>
<para>In my electorate, I had two aged-care facilities with COVID outbreaks. The calls and emails from constituents with loved ones in these facilities have broken my heart. How many of those deaths were preventable? How many of the coronavirus outbreaks in residential aged care were preventable? If only the Prime Minister and the Minister for Aged Care had heeded the warning calls—and there have been so many. The shadow health minister reminded us of this—the counsel assisting the royal commission and what they said about the outbreaks in Newmarch House and Dorothy Henderson Lodge, and the degree of self-congratulation and hubris displayed by this government. 'What did the Commonwealth do to ensure the lessons of the two outbreaks?' asked the royal commission. Not enough.</para>
<para>The aged-care sector has been failing for some time, and the providers in aged care have, unfortunately, shown they are not all to be trusted to do the right thing by their charges. One only has to listen to the tragic findings of the royal commission to know that. The title of the royal commission's interim report was <inline font-style="italic">Neglect</inline>. 'Neglect' is not a word that anyone relying on the aged-care system wants to hear. <inline font-style="italic">Neglect</inline> outlines the litany of long-term systemic problems that this government has failed to fix during its seven-year term. We need mandatory minimum staffing levels, minimum skill mix of professionals, proper access to training, decent pay, recognition of skills, transparency of funding, a regulator with teeth and the rights of residents. The government has failed to act on any of these key issues for our most vulnerable, our elderly. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr EVANS</name>
    <name.id>61378</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise on behalf of the people of Brisbane to place on the record the Brisbane community's support for the Morrison government's policies and leadership during the global COVID-19 crisis. In this pandemic, we face a challenge unlike anything this country has seen in the lifetime of almost any of us. In the face of this rapidly evolving global situation, and in response to some of the unfortunate commentary we've heard proffered over recent days, I think it's worth pointing out once again that there is no playbook for a once-in-100 years pandemic like COVID. There aren't simple answers to the enormous challenges posed to the health, jobs and prosperity of millions of Australians by this insidious virus; we wish there were. To understand this, we need only look at the tragic experiences of so many other countries around the world to which we would normally compare ourselves.</para>
<para>We should treat with some scepticism those who come into this place implying that there are silver bullet solutions on offer or that there is some set of magical policy prescriptions that would result in zero harm, whether on an economic basis or a health basis. And we should extend that scepticism to any who come into this place attempting to sow the politics of division when Australians are asking us to leave our differences at the door and work together to protect lives and livelihoods.</para>
<para>As I said, there is no playbook on how to respond to COVID-19. But I can also say with confidence that in the 20-odd years of my professional career, much of which has involved working in or around government policymaking, I have never before seen policymaking as dynamic or as responsive to the needs of Australians as what I've seen from within this federal government over the course of this crisis. We saw this responsiveness with the rollout of JobKeeper, the largest single support package in this nation's history, designed and delivered by the Morrison government in a matter of weeks to provide to nearly one million businesses and about 3½ million Australians the urgent lifeline they needed during this time of unprecedented economic turmoil.</para>
<para>We saw this responsiveness with the establishment of a national cabinet—the first time in the history of our Federation that leaders of the Commonwealth and of the states and territories have worked in such close and frequent collaboration to make the urgent decisions needed to steer Australia through a crisis. And we saw this responsiveness with the government's fast-moving policy response in so many areas—telehealth, childcare, other support for specific industries, foreign investment and so many other areas.</para>
<para>We've seen the results of that responsiveness on policymaking in the economic results that we are starting to see so far. As the Treasurer noted in question time earlier today, the June quarter GDP figures for so many other like countries are seeing substantial falls right now—figures like more than 20 per cent falls in the UK, almost that in France and 10 per cent in the US and Germany. Yet, here in Australia, we've managed to maintain our AAA credit rating, and, of the 1.3 million Australians who either lost their job or saw their hours reduced to zero since the start of the crisis, more than half of them are now back in work. Without JobKeeper and other government policies—according to Treasury, that support has helped to save 700,000 jobs and the unemployment rate would otherwise have been around five per cent higher in Australia than it is today.</para>
<para>When we consider the challenge, the scale of the challenge, we of course acknowledge that, as we continue to learn and respond to the virus, our response will continue to evolve. What we don't claim—as seems to be being implied occasionally—is that anything short of perfection must be considered total failure. And, like many members of this chamber I'm sure, I've been hearing from thousands upon thousands of local constituents and local businesses who've looked to the federal government for help this year and have been able to rely on the economic lifelines provided by the Morrison government in a moment of such significant need.</para>
<para>I want to take this moment on the public record to pass onto the health minister, the Treasurer, the Prime Minister and so many other ministers who've been working so tirelessly in the best interests of our nation the sincere thanks I've received from so many constituents, businesspeople, charities and sporting organisations from right around Brisbane. We'll keep working hard to save lives and save livelihoods.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak about the serious failures in this government's attempt to combat COVID-19. When I sat down to think about those serious failures, I have to say, my problem was containing myself to the five minutes available for me to speak in the chamber today. Since the member for Brisbane has referred to the national cabinet—I wasn't going to mention it, but I am going to mention it now.</para>
<para>If there's one thing I've seen that's consistent about the approach of this government to its much fated national cabinet, it's that Friday afternoon seems to operate something like this: the Prime Minister comes out of national cabinet, tells the whole country in a press conference what has been agreed by national cabinet, and then we have a succession of state premiers coming out and correcting the Prime Minister about how what the Prime Minister thinks is good for the country actually won't work because of the circumstances in their states. So, as a way of getting people together on a videoconference, which I think we're all getting very familiar with—it seems to be very effective. As a way of getting national agreement to things, I think the Prime Minister's completely missed the boat, or maybe he's not attending at all. He's got a lovely prewritten media release to go when he walks out, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the reality confronting Australians or the reality confronting our state governments right now.</para>
<para>I want to also touch upon this government's digital response. They've made much about the COVIDSafe app, the COVIDSafe app that our shadow minister for health and the Labor side of politics were very happy to support in messaging to the community that we need to take all steps available to us to make sure that we are able, as an entire society, to move back towards the lifting of restrictions, and this was seen as a key part of that. But, of course, we did know, in the backs of our minds, that this government that gave us the 2016 census and this government that gave us myGov was also the producer of the COVIDSafe app.</para>
<para>I point out that, with this COVIDSafe app on my iPhone—it's not a particularly unique type of phone across Australia—I have to make sure I restart the app every time I go into my phone, make sure that I've got my battery pack to go with my phone to deal with the battery charge problem that the app has created and make sure I don't keep my phone in my pocket for too long because it's going to burn a hole in my leg because of the way it's using the battery on my phone. All of these are issues that this government has failed to deal with.</para>
<para>Of course, that's not the only digital blunder we had. We had the minister for Services Australia come out and say that the government was under cyberattack because the myGov site wouldn't work. People couldn't lodge their claims with Centrelink. It turns out, unexpectedly—who would have thought!—if you shut down the entire economy and hundreds of thousands of Australians need to go and get payments from Centrelink, they might need to log on to make that claim. I saw queues down the street—down the block, to the train station, around the corner—from my local Centrelinks because of the incompetence of this government in supporting Australians to get through the pandemic crisis and the economic effects that come with it.</para>
<para>The government finally came to the program with a wage subsidy: JobKeeper. It's a great outcome. We're glad that you did that. We have been happy to support the legislation that enabled it. But for some reason the essential service that is child care—the service that helps workers go to work, especially our healthcare workers—is the one area that, at least, you gave JobKeeper to and then you took it away early. That is capricious, that is unhelpful, that is stopping people from getting back to work. That is stopping our healthcare workers from being able to support those that need their assistance in our community right now—let alone the complete stuff-up of providing those childcare support services with the additional support that they need, leaving them vulnerable for too long. Then giving them an additional subsidy which didn't help with some of the childcare system because it is a differential system. It has different aspects to it. The government could not deal with that issue.</para>
<para>We now have the changes to JobKeeper that are coming forward under this government. Remarkably, what the government has proposed, that we have been dealing with in the House today, is a system to extend JobKeeper—a good outcome—but at a lower rate. What's going to happen under these lower rates of JobKeeper? This is the government's plan for jobs in the country—wait for it—400,000 more unemployed people. That's not a plan for jobs. The government doesn't have a plan for jobs. The government literally has a plan for no jobs. It has a plan for 400,000 more unemployed people. That is what they want the Australian people to support. That's not a plan. That is leaving the entirety of Australian society worse off. That is not looking after Australians, not looking after their welfare and not looking after their jobs.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I reject the assertion of the statement put by the opposition and the member for McMahon. While I admit nothing is perfect, I am of the view that the government's COVID-19 response has been spectacular. This government has shown leadership, unity, flexibility and a measured approach to a disaster from which many other countries will struggle to recover.</para>
<para>People in my electorate of Mallee are overwhelmingly grateful for the federal government's comprehensive response to the pandemic. If I had a 'gratitude-o-meter' measuring how thankful people in my electorate are, I can assure you it would be off the chart. I have never received so many emails, letters, messages and phone calls about how grateful individuals are for the support that they have received.</para>
<para>The plan to flatten the curve by developing an appropriate systemwide health response was nothing short of brilliant and our plan has performed extraordinarily well. Ventilators, hospitals, workforce and PPE had to be developed and this occurred in a timely way. Our national response plan provided guidance for all in the health sector, including for residential aged care. The rapidity with which our health force had to be supplied with PPE posed a serious challenge, but the government engaged with the manufacturing industry in Australia to supplement our national supply. When the world was scrambling for PPE we made our own—evidence of our ingenuity and the assistance of this government to back homegrown Aussie businesses.</para>
<para>The formation of the national cabinet has also seen great efficiencies in policy development, facilitating the coordination of Australia's response to the virus and allowing major decisions to occur in a timely way. This initiative, by the Prime Minister, displays this government's leadership and adaptability in a critically evolving situation.</para>
<para>The government's economic response has matched the health response in effectiveness and timeliness. Whether it's the creation of the single largest economic support measure in Australia's history in the JobKeeper program, now worth over $100 billion; or the increases and amendments to the JobSeeker payment that have been a lifeline for millions; or the instant asset write-off scheme, which allowed Rod Stuart from the Dunolly Bakery to purchase new ovens to improve his small business; or the cashflow boost that has provided much-needed stimulus to thousands of employer, the flexibility and responsiveness of this government to the COVID-19 pandemic has been nothing short of astounding.</para>
<para>Further to that, we have been on the front foot in terms of planning and implementing these economic support packages. The Treasurer has been extraordinary in his forward planning and strategic thinking. I dread to think where we would be if this government had not been at the wheel when COVID-19 struck our shores. This government has not shied away from its responsibility to confront the dual crisis on both health and economic fronts. When others, who will remain nameless, dropped the ball in hotel quarantining or in testing, tracing and managing outbreaks, it was the federal coalition government who offered assistance and was finally permitted to send in the troops, whether it was a health workforce or the Australian Defence Force.</para>
<para>This government has considered what the potential outcomes of COVID-19 will be for years to come. We have not had a kneejerk response; rather, there is clear evidence of planning for the future. Other key programs, such as JobMaker and JobTrainer, are clear evidence of this government's strategy for economic recovery. Our focus on jobs and training will assist people to get back into work or change careers should that be necessary.</para>
<para>The federal government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been outstanding and stands well in comparison to responses from around the world. Suggestions to the contrary only serve to display the ignorance, wilful or otherwise, of those who make them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise this afternoon to speak on the shortcomings of the government's ongoing COVID-19 response. The first thing I would note is that they have done their very best to not allow the parliament to make a response to COVID-19. It is an ongoing source of frustration and genuine democratic objection that people who were elected by 110,000 Australians to come to this place and put their views and ensure that their needs are looked after have been so shut out of such an important process, at such an important time of policymaking for this country, on a policy that will have consequences for decades to come. So the first thing I wanted to note is the government's petty small-mindedness in the way they have gone about the business of Australian democracy and in the way they have conducted themselves with respect to parliament this year.</para>
<para>There is a difference between politics and governance. Politics is the art of the possible. It's how you go about policymaking. But good governance requires both an opposition and a government. It requires members from all parts of the country, who have a diversity of views and different experiences, to work together. We on this side of the House have done our very best to be constructive and to work together where possible. But, week after week, month after month, we have found that parliament has been cancelled and there has been a transfer of powers, with decisions that should rightly be made by the parliament being made by one minister alone, transferring things that should be in legislation to regulations. Things are being decided, for example, by the Treasurer, at the stroke of a pen, rather than through a vote in parliament by those elected by the Australian people.</para>
<para>The Prime Minister says that he isn't interested in the politics of the pandemic, but I do not think it is politics to ask genuine questions that people ask us, as their representatives, to put and to consider with respect to a policy response. For example, is it politics to try and improve the disgraceful state of the private aged-care system in this country? No, it isn't. Is it politics to try and support young people through the second economic crisis of their lives? No, it isn't. Is it politics to ask the government what they're going to do for the people that they have chosen to exclude from JobKeeper—people like casual workers, childcare workers, staff at universities and the dnata workers, as part of our broader aviation workers, who are in severe financial stress after the events of this year? When you have chosen to exclude them from a program, is it politics to ask what you are going to do for them instead? I do not think it is. I do not think it is unreasonable for us to ask those questions and to expect legitimate answers from the Prime Minister in places such as question time.</para>
<para>In the time I have left I want to briefly touch on two areas that are of crucial concern to the people in my electorate of Lilley, the first being mental health. The member for Brisbane and I literally share road borders. I have the northern half of the road and he has the southern half of the road. It was news to me that he has had an outpouring of people writing to thank him for the dynamic and agile response of the government, because on the other side of the road, when those neighbours are taking their wheelie bins out and consulting with my constituents, there seems to be a very different experience. With respect to mental health, we know there have been shortcomings in the government's response to this emergency. We know it must be a priority. They've said that it will be a priority, but that is not being backed by the funding and the policy heft that is needed to address this problem.</para>
<para>We welcome absolutely the efforts that they have made so far, including those announcements and the things that have happened in recent weeks in Victoria, but more needs to be done. I did a town hall with my young people last week ahead of this sitting of parliament to make sure that I was across what they wanted to be raised in this place. They said mental health was their No. 1 concern. Specifically, young people are going to places like headspace to get support. I had a woman, Kayla, who's in her early 20s, say that she went at a point when she felt like she really needed help—so probably a long way beyond when she should have or could have first gone—in May and was told that she could not get in until September. When she said that, the nodding across the Zoom windows was emphatic. Everybody is having a universal experience of having to wait three months too long to get support, and that's at the point when they already have recognised that they need it. We need to do a great deal more.</para>
<para>I'll wrap up by saying that the mental health crisis doesn't stop at the Murray River. The mental health crisis is real for young Australians right across the country. We need to step in—this parliament, this sitting—and provide more funding immediately.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BELL</name>
    <name.id>282981</name.id>
    <electorate>Moncrieff</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Lilley for her contribution today, but I would say that JobKeeper is not about politics. JobKeeper is about supporting the millions of Australians, the 3.5 million Australians, who are on JobKeeper, and that is what it's about. I think we'd all agree that that is well above politics.</para>
<para>In Moncrieff, there is overwhelmingly positive support for the government's decisive action in managing the economic impact of the pandemic. In fact, there were audible sighs of relief outside my office, in the streets of Surfers Paradise, when it was originally announced and again with the announcement of its extension, when there was much relief in the business community and among those who are employed by the local business community. At the Reimagine Gold Coast forum last week business leaders gathered to create a brighter future for Gold Coast industry, skills and jobs. What so many of those business leaders and the City Heart Taskforce executive members said is that they give the federal government a great big tick of approval for its economic response to the COVID-19 crisis. JobKeeper was on everybody's lips at the Reimagine Gold Coast forum. Business operators endorse JobKeeper as a great success in keeping Gold Coasters employed.</para>
<para>At the last census there were 32,111 small businesses in Moncrieff, which is just over half of all the small businesses on the Gold Coast. There are 9,700 businesses on JobKeeper in Moncrieff. For anybody doing maths today, that is 30 per cent of businesses in my electorate that are currently relying on JobKeeper to keep the doors open and to keep Gold Coasters in jobs. So it's very, very important for my electorate on the Gold Coast that JobKeeper continues, for certainty for businesses and, indeed, for people to remain connected to their employers.</para>
<para>Keeping employers and employees connected has been vital, and particularly crucial for the economic security of women. The importance of job connection is well understood by the Prime Minister and all members on this side of the House. It is very, very important. Why is that connection particularly important to women and the economic security of women? It's because we women have to carefully balance our jobs, our lives and our community life. Stability matters to the good women of Moncrieff so they can have certainty moving forward, so that they can manage their lives. When a woman loses her job, even if she's fortunate enough to find another job, she's got to then rebalance her life and the lives of her family. So JobKeeper is about so much more than a $1,500 fortnightly payment to so many people in my electorate. It's about hope. It's about confidence. It's about business confidence. It's about keeping our economy running and keeping open the doors for Australians. JobKeeper has given many women in Moncrieff a degree of stability, and that's really important too—stability, confidence and hope for the future.</para>
<para>I'm running a Love Your Local campaign on Facebook, where I go around to businesses in the electorate and visit them and do a video to promote them online as a destination for locals. With the border closures, we only have locals on the Gold Coast feeding our tourism industry and our small business sector, which are hurting so badly. The Bavarian Haus on Cavill Avenue is an institution that's been in Surfers Paradise since 1975. Carol has worked there for 25 years. When I went to her place of business, to her fine establishment on Cavill Avenue, she outlined to me that, without JobKeeper, they would not be open. They have three levels in their restaurant, and only one of them was open. They're limping along on JobKeeper, thanks to the federal government. It's the longest continuously standing restaurant on the Gold Coast. We hope to make sure that it's standing on Cavill Avenue in Surfers Paradise for the months and years ahead. It's very important. JobKeeper is a vital lifeline to bridge that business from pre-pandemic times to today and into the future. Many other businesses in Moncrieff have been affected. I commend the federal government for the work we're doing with JobKeeper.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I speak on the government's inadequate response to the COVID-19 pandemic. At the outset, let me say that this is a health crisis that required a political response. Let there be no mistake about this. Australia has done quite well compared to other countries around the world. With a population of 25 million people, Australia has had 25,000 cases. Unfortunately, we've had about 525 deaths. I give my commiserations and condolences to all the families affected. Sweden, with about a third of Australia's population, has had 87,000 cases and 5,900 deaths. I mention Sweden because the member for Hughes, the captain's pick for the last election, proceeds all the time with conspiracy theories and false medical advice, with no response from the government. It is disgraceful that the Prime Minister, who picked this man to be a candidate at the last election, does not acknowledge the terrible comments he makes on Facebook and all sorts of media all the time, which is really impairing our response and giving food to the conspiracy theorists. It's terrible.</para>
<para>Australia has done well because politicians have listened to expert advice from scientists and medical experts. But they almost didn't. If you remember, at the beginning of the pandemic, the Prime Minister was off to the footy, wasn't he? But, luckily, someone tapped him on the shoulder—I suspect it may have been the health minister—and said, 'You have to listen to this advice,' and the right thing was done. Australia did well because the politicians listened to the advice of the experts and dealt with the expert management by our bureaucracies. Our Public Service very rarely gets commendations, but we are very lucky to live in a country like Australia, where our bureaucracies and public service can respond so well. I'd like to give my congratulations and thanks to all of our public servants, state and federal, who have done so well.</para>
<para>Australia has done well, but there have been missteps, particularly in aged care. Aged care has been a national tragedy. This was something that was foreseen by the Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport in an inquiry in 2017. We were given lots of evidence on the inability of the aged-care system to cope with infectious diseases such as influenza, gastroenteritis et cetera. This was a predictable outcome, yet nothing was done. There may have been a plan, but it was a catch 22 plan. It was the plan you had when there was no plan.</para>
<para>Border protection was terrible—not just the <inline font-style="italic">Ruby Princess</inline>. Even recently, I've had complaints from constituents about our airport health screening. This is something that was predicted, and yet nothing was done by this government and this minister for months and months.</para>
<para>Our messaging to young people has been terrible. First of all they were told: 'You'll be okay. This won't affect you. You'll be fine.' Then they were severely criticised for going to Bondi Beach on a good summer's day. We need to get our messaging right. We are also getting our messaging to culturally and linguistically diverse communities wrong. We need to make sure that the messages we're giving to people are ones that they understand and can act on.</para>
<para>Our lack of pandemic leave for people who were not going to get any support if they had to leave work to be tested or if they were sick was terrible. We need to have a national plan for this, not state by state.</para>
<para>The other thing I would take issue with is the national cabinet. The national cabinet is a good idea, but I personally was very disappointed that the Leader of the Opposition was not appointed to this. The true national cabinet we had in the Second World War, under the Curtin government, included the Leader of the Opposition. It needs to be national. Our state borders need a national plan <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ARCHER</name>
    <name.id>282237</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Earlier today I stood here and spoke for about 15 minutes in support of JobKeeper, which is just one element of the Morrison government's response to COVID-19, and I'm glad to be back for another opportunity to talk about this, so I thank the opposition for that opportunity to show where we have met the challenges. Months on from the first crushing impact of the coronavirus, we are leading many other countries in the world. You only have to look at the situation across the world—in Italy, Spain, the USA, the UK and, of course, Mexico and Brazil—to understand how effective government policy and action have led the way here in Australia. These are uncharted waters, a dynamic and evolving challenge. But Australians, including those in northern Tasmania, have confidence in our government's response. The decisions made by the Morrison government have been decisive to protect the health of all Australians while trying to balance the devastating economic impact this crisis would bring, and it is working.</para>
<para>JobKeeper has effectively acted to protect the lives and livelihoods of Australians, keeping many Tasmanian businesses going and their valued employees connected. Over 2,800 businesses in my electorate of Bass are utilising the system, and each and every time I'm out in my community I am told what a lifeline it has been for employers and employees, providing certainty and security in a time of so much upheaval. I'd like to pay tribute to those many small businesses—in northern Tasmania in particular—that, with support from the government, have reimagined their businesses and adapted so quickly to this situation thrown their way, which was unimaginable just six months ago.</para>
<para>Other significant responses to the crisis include over $16 billion in payments to more than 750,000 businesses to boost cash flow; a 50 per cent wage subsidy supporting around 180,000 apprentices and trainees; up to 340,700 JobTrainer places for school leavers and jobseekers to upskill; the HomeBuilder program, supporting the residential construction industry, which has proved to be enormously popular in northern Tasmania, with many in the industry lauding the support the government has provided to them and the security that this will bring to them and their families; JobSeeker and the coronavirus supplement; and $750 payments in April and July to millions of Australians, including pensioners.</para>
<para>In particular, I am very proud of the quick response in providing access to health services, particularly in mental health investment and telehealth. In a community with high representation of the elderly, the vulnerable and those with chronic disease, there was always a concern that, beyond being susceptible to COVID-19, the general health of many in northern Tasmania would suffer as people stayed away from seeing their general practitioner or specialist. This is where the $600 million telehealth package—years of work put together in just a matter of days—has had a significant impact. Again, in our northern Tasmanian community, I have heard much positive feedback on the impact that this has had on the ground.</para>
<para>The impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of those in the northern Tasmanian community has also been of much concern to me. Once again, that challenge was met by our government under the steady hand of Minister Hunt. Hundreds of millions of dollars has been invested into additional mental health services across the country, including providing additional support services for Lifeline and Kids Helpline and creating a dedicated coronavirus helpline with Beyond Blue—all of which have seen a marked increase in demand for their services over the past six months.</para>
<para>While we're all keen to get back to life as normal, we know this will likely not be the case until a vaccine is available. I commend our government for their commitment to providing a free vaccine to all Australians should trials prove successful, safe and effective. The letter of intent with AstraZeneca is the first step towards making this a reality. Whilst there is no guarantee it will be successful, it does provide hope, and the government will continue to take advice from the best medical, scientific and manufacturing experts.</para>
<para>I know and have seen the real impact of the government's health and economic response to the crisis. I would like to take this time to again thank the healthcare workers in my community for turning up day in and day out under immense pressure to keep our community safe. To my constituents in Bass, I say: thank you for the sacrifices you have made over the past few months. Much has been asked of you, but our government does have your back and will continue to stand up and support you.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265991</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The discussion has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>75</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Amendment (Prohibiting Academic Cheating Services) Bill 2019</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r6483">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Amendment (Prohibiting Academic Cheating Services) Bill 2019</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Returned from Senate</title>
            <page.no>75</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>75</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Intelligence and Security Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>75</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>75</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee's report, incorporating dissenting reports, entitled <inline font-style="italic">Inquiry into the impact of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press</inline>.</para>
<para>Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I am pleased to present the report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security's inquiry into the impact of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press. This statement has largely been prepared by the chair of the committee, the member for Canning, and I acknowledge his outstanding leadership of the committee and the work of all colleagues on both sides of the House and in the other place on this report.</para>
<para>The report covers the committee's consideration of the matters referred to it by the Attorney-General under section 29 of the Intelligence Services Act 2001. The execution of two search warrants by the Australian Federal Police in June 2019 provoked public discussion on the impact of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press in Australia. The committee acknowledges the government has already acted to address concerns raised by journalists, media organisations and civil society in response to the execution of these search warrants. Though these are welcome steps, the committee considers there are other opportunities for further reform.</para>
<para>This report considered both the need to protect Australia from threats to our national security and the importance of public interest journalism to a free and open society. We consider the rule of law and a free press mutually supporting in a healthy democratic society. All Australians have obligations before the law. This includes journalists and media organisations who serve a vital role in upholding it through fair and accurate public interest reporting. No Australians are exempt from the obligations of the law. In our consideration of press freedom we've resisted calls to recommend an exemption from the law for journalists, for reasons detailed in the report. It is the committee's view that there is a healthy tension between the obligations of national security and the transparency of public interest journalism in Australia.</para>
<para>We can improve our current warrant regime as it applies to journalists and media organisations, as the following recommendations make clear. The committee has recommended that the existing role of the public interest advocate, provided by the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979, be amended and expanded to apply to warrants involving the investigation of unauthorised disclosure of government information when it relates to journalists and media organisations. In recognition of the gravity of occasions where national security may encroach on the freedom of the press, the committee has recommended elevating the qualifications required of public interest advocates and issuing authorities for these warrant applications. Specifically, we recommend that all warrants sought by an enforcement agency related to a person working in a professional capacity as a journalist or a media organisation should be issued by a judge of a superior court of record in the jurisdiction of issue for the relevant Crimes Act 1914 warrants, and a nominated Federal Court judge for relevant Surveillance Devices Act 2004 and Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 warrants.</para>
<para>While the committee has not recommended an exemption or exception for journalists and media organisations, the committee acknowledges the important place of public interest journalism in Australia and recommends that the government consider whether defences for journalism undertaken in the public interest should be applied to additional Commonwealth secrecy offences. The committee has made recommendations relating to the Public Interest Disclosure Scheme, noting that it is preferable for public servants to have access to a robust process to raise concerns before approaching journalists and media organisations.</para>
<para>In relation to the events underpinning the inquiry, the committee believes there is a role for better cooperation between journalists, media organisations and government departments. Therefore, the committee has recommended that the government consider establishing a mechanism for journalists and media organisations to communicate with the originating agency of national security classified information without the threat of investigation or prosecution. In addition, the committee recommends government departments and agencies prioritise the establishment of media liaison units.</para>
<para>The committee noted the concerns raising the appropriateness of national security classification on documents and recommends that oversight bodies audit and inquire into the implementation and application of the National Security Classification Framework. Though outside of the scope of the inquiry, the committee recognises the evidence it received about defamation, shield laws and freedom of information and has made recommendations on harmonising shield laws and addressing consistency with the freedom of information process.</para>
<para>Finally, the committee recognises that measuring the impact of these recommendations on improving the perception of a free press in Australia is difficult without additional transparency. The committee has therefore recommended additional reporting measures on the Public Interest Advocate regime as well as on warrants that relate to journalists and media organisations. I commend this report to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to make a statement.</para>
<para>Leave granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No journalist should be charged, or even jailed, just for doing their job. Law enforcement agencies should never raid journalists just because they are embarrassing government. But when a journalist's home and the ABC headquarters were raided on consecutive days in June 2019, the Prime Minister responded to community concern with a wave of the hand and the glib declaration:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It never troubles me that our laws are being upheld.</para></quote>
<para>According to the current Prime Minister, Federal Police raids on a respected journalist and the national broadcaster were just business as usual in Australia. It was only in the face of overwhelming political opposition that the Morrison government asked the intelligence and security committee to conduct an inquiry into the impact of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press—not that the Prime Minister thought that such an inquiry was necessary. Even after establishing the inquiry, the Morrison government insisted that the law was perfect as it was and that no changes were needed. To quote directly from the first submission to the committee by the Department of Home Affairs and the Attorney-General's Department: 'The current legislative frameworks appropriately balance the importance of press freedom with the imperative to protect national security.'</para>
<para>The absurdity of the government's position that nothing needs to change was laid bare when the committee asked the Department of Home Affairs how many warrants had been issued, or even how many were currently in force, against journalists in Australia. Incredibly, the department told the committee that it did not know and that it did not care to find out because to do so would be an unreasonable diversion of the government's resources. Let that sink in. The Morrison government asked the committee to inquire into the impact of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the press, told the committee that the existing legal framework in relation to freedom of the press was appropriate, and then admitted that it did not actually have any idea how the existing legal framework was operating in practice—nor did it care to find out. It is yet another example of the Prime Minister confusing his own spin for substance.</para>
<para>The intelligence and security committee does not agree with the Prime Minister that nothing needs to change. In the report that it has tabled today, the committee has unanimously concluded that existing Australian law does not adequately protect freedom of the press, or the public's right to know, and that significant reforms are needed. Perhaps most significantly, the committee has recommended sweeping changes to the way in which warrants are issued. If recommendation 2 of the committee's report is implemented, warrants that relate to professional journalists or media organisations could only be issued by a superior court judge acting persona designata where such a warrant is sought as part of an investigation of an unauthorised disclosure or common-law secrecy offence. While the committee accepts that such warrants should continue to be issued without notice to the journalist or media organisation, the committee recommends that those warrants must be contestable by a public interest advocate. Further details of how the contestable warrant framework would operate are set out in the committee's report.</para>
<para>In total the committee made 16 recommendations, including in relation to the harmonisation of state and territory journalist shield laws; ensuring that agencies are not marking documents as secret without good reasons; the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013; and extending existing defences for public interest journalism to a range of Commonwealth secrecy offences. The committee has also recommended significant changes to existing record-keeping and reporting requirements so that the government must tell the Australian people how many warrants are being sought in relation to journalists and media organisations. All of these are positive recommendations.</para>
<para>However, for the reasons outlined in our additional comments to the report, Labor members believe that the bipartisan recommendations of the committee do not go far enough to protect freedom of the press and the public's right to know. In our view, the Morrison government should regard the committee's recommendations as a starting point for reform. Broader reforms are clearly needed, including in relation to matters that are outside the purview of the intelligence and security committee.</para>
<para>I would like to acknowledge the hard work of all committee members. In many ways, this was unlike any inquiry the committee has ever undertaken. On behalf of Labor members, I would like to thank the committee secretariat for their excellent work on this report and thank the Liberal members of the committee—particularly the chair, the member for Canning—for the constructive way in which they have engaged with us over the course of this inquiry.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the House take note of the report.</para></quote>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>77</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>77</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2020</title>
          <page.no>77</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="s1260">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Electoral Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2020</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report from Committee</title>
            <page.no>77</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:32</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, I present the committee's advisory report, incorporating dissenting reports, on the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2020.</para>
<para>Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the House take note of the report.</para></quote>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZP</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>77</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020</title>
          <page.no>77</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
            <a type="Bill" href="r6583">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>77</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr LEIGH</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
    <electorate>Fenner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We are now in the greatest economic downturn that Australia has seen since the Great Depression. Research from the Australian Treasury has revealed just how damaging this can be, particularly to young Australians. That research has looked at the so-called scarring effect, the long-term effect, of graduating in the teeth of a recession. I know this effect well, having finished high school in 1990 and seen some of my classmates who searched for work utterly unable to find it at that time. We know now that there are 13 jobseekers for every job vacancy, so this problem is particularly acute.</para>
<para>The research conducted by Daniel Andrews of the Australian Treasury—now at the OECD—titled <inline font-style="italic">The career effect of labour market conditions of entry</inline> found that a person who enters the labour market for the first time during a recession is more likely to be unemployed and more likely to be unemployed for longer. When they do find a job—if they do—they are more likely to work at a low-productivity firm and are less likely to switch firms, thereby missing out on the wage gains that come from that. Their estimate is that somebody who enters the workforce in a year in which youth unemployment is five percentage points higher suffers an eight per cent hit to their earnings in the first year and a 3.5 per cent hit to their earnings in the fifth year. The scarring effect lasts a full decade.</para>
<para>We know that in Australia right now we are seeing significant adverse effects right across the labour market. We've seen a downturn in hours of some 20 per cent and the effective unemployment rate, the Treasurer tells us, will go to 13 per cent. The difference between those is JobKeeper, a wage subsidy scheme urged on the government, after they initially dragged their heels, by Labor. Labor recognises the value of wage subsidy schemes and maintaining the connection between employer and employee. Its value has been shown in Australia, as it has overseas.</para>
<para>But JobKeeper is far from perfect. Let's start with the finances. When it was announced in March, the federal government anticipated the program would cost $130 billion and support six million jobs. They continued to say in May that those figures were on track, until the $60 billion penny dropped and it was revealed that the program was in fact costing $70 billion and supporting only 3.5 million jobs. Rather than admitting the mistake, the Treasurer blamed employers for putting the wrong figure on the tax office form. After years of talking about the importance of personal responsibility to Liberals, the Treasurer was unable to take responsibility for the single biggest fiscal error in Australian history.</para>
<para>We have also seen problems in the way in which JobKeeper is designed. In other countries, wage subsidy schemes subsidise wages. In the past the government has touted the Single Touch Payroll scheme, which records how much employees earn and how much their hours are. But rather than rely on data from Single Touch Payroll, the government instead opted to supply a flat $750 a week. That means that someone working one day a week received a windfall but it also meant the coalition was able to say that one million casuals who had been with their current employer for less than a year were ineligible, hitting hard many of those in the arts and hospitality sectors.</para>
<para>So, we have a JobKeeper scheme that is less well targeted than it could be if the government could make appropriate use of the data. I acknowledge in this my colleague the member for Gellibrand, who has done very important work on government data systems and ensuring that we get them right. It really matters here. Better targeting could allow JobKeeper to be extended to many more people. The government's deficient data systems are costing the budget and costing Australians in increased joblessness. Even from September the government isn't targeting precise wages. They are going to a more clumsy solution, a two-part payment, of $600 a week for those who work more than 20 hours a week and $375 a week for those working less than 20 hours a week.</para>
<para>We are also seeing too little transparency from the government. The Ardern government has put in place a website to which any New Zealander can log on and find every firm that is getting their equivalent of JobKeeper. But such an innovation doesn't exist in Australia. Even if you are a firm with a turnover of over $100 million, the taxpayer doesn't know whether or not you are getting JobKeeper. As Dean Paatsch from Ownership Matters has pointed out, that means that some firms are on track to receive JobKeeper and report an increase in profits. That is why some have dubbed it 'DividendKeeper', now that we have seen certain firms receiving taxpayer support and then paying that right back out to shareholders. It could be that that is paid out to executives as well. Dean Paatsch puts it mildly when he says, 'I don't think it was ever the intention of the government to subsidise executive salaries.' I would go a little further. If your firm is getting JobKeeper, the CEO should not be getting a bonus.</para>
<para>We've also seen in Australia too little data being published on the unemployment rate. We know that the government, on a regular basis, has detailed information on the number of people who are signing up for JobSeeker, formerly Newstart. These parallel numbers have been published in the United States since 1968, according to economist Saul Eslake. Every Thursday morning since 1968, the Americans have got an immediate read on what unemployment is in their country. The same numbers are considered a state secret in Australia. The government is now talking about doing them fortnightly but is unwilling still to provide the same level of detailed data that Americans are able to access.</para>
<para>We're seeing significant issues in the labour market at the moment, and, as the crisis goes on, we're seeing the possibility that it will serve to exacerbate inequality. In a report for the Hamilton Project, economists David Autor and Elisabeth Reynolds discuss some of the ways in which the COVID crisis could make low-wage work more precarious. They point out that, the longer the shutdown goes on, the more likely it is that firms will begin to move to technology and supplant low-wage workers. They talk about this as 'automation forcing'. They point out that this may lead to firms having 'fewer workers per store, fewer security guards and more cameras, more automation in warehouses, and more machinery applied to nightly scrubbing of workplaces'. They say aerial drones may replace delivery people, and, in the meat-packing industry, adoption of robotic technology will speed up. All of this could have a lasting adverse impact on the number of low-wage jobs available.</para>
<para>The concentration of employment in large firms could be a result of a number of small business collapses. We know that the government's loan scheme hasn't helped to support lending in small business. Small business lending is down eight per cent this year, while large business lending is up. We know that there is a serious risk of cash-strapped small firms being bought up by larger companies—that we will see an increased trend in a market concentration which has already gone too far in Australia. That could well lead to the labour share declining, increasing inequality.</para>
<para>Urban de-densification could also mean that we see fewer jobs available for workers who support urbanisation—fewer opportunities in food services, cleaning, security, entertainment and transport. The rise of urbanisation has been a great driver of productivity. The cessation of this trend could cost jobs and may indeed have an adverse impact on productivity.</para>
<para>We also may see a shift towards working from home, which could have, again, impacts on inequality. James Stratton, an Australian undertaking his PhD at Harvard, estimates that 41 per cent of Australians have jobs that allow them to work from home, but high-wage employees are three times as likely to have a job that allows them to work from home. Firms also need to make sure they get working from home right. Research by Nicholas Bloom, quoted in Joshua Gans's regular update, points out:</para>
<quote><para class="block">For remote working to succeed, it is essential to have an effective performance review system … In firms which do not have effective employee appraisal systems management, I would caution against WFH—</para></quote>
<para>working from home. Again, that may be a concern, given what we know about the differences in management capability across Australian firms.</para>
<para>We're also seeing very different impacts in this downturn, compared to previous downturns, from a gender perspective. Jeff Borland's Labour Market Snapshots show that previous recessions have largely been 'man-cessions': the fall in male employment has been more substantial than the fall in female employment. Early on in this recession, the largest job losses were among women, who dominate in employment sectors such as hospitality.</para>
<para>We've seen from the government a failure to announce a long-term plan for JobSeeker. Anglicare Australia have published a troubling report on the implications of the sudden phase-back in JobSeeker payments. They point out that for a couple on JobSeeker with two children only five per cent of rentals are currently affordable, but if the government goes ahead with its September cut then only 1.5 per cent of rentals will be affordable for a couple on JobSeeker.</para>
<para>There is also something that should be noted about this bill, which is that it expands the circumstances in which tax secrecy laws can be disregarded, expanding them from a threat to health, safety or public health to allowing the secrecy rules to be overridden to allow the administration of a law relating to coronavirus. I think that's a good thing, though I would point out that it stands in stark contrast to the coalition's approach to tax transparency in previous times. They have fought tooth and nail to keep information about the tax paid by Australia's largest firms secret.</para>
<para>There is much more that could be done. JobKeeper should be better targeted, which would mean it could be expanded to a broader range of Australians while serving the budget. Saul Eslake also suggests that it would be in the interests of the Australian economy to focus more policy attention on new businesses. He argues that on the basis that new businesses are more likely to be in industries that have good long-term prospects, more likely to create jobs, more likely to innovate, and more likely to be started by young people and to employ young people. He points out that tax preferences for new businesses would cost less than tax preferences for small businesses and that there's no way you can game the system. Businesses, like individuals, can't make themselves any younger, so there are no perverse incentives in subsidising new businesses.</para>
<para>The task is predominantly a fiscal one in Australia, as it is around the world, with monetary policy having reached the lower bound. But that's not to say that nothing could be done to improve the focus of the Reserve Bank on outcomes. As the deputy chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, in our last hearing I pressed the Reserve Bank governor and his staff on their three policy levers. It strikes me, looking at the Reserve Bank's projections, that it is now possible that inflation will be below the target band for the entire period of Governor Lowe's term as Reserve Bank governor, right through from 2016 to 2023. The consequence of that would be lower output for the economy and higher unemployment than if inflation were kept within the target band. You can see the impact of this through Australia's relatively high exchange rate, which reflects the relative conservatism of the Reserve Bank compared to other central banks. It surprises me that the Reserve Bank have not been willing to consider negative interest rates as other central banks have done, and I am concerned that, in not doing so, they may be putting bank profits ahead of jobs. The Reserve Bank's policy of yield curve control could be pursued more aggressively by targeting five-year maturities, and the term finance facility hasn't done enough to support small businesses, with, as I noted, lending to small firms having fallen eight per cent this year while lending to large firms has risen. So cutting the interest rates on the term finance facility could be beneficial.</para>
<para>In critiquing the Reserve Bank in this manner, I'm not alone. There have been many thoughtful commentators who have done so, including the Grattan Institute's Brendan Coates and Matt Cowgill; Stephen Kirchner of the US Studies Centre at the University of Sydney; Monash University's Isaac Gross; and the University of Melbourne's Chris Edmond and Bruce Preston.</para>
<para>It is important that all policy arms are working to aid recovery and to focus on the core priority for Australia: jobs, jobs, jobs.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020. My friend, in his contribution, ended with the words 'jobs, jobs, jobs', and I'm going to begin where he ended. When we look back over this pandemic, hopefully in the not-too-distant future, and we review how we dealt with this one-in-100-year challenge to our nation, I think the establishment of JobKeeper, and now its extension, will be seen as the single most significant decision taken, particularly as it relates to saving livelihoods. There are equally important decisions that have been made around saving lives but, when it comes to saving livelihoods, JobKeeper, in my view, is where it starts and finishes. In my electorate, 3,700 businesses have taken advantage of these measures. I don't know how many employees are benefitting, but I can only imagine that it runs to the tens of thousands.</para>
<para>Now, in my community, when I walk around I am beginning to have these sheepish conversations with business operators who are almost somewhat embarrassed to concede that they are in receipt of JobKeeper. On the quiet, almost like those shy conservatives that delivered Trump to the White House and that delivered us our last election, they just want to point out that it was this measure that saved their business.</para>
<para>On a number of those occasions, I've got to tell you, I've been quite surprised. When you live in a very small, close-knit regional community you get to know people's businesses, or at least you think you do. Of the number of people approaching me, I was surprised by the number who operate businesses that I thought would have a trading position that would have meant that, sure, they'd be in receipt of JobKeeper because turnover had reduced below the requisite amount, but JobKeeper wouldn't have been the difference between business and no business. But that is, in fact, what I've come to learn.</para>
<para>In highlighting the importance of these amendments and the extension, which I think ought to be celebrated as much for the fact that it shows how dynamic this parliament and our government can be in responding to the challenge, noting that, obviously, we established JobKeeper, and this now is about extending it well past the initial deadline of the end of next month through to March 2021—and noting that this is the first opportunity I've had to speak in this place about the measure at all—I want to take this place back to what was the darkest moment for me in this pandemic. I'm based in Mount Gambier. My staff and I were following all the relevant health advice. I'd ask my staff to work from home, like I'm sure many in this place did. I was at home following that direction, but, getting a little stir crazy, I'd want to go into the office, so I'd walk down the main street and go to the office. There was no-one else there, so, in a sense, I was self-isolating—no problem. I would walk past a cafe. I've come to know Josslyn Lee and Lucy Von Stanke, who operate this cafe, very closely, because it's right next to my office. They're young, innovative entrepreneurs employing a large number of people in my electorate. I would walk past and I would see them go from completely closed to operating on a part-time takeaway basis. My lowest moment thus far in this pandemic was when, on one of these occasions, I was walking home—I know they'd been trading on an exclusively takeaway basis for a while, probably because I was close to their best customer—and I saw them sharing a bottle of champagne in the front window of the restaurant. I thought things were on the up, so I gave them the thumbs up. They gave me the thumbs down. So I thought, 'I'd better go in there and ask.' I popped in and said, 'Lucy and Joss, what's up?' They said: 'Look, we can't trade on this takeaway-only basis. We're going to have to close again.' But that wasn't the lowest moment. The lowest moment was after I'd told them that we were making arrangements in relation to commercial leases—they were quite happy about that; in fact, they were relieved—and Lucy, who I've known for a long time, said to me, 'But what about us?' At that time we hadn't announced JobKeeper. In fact, it was still in its development phase and there was no way I could talk to them about it. I said, 'It's JobSeeker.' That was a low moment because here were two 20-something entrepreneurs in my electorate, who employ 35 people, and the best we could get was JobSeeker.</para>
<para>I've got to tell you, Lucy and Joss are the greatest supporters of JobKeeper that I can find in my electorate. As I said, there are 3,699 other businesses but these two young women are so passionate about the fact that they were given an opportunity to continue to employ their staff, and to continue on their small business dream, that they've become massive advocates. I've got to tell you their dream is not to be in receipt of JobKeeper forever, but they're simply so grateful that it was there, a safety net if you like to catch them as they fell in consequence of the economic impact of the pandemic.</para>
<para>Lucy and Joss are by no means unique. I expect there are Lucys and there are Josses throughout the country. In my electorate, whether it's Karen Milesi at the Murray Bridge Hotel, who employs 18 staff on JobKeeper; whether it is Tom Kosch at the Commodore on the Park, who employs 27 on JobKeeper; whether it is Toni Vorenas from Metro Bakery and Cafe, who employs 15 staff, many of whom are at-risk individuals; whether it's Thyme at the Lakes, who employ seven staff—I would love to be able to stand here and run through each one of these businesses individually, because these businesses represent lifetimes of work.</para>
<para>As a nation, forgetting about which side of this place we stand on, this parliament has done some of its best work to make sure these businesses fell into a safety net that ensured employees were able to remain connected to those businesses and able to remain employed. Even for those businesses for whom the health advice at certain periods meant they couldn't even be open, I saw those employees going to work. It might have been painting the front bar, retiling the bathrooms or cleaning the fridges, but what it meant was that people were maintaining their usual routines. They were going to work. They were interacting socially.</para>
<para>As an employer now in one context who has resisted for a very long time the requests to work from home, or work from anywhere as we call it, I kind of fell in love with it. I thought, 'This is great.' I will tell you who didn't fall in love with it: my staff. They wanted to come back to the office so that they could socialise with each other, and I think to get away from their families. The advantage of this period—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Those on the other side can heckle. I don't mind. I'm sure there will be lots of silver linings on this dark COVID cloud and no doubt dark it is. There will be lots of silver linings. I think one of the silver linings will be that employers like me who were perhaps somewhat reluctant to think about the ability and the flexibility of working from anywhere have now learnt that this is amazing technology. It has created productivity benefits. Whilst it is not, I think, something that people want to do all day every day, or at least many don't want to do it all day every day—some have to—there's the opportunity and the flexibility to do that. I'm prepared, notwithstanding the heckles that will come, to tell you that I'm the bloke who's still looking for the 'any key' on my computer. I am a Neanderthal when it comes to technology, but I have had to learn about these things and it's amazing—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish the member for Hunter was here, because I could have some fun with his pro-coal stance. He loves coal. We love coal. I love coal. I love cheap electricity to be honest. I love how 'coal' and 'Joel' rhyme. It is just such an opportunity.</para>
<para>I love that those opposite have come in—I don't think it is to listen to me. I expect that one of our members is about to make her first speech in this place and I congratulate her for that. I think I've worked that out—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>No, it something else. They have come in for me. That is all good. What I can say is there are 3,700 businesses in my electorate that are benefiting from this scheme. I can only think that runs to tens of thousands of employees who otherwise would have had their employment ended and the connection between their employer and themselves severed. Who knows what economic damage that would have done to the lives and livelihoods of those employees in Barker.</para>
<para>As I said earlier, this amendment bill talks to our ability to be dynamic in this space, to listen closely to the needs and to watch how this pandemic develops over time. Clearly, it has developed. The circumstances in Victoria are incredibly sad and they are challenging everywhere else in Australia. But this amendment bill talks to our ability to be dynamic, to stand alongside the employers of this country and their employees and to support them in this very difficult time. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Let's be clear about one thing: this government has never supported wage subsidies. Labor, the business community and a whole range of small businesses in particular were all out there saying that what we needed to do was to keep the relationship between employers and their employees during what was complacently dismissed by this Prime Minister as something that would just be a temporary blip. That's why we're debating this Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020. This legislation has to be introduced because, when the government established JobKeeper, they did say it would all snap back in September. They said everything would snap back and all government support would be withdrawn from the economy because, essentially, they were uncomfortable with the position that they themselves adopted. I've said before, in my vision statement about the economic recovery from the pandemic, that it is Labor values that are getting our country through the pandemic and, indeed, it will be Labor values that we return to to get us through the recovery successfully.</para>
<para>The idea of government intervention at a time of need is a part of what Labor is about—the power of government to make a difference to people's lives, to protect living standards and to create opportunity. Those opposite believe that, if government just gets out of the way and lets the market rip, it'll all be okay. And that's the philosophy that they brought to these issues at the beginning of this pandemic. It's the reason the Prime Minister said on 23 March that the government decision to reject wage subsidies was 'sound' and 'just too hard'. He said: 'The measures require a complete redesign of delivery mechanisms, which will take many months.' A day later, he said of wage subsidies:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… one of the weaknesses of the system that you're advocating for is that it has to build an entirely new payment system for that to be achieved, which is never done quickly and is never done well. … To dream up other schemes can be very dangerous.</para></quote>
<para>They had this view that you couldn't do anything new and that everything was fundamentally okay at a time when businesses were crying out for support and workers were losing their jobs. And it was because the government established higher payments for people who were unemployed under JobSeeker prior to establishing JobKeeper that we saw those queues outside Centrelink as we gathered here on that Monday morning. It was as a direct result of the conscious decision by this government to provide a message, which was, essentially: if you are in doubt, put workers off, because they'll be protected, once they're unemployed, by the extra payments. That decision had diabolical results for workers, many of whom found themselves unemployed for the first time in their lives.</para>
<para>I have a Centrelink office just down from my electorate office in Marrickville Road. Each day, when I walked down, that queue wrapped down Marrickville Road, turned the corner down Illawarra Road and went on down the hill. Hundreds of people were in that queue, most of them representing many more people, because they had families. They were people who were desperate and people who thought they were in secure employment but found that they weren't. Many of those people were laid off first, due to the fact that the government essentially provided a safety net, in terms of JobSeeker being increased, but without any wage subsidies or support for people in employment. They gave businesses the message: we'll protect people and provide some support if they're unemployed, but we won't provide support if they're employed. The direct result were those queues and tragedies for those families, many of whom just struggled because they were reduced to simply surviving. Of course, they didn't have savings—remember that. We had the minister say that it was okay that casual workers were all being laid off and that they could survive because they got this loading that they were keeping in the bottom drawer—all these really wealthy casual workers in insecure work.</para>
<para>Let me say this: this is a debate about immediate needs. We need to deal with the immediate consequences of the pandemic, but we also need to have the vision and the foresight to look at the weaknesses that have been exposed by this pandemic in our labour market, the weaknesses that have seen a great increase in insecure work, the weaknesses that have seen an increase in casualisation and the weaknesses that have seen an increase in contracting out—because it is those people who tend to be the lowest paid who've been made to bear the brunt of this crisis. The fact that we're having to deal with this legislation, because the government believed in 'snap-back', says it all.</para>
<para>When the government did introduce the JobKeeper program, they left too many people behind. Whether they were casual workers, people who worked at places like dnata, university sector workers or local government workers, whole sectors missed out, including the arts and entertainment sector, for example—they were just left behind. That had huge consequences. I know of families in my electorate where mum or dad were suffering, having lost their job or had their payments reduced; at the same time, my son's mates were doing okay because they were getting extra money. So the design of the system provided for some people to miss out completely whilst others were getting additional payments. Some went from earning $150 a week in a casual retail job to all of a sudden getting substantially more than that: $750 a week—a five times increase simply because of the nature of their work. And, of course, there was the $60 billion mistake, the largest budget mistake of any Treasurer ever—and I suspect he will hold that record for some time. In trivia questions in future years, remember the name Josh Frydenberg, because a $60 billion mistake is what happened from this government. They didn't seem to even realise.</para>
<para>The legislation before us today also has mistakes in it. We're supportive of extending JobKeeper. We've been the ones who've been arguing against snapback from the time those words came out of the Prime Minister's mouth. We believe that an early withdrawal of support will mean a recession that is deeper and longer than it needs to be, and our economic team have been outlining that. So we'll be constructive about this. But that's why we're proposing amendments to help fix up the legislation, just as we proposed wage subsidies to try and help—not to help the government. That isn't our end. We'll be honest about that. We want to help people. We want to help the government to help people. That's what we want, which is why the government should support our amendments.</para>
<para>The first amendment that we'll move, of course, is about what happens to companies that aren't getting JobKeeper at all. We don't see that it is reasonable that employers who no longer need government support also get access to emergency industrial relations powers that are provided by this legislation. So that's a fundamental issue here.</para>
<para>The second issue is that a business trading at 90 per cent of normal turnover will be given the power to take away 40 per cent of their workers' wages, with no safety net in place, unless our amendments are adopted. A business that has seen a fall in turnover of 10 per cent will be permitted by this legislation to cut hours by 40 per cent and therefore cut wages by 40 per cent. What is being proposed by the government would have the consequence that some workers would actually be better off if they were working for a firm that was more distressed. Then they'd have JobKeeper as a safety net. Because the company's doing better, the worker will be worse off. How does that work? How is that logical? How is that the market in operation? How will that assist the economy? One of the benefits of JobKeeper and JobSeeker is increasing economic activity throughout the economy by increasing the circulation of money—income. So they spend money and they keep the economic activity going. A young hospitality worker who's had two of their days cut could see their pay fall to just over $450 a week, $150 a week less than they would receive if their employer still had access to JobKeeper.</para>
<para>So we'll be proposing amendments to this legislation—commonsense amendments that I hope the government adopts. To be fair to the government, in the past they adopted Labor amendments to extend support to Austudy recipients, youth allowance recipients and Abstudy recipients. They adopted Labor's position, which was that, for two-income families, some of the tapering of family support meant severe disadvantage for those working families in our suburbs trying to pay off their mortgage. They should listen to Labor on our amendments here. They should adopt them, because a retail worker who's rostered from Wednesday to Saturday and who loses their weekend shifts would lose nearly half of their income under this proposition.</para>
<para>The government has said, 'We're all in this together.' The way out of this pandemic isn't by cutting workers' pay. We accept that businesses are doing it tough. But we don't think that cutting wages through this mechanism is appropriate. We don't think that someone, a full-time worker, who is working and has their hours cut by 40 per cent but is still working three days a week should receive less income than someone who works for a company that's basically really struggling—not working at all, perhaps—and is getting JobKeeper, $750 a week, for not working. It's an anomaly that's here. We need to fix it. We want to make sure that any worker who has their hours cut by their employer doesn't have their pay fall below the applicable JobKeeper rate under this legislation. That's common sense.</para>
<para>I commend the amendments that will be moved to the House. We don't want backdoor austerity, because austerity doesn't work during a crisis. What works is providing support. It worked when Labor did it during the global financial crisis, in spite of the opposition of those opposite. But we have been constructive. We haven't acted like they acted; we have acted like a responsible opposition. Our amendments we put forward are essentially to provide that safety net so that no-one who is working will be worse off than someone who isn't. It is a commonsense proposition that should be supported by this House. We intend to advocate for it here. We intend to advocate for it in discussions with the government. I say that I think this is an unintended consequence—I hope it is—because, frankly, it just doesn't make sense. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to rise to speak on this bill, the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020, and the proposed extension of the JobKeeper program and the associated IR laws that will accompany it. In my experience, residents and businesses in my electorate have been extremely grateful for the early actions of the coalition government in combating this one-in-100-year pandemic. They've appreciated the clear direction set out by the Australian health sector emergency response plan and the almost daily briefings by either the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the health minister or the Chief Medical Officer through all forms of social media and television.</para>
<para>Perhaps most of all, the residents and businesses across my electorate were extremely grateful for the then $70 billion JobKeeper package. Our government's JobKeeper package has helped keep Australians in jobs and supported businesses in this time of crisis. It's helped businesses impacted by coronavirus to cover the costs of their employees' wages so that more people have retained jobs and have continued to earn an income. In the words of one of the JobKeeper recipients in my electorate, Dorrigo hotel owner Peter Feros: 'JobKeeper has enabled me to keep my most important asset—my staff.' He then went on to tell me how good they were, and that he had an award-winning chef at the pub.</para>
<para>There is absolutely no doubt that the last six months has been the most difficult time for all Australians—none more so than when this pandemic hit, with the anxiety of, 'Will I have a job?', 'How will I run my business?', 'Will I actually have a business to run?', 'How will I pay my mortgage and my rent?' But this government provided the biggest ever lifeline of any government in our history, and supported hundreds of thousands of businesses and millions of Australian workers—businesses like the Settlers Inn in Port Macquarie, the Observatory Apartments in Coffs Harbour and the West Kempsey Hotel. I was contacted by the owner of McGrath real estate, who asked me to pass on his personal thanks to this government because he was able to keep on his seven employees.</para>
<para>I had hundreds of similar emails thanking this government for its immediate intervention and for keeping all Australians afloat. I've taken a selection of those emails. Kate Walsh from Wauchope Travel, on 20 May, wrote: 'I'm incredibly grateful for the role the government has played in controlling the coronavirus pandemic and ensuring the safety of Australians and for the JobKeeper payment, which has enabled me to remain in the industry I love. Without this, there is absolutely no doubt that I'd be added to the ever-growing unemployment figures. JobKeeper has allowed me to return to work after being stood down, and it means I have been able to assist my employer with the enormous job each of us is currently undertaking. Unlike some industries, travel agents have never worked so hard than during the COVID-19 pandemic.'</para>
<para>Neil Manson from the Observatory hotel, on 27 April, wrote: 'I felt it was important for you to know that thanks to JobKeeper almost all our staff are still working, not just taking the money but contributing. We will come out the other side still with a business, still with a workforce, still with our regulars and able to hit the ground running.'</para>
<para>Finally, John Cassegrain from the very well-known Australian winemaker business said: 'The JobKeeper program is a great initiative to help employers such as us retain staff. While the winery revenue is a shadow of normal, we still have critical wine production functions to perform if we are to have a wine to market as and when the market returns.'</para>
<para>During the last six months I have met with almost all of my chambers of commerce branches, and without exception all of their members tell me stories about how JobKeeper has helped support all of their businesses and staff. Mums, dads, apprentices and young people out of school are all able to continue to survive because of this government's initiative.</para>
<para>So it dismays me when the haters and the detractors bleat like sheep for the sake of political noise. The Prime Minister himself said no system is perfect, and this government has addressed the issues that have arisen in a timely and appropriate manner. What this government has done is provide the necessary and immediate support to our Australians so they can put food on the table, they can clothe the kids and they can put petrol in the car. Our Australians have remained resilient and positive, and we in this place should recognise their efforts—all the business owners and all the employees. As parliamentarians, we have a reciprocal obligation to lead with resilience and positivity and, above all, provide hope—hope that in the not-too-distant future there will be no need for JobKeeper, hope that in the not-too-distant future it will be business as usual again. What Australians do not want to see right now is political navel gazing or self-interest. So I welcome this bill before us today to extend the prescribed period of the coronavirus payment framework. I wholeheartedly support the JobKeeper payment and the temporary changes to the Fair Work Act, and I wholeheartedly support that they go past September to support all of our hardworking business owners and employees.</para>
<para>Two large sectors in my region of the Mid North Coast are tourism and hospitality, and these businesses are still yet to attract a lot of customers due to the international borders being closed and the borders above and below us being closed. It is for these and other businesses in my electorate—indeed, throughout the entire nation—that I support the JobKeeper payment being extended for another six months. I also support businesses' and organisations' eligibility being retested and targeted so as to ensure the program only assists those businesses that need it the most.</para>
<para>The bill before us today also amends the information-sharing arrangements to enable the Australian tax office to share JobKeeper payment information with Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies to assist them in their efforts to address the impacts of the coronavirus.</para>
<para>This is a common-sense move which should be approached with bipartisanship and will improve our ability to approach the economic crisis arising from the pandemic. We all wish that Australia—in fact, the world—had not experienced the coronavirus. It is a once-in-100-years event and has caused much devastation and loss. Australia is doing well. We have strengthened our health system and our aged-care system and continue to work with the states and territories. This bill will enable us to continue supporting our vital businesses and people through the historic JobKeeper payment. It will enable us to continue supporting thousands of businesses and organisations in Cowper who are grateful for this targeted, temporary support, which has been vital in helping them to chart the current uncertain waters. I urge all members to support the bill.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This coronavirus has exposed many of the fault lines in our society and shown us how, going into the crisis, we were in many respects far too unequal as a society. We've found that many people are in so much debt and without any savings or buffer that they are only a week or two of job payments away from real distress and the poverty line. We have discovered that so many people in this country don't have a roof over their head and, again, are in so much rental stress that if something happens to their job then they risk being turfed out onto the streets in the middle of a pandemic. And as the health restrictions have been imposed, rightly, to make sure that we all stay safe and that this terrible virus takes as few lives as it possibly can, we've also found that the burden of dealing with the crisis has not fallen fairly across society. Young people have lost their jobs at record high rates. Going into this crisis about three in 10 young people either didn't have a job or didn't have enough hours at work. That number rocked up to nearly four in 10 within the first month or so. Not only that, we're seeing that more women are losing work than men are and that the industries that are hardest hit are the ones where young people and women work in greater numbers. They are the industries that are going to take a long time to get back on their feet, because we may, certainly in Victoria, be dealing with these social-distancing restrictions for some time.</para>
<para>That's why in this time of crisis we need government to step in to ensure that no-one is left behind. That has been the Greens mantra from day one. Others have picked it up since, which we welcome, but the Greens mantra from day one has been 'no-one left behind'. However, the government, in its response, has chosen to leave people behind, which is turning up the dial on inequality in our society and widening, rather than seeking to close, the cracks that were there at the start of the crisis.</para>
<para>When the crisis started to hit, the Greens were the first party in parliament to call for some form of wage and job guarantee. We made it very clear that the government's initial response—shovelling billions out of the door to help business—was only part of the response. If money was going to business without any guarantee that people were going to stay on in work then we were going to see massively high levels of unemployment, and that's what we saw with those terrible dole queues snaking around the corner, including in my electorate at Abbotsford at a Centrelink office that the Minister for Government Services tried to close in the middle of the pandemic while there were those massive, massive queues of people waiting for assistance.</para>
<para>When the government decided to adopt a wage guarantee we were supportive of it, because we were the first ones to call for it, but it left a lot of people out and a lot of people behind, and we are continuing to deal with the fallout from that. In a world of insecure work that this government has allowed to run rife, so many casual workers were cut out. Over a million casual workers were cut out unfairly by this government. They have been forced to go without JobKeeper, which is such a lifeline for so many people.</para>
<para>In sectors like the arts and the creative industries, where people might not be engaged in full-time, continuous employment in the way that government thinks is the norm, so many of those people might work from project to project. They missed out because they weren't employed on the magic date of 1 March.</para>
<para>We have now seen childcare workers have the subsidy pulled out from under them even as the crisis continues, especially here in Victoria. They don't get JobKeeper anymore.</para>
<para>We have seen so many temporary visa holders who are in real distress because they have very little support to fall back on. The government is happy to take their taxes when times are good, and then it turns its back on these temporary visa holders when times are bad. All of these areas have been doing it tough under the government.</para>
<para>Say nothing of universities. The government say they are concerned about jobs, jobs, jobs. They are overseeing tens of thousands of job losses in the university sector. In the time of a pandemic, what the government should be doing is making sure that employers who are dependent on the public sector are keeping their staff, not shedding them. Instead the government is deliberately adding to the unemployment figures by overseeing mass carnage in our university sector.</para>
<para>The government come with this bill to extend some elements of JobKeeper, but, of course, not only do they fail to close the gaps that they've created, not only are they going to continue to leave many, many people behind, but they come here with a sting in the tail as well—a surprise package in this bill. There is a very welcome extension of JobKeeper. Again, the Greens were the first ones to call for these wage guarantees. We have said that they should continue at their current rates for as long as they are needed, so we welcome the support and the extension of those payments. It is going to be a huge lifeline to millions of workers and many businesses across the country. So we support the continuation. But this government can't help itself. For the government, the approach seems to be 'never let a crisis go to waste', because they come in here with a surprise package built into this bill that is going to hurt many, many workers.</para>
<para>The government, under this bill, wants to create a new category of employees. These are the employees of a business that is doing so well that they can no longer get JobKeeper, but, apparently, according to the government, the business is doing so poorly that the employer can now turn around and cut their pay. In other words, under this bill there will be a category of businesses that, on the one hand, the government thinks are doing so well that they don't need to give JobKeeper to their employees but, on the other hand, are apparently doing so badly that they can cut their employees' pay. This is critical. Those employees then won't be able to get JobKeeper. In other words, in the middle of a pandemic, the government wants to allow some employers to cut their workers' pay without those workers then being able to get JobKeeper. That is an appalling and cynical move by a government that is showing its true colours day by day.</para>
<para>The government got dragged into having to give the important wage and job guarantee in the form of JobKeeper. Now it is using the extension of this vital measure as an excuse to attack working people. In many respects, it is a form of corporate welfare that workers are being asked to pay for in the middle of a pandemic. Big corporations are now being told, 'You can cut your workers' pay and they will effectively help nurse you back to profitability.' No, it shouldn't be up to workers, in the middle of a pandemic, who have their pay cut. And it is not going to be a pay cut of just up to 40 per cent. The employers, under this provision, can cut workers' hours by 40 per cent. But, if those hours happen to be hours working late at night or on weekends, where you might be earning penalty rates, your pay could be cut by much, much more than 40 per cent. Make no mistake, on the one hand the government is saying, 'Look, we are extending this JobKeeper payment,' which is very welcome, but on the other hand they are saying, 'Your employer can now cut your hours of work by up to 40 per cent, cut your pay by more than 40 per cent and you won't get JobKeeper.' There is absolutely no justification for that. The Greens will be opposing that. The Greens support the amendments that have been moved by the opposition here to excise those provisions from the bill. We announced yesterday that we would be moving those same amendments in the Senate. Those provisions have no part in this bill. We don't need to extend these emergency industrial relations powers that are allowing businesses to change work to people who don't get JobKeeper. We don't need to do that in order to pass this bill. We can pass the extension of the JobKeeper payment and even pass the extension of the emergency IR powers for the people who continue to get JobKeeper payment, but we must not create this new category of people in this country who can have their pay cut by over 40 per cent in the middle of a pandemic and then not be able to get JobKeeper. We will support the amendments to remove those objectionable provisions from the bill. We will move them in the Senate.</para>
<para>We should also use this opportunity to ditch the austerity agenda that Liberal and, sadly, Labor have been pushing, with respect to people who are earning JobKeeper and who previously earnt less than $1,500 a week. There were many people who were under employed in insecure work in this country. They were working low hours per week, not by choice, but because a shift here and a shift there was all that was available to them. When JobKeeper came in at $1,500, many of these people who were stuck in insecure work and stuck in low-hours work were, for the first time, getting something close to a living wage. It's the weekly minimum wage, so they're not exactly living high on the hog. They're getting something close to a living wage—that is, the adult weekly minimum wage. Then Labor came along and, astoundingly, spent the last few months saying this was a wasteful spend and that it was adding to debt. For goodness sake! They're worried about adding to debt because we're supporting low-paid workers in the middle of a pandemic—what a ridiculous proposition.</para>
<para>Labor spent months goading the government into trying to cut payments for people who previously earnt less than $1,500, and the government, unsurprisingly, has agreed. The government now wants to introduce a two-tiered system, which I presume will also have Labor's backing, where people who are working less than 20 hours a week are now going to get their payments cut in the middle of a pandemic. I can tell you something about the people who are going to get their payments cut: they are twice as likely to be women. They're the people who work less than 20 hours a week. As I said, many of these people have been stuck suffering in insecure work. They're not necessarily working these hours because they want to—of course it works for some people, but not for everyone. Many of these people are underemployed and stuck in insecure work. We should not be cutting people's income in the middle of a pandemic, certainly not the people who are on low hours and low pay on insecure work. We should use this as an opportunity to ditch the idea that there should be a two-tiered system.</para>
<para>I'm glad that Labor has started to walk back on some of its calls for cuts. I hope it now extends that to this ridiculous idea that we should cut the payments for people who were previously earning less than $1,500 a fortnight. That $1,500, for people in the middle of a pandemic—especially as the restrictions get extended in Victoria and especially for such a visitor-centred economy like ours, where so many people work in the hospitality and arts and creative sectors with low-hour jobs from time to time. It is going to take us a while to get back on our feet in Melbourne. It is going to take us a long while. The social distancing restrictions that are going to stay in place may make some of those previous businesses unviable for the foreseeable future. We've got to work out how to deal with that, but the one thing that we do know, as we're suffering through that, is that people who were on low hours and in insecure work going into this pandemic should not have their payments cut. I hope that Labor reverses its position on that so that we can get the government to change their mind on that as well.</para>
<para>There are some good amendments coming from the opposition to get rid of the legacy employer concept. Given that I'm not physically in the chamber due to the coronavirus restrictions here in Victoria, I want to place on the record that I will be supporting Labor's amendments when there are divisions. They are good amendments, but it's time now to say, 'Let's not cut anyone's payment.' We need to keep JobKeeper where it is. Not only do we need to extend it—and I welcome the move to extend it—but we need to keep it where it is for so long as it is needed. We need to make sure that people who were previously earning less than $1,500 don't have their payments cut, and we need to extend JobKeeper to all of those groups, as I said at the start, who have been left behind by the government in this pandemic, because what we are seeing day by day is that it is taking longer than expected to respond to this crisis. People across the country, but especially in Melbourne and Victoria, are suffering. We need continued government support, at least at the level that it was, extended to everyone who needs it. Now is the time to give support and come up with a proper recovery plan that is going to get us to full employment on the other side—not cut, cut, cut. We can't cut our way out of this crisis. If we try and cut our way out of the crisis then people are going to suffer and the economic recovery is going to take even longer than it otherwise would. So support the extension, but please, Labor and Liberal, don't cut people's payments in the middle of a pandemic.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs McINTOSH</name>
    <name.id>281513</name.id>
    <electorate>Lindsay</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Cafes, sporting clubs and centres, dance schools, manufacturers and tradespeople are very diverse businesses, but what they have in common is what they've been telling me: that JobKeeper has been an absolute lifesaver for their business. Around 4,500 businesses in Lindsay have been accessing the JobKeeper program for their employees. That's thousands of local small and family businesses keeping people in our community connected to local jobs.</para>
<para>I recently visited Quest Penrith. Phil and the team discussed the challenges that they've been facing due to the coronavirus pandemic. They're particularly struggling with closed borders, which are preventing corporate travellers and forcing sporting teams to cancel big sporting events. This is costing thousands of dollars in cancellations. The JobKeeper legislation, for many businesses like Quest, is the difference between remaining open, servicing customers and reopening on the other side, and closing their doors and losing local jobs. Local jobs are what I am absolutely passionate about—local jobs for local people. One employee told me that she used to have to commute out of the area every day for work. Over 300,000 people in Western Sydney do that. The job that she has with Quest means that she can work closer to home and have that work-life balance and spend time with her family after work, not on the train commuting home. So it is really important that we support our local businesses to keep local people able to work in our community.</para>
<para>Another local business that has been kept in business by JobKeeper is the Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre. I recently spoke in this place to highlight a few of my election commitments. One of those commitments I made was delivered to the centre: to upgrade their facilities. It's a really popular facility for people in our community, particularly families. Luke, who is the managing director of the centre, describes JobKeeper as an absolute lifeline. This has been the case for many sporting facilities, and small and family businesses, in my electorate of Lindsay. Luke told me the centre plans to have local children back playing basketball and volleyball in October. I wish them all the very best for their reopening. I know how much this will mean to local families. Local sporting facilities are important to families in our community.</para>
<para>I've also met on a number of occasions with Julie, Alan and the team at Nepean Aquatic Centre and Eva Borys Swim School. Learning to swim is such an essential part of Australian life for safety, fitness and fun. The Nepean Aquatic Centre hosts learn-to-swim lessons for babies, children and adults, as well as sport and fitness options for competitive swimmers, squad training, lap swimming and aquarobics. One day I was there meeting the team and I saw the rehabilitation work that they also do at this centre.</para>
<para>But, as with so many businesses, the restrictions imposed to help stop the spread of the coronavirus forced the temporary closure of the centre. The JobKeeper program was vital to ensure the incredible staff who are there who teach these lifesaving skills to children and encourage healthy active living in our community, which I'm completely behind, were able to stay connected to their local jobs and re-emerge on the other side. Now the swim school is open again for local families and they are delighted that children can learn to swim. As their motto says: 'Love to Swim, Swim for Safety, Swim for Life'. Now, as we come into summer, we have work to do to ensure that, even as restrictions come into place, the swim school can do its very important work of teaching children these very crucial skills.</para>
<para>Keeping businesses in business and maintaining local jobs is the key aim of the JobKeeper legislation. For Quest Penrith, the Nepean Aquatic Centre, the Penrith Valley Regional Sports Centre and so many other local businesses—the dance schools, the manufactures and the tradespeople—this means they will be able to re-emerge from the coronavirus, open their doors and continue to contribute so much to our community and our local economy. As we continue to grapple with the coronavirus pandemic and look to the other side, we must make sure our small businesses and community organisations have the support to open their doors and sustain local jobs. The Morrison government's JobKeeper amendments will make sure we can keep businesses in business and employees in jobs for Australians who need it most.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Let's start with some facts in this debate on the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020. Fact No. 1: Australia is experiencing its greatest economic recession since the Great Depression. Fact No. 2: for the first time in Australia's history over one million Australians are unemployed. When you include the many hundreds of thousands whose unemployment is hidden, or who have lost hours, the number of Australians who want more work is much closer to two million people. Over 500,000 Australians have lost their jobs since March and countless hundreds of thousands have lost their hours. In my home region of the Hunter, 40,800 jobs were lost between March and June. The official unemployment rate is over seven per cent, but when you use the effective unemployment rate it is over 13 per cent. The official youth unemployment rate is 16.3 per cent, but when you include those who've given up looking for work it is 35 per cent. When you include those amongst young people who desperately need more hours, over two-thirds of young people in this country desperately need more hours. Just think about that for a minute. Two-thirds of young Australians either desperately want work or need more hours to pay their bills. This is indeed the greatest economic challenge this country has seen since the Great Depression.</para>
<para>And the challenge is much worse because this government has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into taking action. They resisted with every fibre of their body. When Labor first proposed a wage subsidy, this government resisted it. They resisted it strongly. They had to be dragged kicking and screaming towards it. Even when they did implement it, they implemented it incredibly poorly. We saw massive issues, particularly one million Australian workers excluded—one million Australian workers who had the misfortune of being casual workers with less than 12 months connection to their workplace or who performed a series of short, contracted jobs in the gig economy. So, from day one, even when this government supported a wage subsidy, one million Australians missed out.</para>
<para>Nevertheless, JobKeeper has been massively important for Australia and for my region in particular. For example, the travel industry has been gutted by the pandemic. A Warners Bay travel agent who I spoke to has told me that she was extremely grateful for the JobKeeper program, which has given her business the ability to remain, in some ways, operational. The agent pleaded with me to do all I could to ensure the extension of JobKeeper, and, thankfully, there is an extension of sorts until next year, although many businesses won't qualify under the new criteria and the rate is going to be reduced drastically at a time when the economy needs more stimulus, not less. The agent also explained to me how different the travel industry is from other industries, such as hospitality, which have in some ways been able to adapt and run more home delivery or more takeaway. Her business relies totally on international and, to a lesser extent, interstate travel, which of course has been drastically curtailed.</para>
<para>Another business owner I've had contact with runs a preschool. She too is overwhelmingly grateful for the wage subsidy that was implemented, which allowed them to remain operational. However, the government completely failed to deliver on its promise of free child care, and in fact JobKeeper was removed for early childhood education centres in July. Another example of a beneficiary of JobKeeper is the cafe across the road from my electorate office. Although they had to shut for a while at the start of the pandemic, they were able to support their staff through the initial period until restrictions were eased and they were able to reopen. These are just a few examples of businesses in Shortland who have been able to survive in this unprecedented economic Armageddon because of a wage subsidy that Labor championed from the beginning of the crisis and that the coalition resisted and dismissed as unnecessary. How wrong they were!</para>
<para>But, Madam Deputy Speaker Claydon, there are significant problems with the changes afoot in this legislation. For example, a constituent of mine runs a large party supply firm that's actually located in your electorate and employs 20 people. He's contracted me to outline that, although they've been severely impacted by the downturn, they did have one relatively good month of trading in July, which would make them ineligible for the October to December quarter of assistance under JobKeeper. This business will be trading significantly below 30 per cent in both August and September but, as it stands, won't be eligible moving forward. This is an anomaly, and I urge the government to address this for businesses in this situation. Twenty families who currently receive the payment will have it cruelly taken away.</para>
<para>The stats on JobKeeper in my area are that 4,150 Shortland businesses and organisations applied for JobKeeper, 15,769 Shortland workers are on JobKeeper and, in fact, 23 per cent of Shortland working-age residents are on JobKeeper. If JobKeeper ends, $23½ million per fortnight will be taken out of the Shortland economy. With the cuts embodied in this legislation, many millions of dollars of JobKeeper assistance will come out of the Shortland economy. That is desperately needed economic stimulus to keep Shortland businesses going. We have many shops that are closing. When I go through the town centres of many of my communities, I see more and more vacant shops, so the situation is not getting better. So for the rate of assistance and the industries receiving JobKeeper to be cut at this time is very premature. Millions of dollars per fortnight will come out of the Shortland economy.</para>
<para>Instead of these drastic cuts, this government should be laying out its future vision for jobs. They should be having a jobs plan to combat the worst economic recession since the Great Depression. But we don't have that; we have the government reverting to its base instincts of reducing the size of government and removing assistance, saying that business will fill the gap. Well, I'm yet to meet a business that can invest in this environment with any certainty, especially when money is being pulled out of the economy. What we need is a vision for a future for the Australian economy—a vision that should be grounded in bringing manufacturing home. I think this crisis has demonstrated that fragile supply chains that are internationally dependent have failed us. We need to bring some of those supply chains, the critical ones, home. We need to invest in national sovereignty. We need to reinvest in national manufacturing powered by cheap renewable energy.</para>
<para>That's why Labor has been so forthright in saying that we should use this crisis to have a green-led recovery.</para>
<para>We should turn the COVID recovery to one powered by cheap renewable energy made reliable by pumped hydro and batteries because that is the future of energy in this country. It is already the cheapest form of power in this country. We should be investing in it at this critical opportunity not just to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions but to become again the land of cheap energy, to bring home manufacturing powered by cheap electricity so that we can reinvest in our aluminium smelting industry, so we can have green steelmaking, so with that we can have green ammonia, so we can have a hydrogen industry that the rest of the world is jealous of, so we can export electricity through DC underwater cables from northern Australia to South-East Asia, so we can export electricity through hydro again to South Korea and Japan, and so we can export rare earths—the lithium, the titanium, the iron ore, the silver, the copper—that the rest of the world needs in a renewable energy boom.</para>
<para>This is what Australia should be doing but, instead, we have a government mired in indecision, a government that is cutting JobKeeper, a government that is cutting JobSeeker and a government that has slogans like 'JobMaker' and 'JobTrainer' that its own departments don't know anything about. This is the critical challenge for this government: will they stand up and fight against the Great Depression or will they repeat the mistakes of previous governments, including the conservative parties in the 1930s in this country which withdrew assistance, cut public sector wages and cut assistance to pursue an imaginary damage surplus that made the Great Depression worse. That is the choice.</para>
<para>Labor stands for an optimistic future, a fairer economy that recognises that COVID has changed everything, an economy with a plan for Australian manufacturing, a plan for decarbonising the economy and a plan for investing in new mining, new resource extraction, new renewable energy. That is the way forward, but I think this government will disappoint us. I hope they don't. I hope they seize this opportunity, because the 15,000 residents of Shortland on JobKeeper and the 150,000 residents in the Shortland economy depend upon a changed approach.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak in support of the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill. I supported the initial JobKeeper legislation in April. When I did that, I said I had heard from businesses and employees across my electorate who said, 'Yes, this is what we need.' Almost 400 people responded to a small business survey I conducted back in April, with 97 per cent of them reporting that they had been negatively affected by COVID-19, losing on average 71 per cent of their revenue, and 32 per cent of them reported that they had total loss of revenue. Understanding of JobKeeper at that time was high, with 99 per cent of respondents reporting that they'd known about it and over half had already registered their interest with the ATO.</para>
<para>Now I stand here and tell you that I've spoken again to dozens and dozens of businesses and employees across my electorate in the long months since. They've told me that this is what they need to keep employees in work and their businesses afloat. The August ATO data revealed that, in my electorate of Indi in April, over 4,300 businesses and not-for-profits received JobKeeper, rising to over 4,600 in May. Of businesses receiving JobKeeper in May, there were 875 in Wodonga, 587 in Wangaratta, 283 in Benalla and 179 in Euroa. These businesses employ thousands of local people. Without this initiative, where would businesses like Mely & Me Cafe run by Jas Mely and Belinda Trotter, The Weekend Local run by Dale and her family in Euroa, Lisa Brown and her family at the Mansfield Hotel, and Belinda and Mark Sorenson from Cafe Martini in Wangaratta be? In a recent survey conducted by <inline font-style="italic">Business Wodonga</inline> in early August, 60 per cent of businesses believed JobKeeper had helped them and over two-thirds said they wanted it to continue for another six months. Businesses praised the government's support measures and said what a difference they had made.</para>
<para>This bill will extend JobKeeper for another six months until 28 March 2021, with payments gradually being reduced through changes to the rules. In light of the stage 3 restrictions currently in place in my electorate, and the impact of the Melbourne second wave on our regional economy, this extra six months will give our businesses the breathing space to work out how to best position themselves for recovery. On this, I'd like to recognise the accountants who are so important in working with business owners as they adapt to this new world and new conditions—ones like Mark Evans, from Henry Partners in Mansfield, who I met in early winter. Mark has been giving business clients financial advice through the bushfire emergency and the ongoing COVID-19 crisis. Renae Pitargue, of First Class Accounts in Wodonga, has been helping her 120 clients understand how they can choose the most effective business structure or restructure their business to ensure employees have ongoing work, including bringing them onto permanent part-time work rather than on a casual basis to ensure they are committed to the company as it comes out the other side.</para>
<para>Businesses receiving JobKeeper under the extension will still be required to demonstrate the 30 per cent fall in revenue, or 15 per cent for charities or not-for-profits, for the relevant comparison period in each of the quarters to June, September and December 2020. I am pleased that the alternative revenue test can continue to be used in circumstances where this reference period is not appropriate—in cases where a business is less than 12 months old or has been affected by drought or other declared natural disasters during the relevant comparison period. This continued flexibility will be appreciated by many businesses in my electorate whose revenue had been significantly impacted by the horror bushfires at the beginning of the year.</para>
<para>This year, 2020, has been a difficult year for everyone, but I especially want to recognise my constituents in Indi, who have stayed strong through a series of disasters both natural and man-made. These include the devastating bushfires, the initial COVID-19 lockdown, the Victorian second wave and the New South Wales-Victoria border closure. The Business Wodonga survey identified border closure as a bigger issue than coronavirus. This is truly incredible. The respondents told the survey, 'The border closure is slowly suffocating our businesses.' They also said, 'We're looking at a significant downturn, with 50 per cent of our geographical service area being stripped from us due to the border crossing restrictions.'</para>
<para>Leanne Harkin, owner of Scissor Creations Hair Salon, has her hairdressing salon one kilometre from the border, and her trade went down 50 to 60 per cent overnight when the border restrictions were first put into place. Stephen Donaghey, of the Murray division of the Masters Builders Association, has told me that it is fair to state that the construction industry in the border region is in turmoil and, without adjustments to current permit conditions, could slow to a crawl, if not total shutdown. Some businesses have already shut their doors due to myriad problems caused by the current conditions of critical services permits and a lack of available permits for parties associated with construction, particularly new homes. It is for these people that an ongoing JobKeeper is so important. It is this sector which the government has proactively identified for support through its HomeBuilder scheme. Construction was booming on the border. Now it is at risk of coming to a standstill. There are homes under construction in New South Wales that are stalling at progress payment stages, as the owners reside in Victoria and cannot inspect the sites to approve payments. Stephen and his Master Builders representatives met with the New South Wales Deputy Premier last week to discuss the impact of the border closure on the construction industry. I congratulate them for their dogged determination and advocacy on behalf of their members, and share their hopes that common sense will prevail and they can get back to work.</para>
<para>JobKeeper is the safety net our country needs right now, but the government is still deliberately excluding some sectors. The universities sector still can't access JobKeeper not only for its academic staff but for the thousands of occupations on university campuses—the support staff, the cleaners, the bookkeepers, the administrative staff, the groundspeople and the gardeners. On the border, the major regional campuses of Charles Sturt and La Trobe universities have hundreds of employees across these sectors. They have been under considerable stress during the pandemic, with no support from JobKeeper. Border universities and TAFEs are crucial to our future as a vibrant region, and we need to support them. Recently I met with staff from Charles Sturt University, who told me they are now expecting considerable job losses right across the rural campuses.</para>
<para>The childcare sector is another one that fell by the wayside with the JobKeeper scheme. When the Minister for Education announced his COVID-19 relief package for child care he halved the amount of money that childcare providers received and expected that JobKeeper would fill the rest. But the problem was that many childcare providers were ineligible for JobKeeper, and especially so in rural regions such as mine. Many childcare centres in Indi are run by local councils, and they were not eligible for JobKeeper. This meant that these centres, which had almost normal attendance rates before the government's package, had their revenues halved and they were denied JobKeeper. Many family day care providers were in the same boat. Disturbingly, I received messages saying some family day care workers quit in disgust at the indignity of the government effectively halving their income, and, now that the emergency relief package has ended, childcare workers were the first ones to be kicked off what should have been a good scheme—because JobKeeper is a good scheme, but it has some significant holes in it. And it is for some of those holes that I will be supporting some amendments this afternoon.</para>
<para>JobKeeper is only one aspect of our economic recovery. It lasts for the next six months, but what about the six after that and the six after that? How do we set ourselves up for a prosperous future ahead? The upcoming budget is our opportunity to plan for the long term, and that's why I've worked with local governments right across Indi, and the community and health sectors, to nominate key projects for our region that will grow jobs and get people off JobKeeper. I was proud to present to the Treasurer my Indi budget submission, which is full of great ideas for regional revitalisation—ideas that, if implemented, will fast-track people into work and keep them there.</para>
<para>Firstly, I think this government should be co-funding major tourism projects by establishing a dedicated regional tourism infrastructure fund to support projects in bushfire and lockdown affected regions with strong domestic tourism potential, such as, in Indi, the Murray to Mountains Rail Trail, the HotHouse Theatre upgrade in Wodonga, the Euroa cinema upgrade, the Alexandra-Thornton-Eildon rail link, the King Valley Prosecco Road development, the Holden heritage centre in Winton, the Skyline precinct in Lake Eildon—exciting projects that bring people to the region and create jobs.</para>
<para>Secondly, there should be more investment in shovel-ready local infrastructure projects that are locked out of current schemes. These include things like the Baranduda Fields access roads and parking area, the Mansfield Lords Reserve Pavilion, the Alexandra streetscape and the Marysville regeneration projects; a telecommunications link between the north-east and Gippsland; community energy; and, in health, rural health and aged care. We should be funding more home-care packages that employ home-care workers to enable people to age safely in place. We could co-fund the Albury Wodonga Health priority projects, including a new women and children's wing, a research and education hub on health impacts of natural disasters, and a community services hub. We should implement the recommendations of the NDIS Tune review, and invest in the development of a skilled NDIS workforce in regional and rural communities, where they can be trained at our regional universities. These are just some of the fantastic opportunities that exist in our community to bring about more employment and to guarantee north-east Victoria's place as a must-visit destination and a fantastic place to live and to work.</para>
<para>On behalf of my electorate, this week and next I'm going to government with this message and I'm meeting with the Deputy Prime Minister and various ministers, including those responsible for tourism, regional health, communications, education, forestry, to name a few. I'm convinced that they should see that these investments deliver value for money and get people off JobKeeper and off JobSeeker.</para>
<para>I would like to thank the nine local governments who worked alongside me to finalise this submission, including Alpine, Benalla, Indigo, Mansfield, Murrindindi, Strathbogie, Towong, Wangaratta and Wodonga. They care deeply about doing the best by their communities and are living examples of how rural and regional councils work hard to build prosperity and livability in the regions—and they have been doing extraordinary work to support their communities during this COVID crisis.</para>
<para>In closing, I would like to thank the government for recognising that the economy cannot simply snap back in September. This extension of JobKeeper is very welcome, as it is clear from business, welfare and community leaders that the pandemic is not over. But I'm feeling more optimistic today that we have what we need in place to get through in a better state than we otherwise would.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her contribution. The question is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MURPHY</name>
    <name.id>133646</name.id>
    <electorate>Dunkley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to be able to be here to support the extension of JobKeeper, and I'm pleased that the Prime Minister and the Treasurer listened to Labor's calls to do so. We also have to remember that we're here speaking on the Coronavirus Economic Response Package (JobKeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020 because of the Prime Minister's and the Treasurer's belief that the economy would just snap back in September and because of their adamant refusal to listen to suggestions that support would be needed for longer. The JobKeeper wage subsidy was supported by unions and called for by unions. It was supported and called for by Labor. It was supported and called for by business, and, finally, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer caved, and introduced a wage subsidy scheme.</para>
<para>Members on the opposite side shouldn't spend too much time congratulating themselves about this wage subsidy scheme—it is great that they brought it in eventually, but there was a delay in bringing it in. Before the government decided to bring in this wage subsidy, we all remember seeing outside Centrelink offices the tragic lines of people who had lost their jobs. We saw those lines at Frankston Centrelink and at Mornington Centrelink, and I'm sure those lines had something to do with the government finally listening to the community campaign that I was proud to support to give Mornington Centrelink a reprieve and the people of Mount Eliza, Mornington and beyond a reprieve so they could still have their Centrelink office until March of next year and Frankston wouldn't be even more overburdened.</para>
<para>So I'm pleased that JobKeeper is being extended, but of course there are still so many businesses and people who were left out of the scheme as it was and who will be left out of the scheme as it will be. This government has deliberately excluded many people. In my electorate, in my community, the 200 or so people who worked at the Peninsula Aquatic Recreation Centre weren't eligible for JobKeeper and lost their positions. Employees at the Monash University Peninsula campus aren't eligible for JobKeeper. Casuals who hadn't worked at the same place for 12 months—which includes so many people, young people in particular in hospitality and retail—are not eligible for JobKeeper.</para>
<para>Under this legislation today, the Treasurer has extraordinary power to set the rates and eligibility under the extension and changes to JobKeeper. When he does that it is important that the Treasurer considers the people and businesses in his home state and my home state of Victoria. In my electorate of Dunkley, I have had many businesses and employees reach out to me about the way in which JobKeeper has been essential but, in many instances, not good enough. Jen, who works in the arts and events industry, which has been shut down since March, with the likelihood of not reopening until sometime next year, managed to get herself and some of her administrative staff into some other work and onto JobKeeper, finally. But it's not enough to cover all of her personal expenses. It's just been enough to help her and others get by. Of course, she wasn't able to pick up any other work, because JobKeeper specifies that you can have JobKeeper only for one job. She's one of the many people in my electorate who are concerned about what is going to happen to them under this new scheme.</para>
<para>Jennifer has spoken to many constituents in my electorate, and they have been generous to share their situation with me. In the time I have today, I can't tell all of their individual stories, but I want to make sure that Fiona from the hospitality industry, Lisa who works in the higher education industry, Pauline in retail, Tori in education, Noni who's a draftsperson, Rebecca who works in retail support, Leanne who's a cake-maker, Casey from the human resources industry who runs a small business, Alysha who's just out of my electorate but works in performing arts and Nick who's a visual artist know that the time and effort they put into telling their stories has not gone astray, that I have heard them and my Labor colleagues have heard them. Many of these people were working more than two part-time jobs to make up the equivalent of full-time hours because they work in a casualised and fractured labour market and industry. Many of these people lost one or more of those jobs before JobKeeper came in, so now they're working less than 20 hours and facing JobKeeper being cut to $750. The amount they were getting before the cut was only just enough to help them get by, and they're very fearful of what will happen to them when these new changes come in. These are the businesses and people that the Treasurer needs to be cognisant of as he is designing the rates and the eligibility criteria.</para>
<para>Today I spoke to Peter Negri from my electorate. He is so concerned for his 90 employees across the country that he asked if perhaps I could put my phone on speaker while I was in the chamber and he could speak for himself. I had to tell him that that wasn't possible. He was anxious to make sure that I let people in this place know, in particular that I let the federal government know, that he has staff members who have said to him, 'I don't know how I'm going to live.' He feels that the federal government isn't hearing what needs to be done on the ground and too often takes a top-down approach. Peter runs a travel company that specifically takes people with disabilities on holidays. He's not able at the moment to use the tax write-offs that have been offered because he hasn't got any income as the tours can't happen. He can't access the 50 per cent backed government loans that this government announced with much fanfare. The ANZ has said no because he doesn't have any income—and, anyway, the speed at which they're processing loans is considerably low. Out of the 90 staff he has across the country, he was only able to get 17 of them onto the JobKeeper package. There are some that are now working second jobs and others have had to go onto JobSeeker, so they've lost their connection to their employer. And, because of the continued health restrictions and the lockdowns and the border restrictions, if he doesn't resume touring by mid-September, he may have to close a business which employs 90 people, is in Carrum Downs in my electorate and helps people with a disability get holidays. His story needs to be told.</para>
<para>So does Damian's story. He invested $200,000 in his business in the sporting industry setting up a gym just before the lockdown and therefore he wasn't sure if he was able to access JobKeeper. He was advised by the ATO he could get it in a provisional capacity because his business had been open for a week. It was open for a short period of time as well in July. He's recently, in the last week, been advised he now has something like a $14,000 bill to the ATO because they've decided he wasn't eligible for the JobKeeper he has received, and, even if he gets JobKeeper now under the new scheme, that won't alleviate the debt. How is he going to pay that back? These are real people—not statistics but real people. This government needs to make sure that it is flexible and innovative in the way it implements JobKeeper, in particular for the people in our great state of Victoria, because it's important for them, it's important for the economy and it's important for jobs.</para>
<para>In the time that's been allocated to me, I also want to say just briefly before I conclude that the fair work changes that are in this legislation have, of course, been the subject of some change since they were first announced. Labor warned the government they shouldn't extend emergency industrial relations powers to businesses that had fully recovered or even better, so the decision to only extend them to 10 per cent threshold is a win. But the way out of this recession, the way to build back better, is not to employ the industrial relations deregulation agenda of the Reagan and Thatcher years. The government cannot, under the guise of a global pandemic, wreak havoc on the conditions and the pay of workers. The government needs to be alert to the fact that workers in my electorate are not going to accept being abandoned by a government that has an ideological belief that workers shouldn't be protected by the IR system.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the extension of the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme. I know that for the many businesses, especially in Warringah, that are still suffering from the impact of the restrictions and the downturn in economic activity, this was an extremely welcome announcement. The bill we are discussing today, Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020, will be a lifeline for many businesses and their employees over the months to come, from October to March. I've been meeting with many businesses around the electorate, as well as with the Manly and Warringah chambers of commerce, to hear their concerns. Warringah has over 17,000 small businesses and sole traders. There are some businesses that, even with this extended lifeline, will struggle to survive, and I urge the government to consider targeted interventions to support those faced with near-complete shutdowns, such as travel agents and those in the events, arts and entertainment sectors.</para>
<para>The JobKeeper amendments extend the income subsidy from the end of September this year through to March next year. Very much welcomed is the change in flexibility in relation to the two tiers of payment under the new scheme—one tier for full-time workers and one for those working less than 20 hours per week. This is a good development to better tailor the response to the need. There's no doubt that small businesses are hurting. I've heard from many employers in my electorate that they are struggling with the disruption to their business and need all the flexibility that they can get to remain viable. These businesses range from physiotherapists to brewers. They're shifting their business models, they are innovating, they are adapting and they need their staff to come along with them.</para>
<para>The introduction of the category of legacy businesses, those that formerly qualified for JobKeeper but have now recovered sufficiently not to require the financial assistance, is a significant development. But there is some concern in relation to the ability to keep the Fair Work flexibility provisions, in that that may lead to a reduction of work and income for employees, which would have a significant impact. I urge the government to consider inserting minimum wage impact provisions, in addition to the cap on the number of hours that can be reduced.</para>
<para>This bill is important to prevent the much-touted economic cliff that is arriving in September. In Warringah alone there are over 7,500 businesses on the current version of JobKeeper. It has been a lifeline for these businesses and I'm pleased to see it continue. But there are certain issues that have been highlighted by my constituents and advocates, such as clarifications regarding the eligibility of start-ups and sole traders; the future eligibility of early education workers for JobKeeper; the need to consider the role of women and youth in our economic stimulus packages; and the need to develop industry-specific packages for those hit most severely by the restrictions imposed on business operations. I have had many sole traders approach me because they were initially deemed eligible for JobKeeper and received assistance for a couple of months but then had it pulled away again. The changes have caused significant concern for those people, and I would urge the government to clarify the requirements. I was contacted by Andrea, a sole trader, and she is not alone. An estimated 9,000 new businesses are in the same situation. The heads of nine accounting bodies, including CPA Australia, and Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand, issued a warning to the government in June in relation to clarity in relation to the GST integrity rule for new businesses. I don't believe there has been a response.</para>
<para>In my electorate, there are many who share concerns about support for start-ups. These are businesses that we will be relying on, and we need people to create more opportunities. These are businesses like Johan Eksteen, who runs a clothing and branding business in Brookvale, or Andrew Gillespie, who has had to escalate his case to the AAT, or Yvonne Bowyer, who fell through the cracks of both JobSeeker and JobKeeper. So I urge the government to clarify the provisions. We need to support start-up businesses, risk-takers, innovators. We need their businesses to survive and to prosper to the other side.</para>
<para>Of course, child care requires clarification. Early childhood educators were the first group to be taken off JobKeeper. The government announced the end of JobKeeper for childcare workers when they also announced the other support package for the industry to offset the loss of JobKeeper. But we've now seen no new announcements from the government regarding what support will be available to this industry post September. The Parenthood group have been calling for childcare centres to return to eligibility for JobKeeper, and I support that call, especially as the majority of people working in those industries are women, and they are the hardest-hit in terms of job losses. The childcare sector is vital as well for supporting women to transition back into the workforce. We can't afford to let that sector collapse.</para>
<para>The government needs to have a specific focus on their support for Australian women to recover their employment opportunities. To date, a number of packages have been very much focused on male dominated industries, and we haven't seen the same attention given to female dominated industries, especially when it comes to the early education sector, casual employment, tertiary education, and arts and entertainment. All these sectors have higher levels of female employment. They have a higher impact of COVID and backdowns, and they have lower levels of eligibility for JobKeeper. So I urge the government to take this on notice and do something about it.</para>
<para>Similarly, our young people have taken the brunt of this pandemic. Youth unemployment in Warringah is at 13 per cent—more than three times higher than the overall unemployment rate. Although they have been impacted the least by the disease itself, youth have been hit the hardest by the economic consequences now and there is no doubt they will bear the brunt of the recovery. I urge the government to consider new approaches to support this generation now and into their uncertain future. We know that, in times of recession, youth are invariably the hardest hit, the last to recover and the least considered in recovery packages.</para>
<para>I must also mention that we need some industry-specific packages, especially when it comes to the travel industry. They've been devastated by border closures both international and domestic. We've had a lot of attention on airlines. Travel agents have received less attention from the media but their situation is arguably more acute. They're continuing to work to secure refunds for their customers but that doesn't bring them any income. I've met with many travel agents, including the CEO of the Australian Federation of Travel Agents. They really need a sector-specific recovery package. They were the first to shut down and, undoubtedly, they will be the last to reopen. Our events industry has been decimated by restrictions. I have heard from several events and event support companies in Warringah who, despite JobKeeper, will struggle to stay afloat. Great Big Events is a local company that specialises in high-profile international events. Their business is gone. Exhibit Systems has been operating in Warringah for over 20 years. Nick, the owner of Exhibit Systems, has had zero income since 13 March this year and employs 46 staff. He has very tough decisions ahead.</para>
<para>Of course, the offer of the 50 per cent business loan and the government guarantee is not of much assistance when the bank cannot approve any loans because there is simply no business plan in the future with their industry completely shut down. So there clearly needs to be some certainty. Countries like the UK and Germany are addressing these industries with specific strategies. I'd urge the government to look at implementing some of those. Many in the arts sector have been found ineligible for JobKeeper and are not able to have the assistance of JobSeeker. So this is an area where I would urge the government to do more. Thousands who work in the arts and entertainment industry are suffering—musicians, dancers, artists, comedians, camera men and women, sound engineers, roadies, editors, producers and event staff at theatres. The ripple effect is endless, and my electorate office has been inundated with stories of people who are really struggling.</para>
<para>I welcome the continuation of JobKeeper and the consultative approach to the refinements of the Fair Work Act provisions. I urge the government to consider further measures to address issues like rent relief and the code of conduct. I encourage the government to develop tailored packages for the industries most affected by the restrictions on operations. The government must consider approaches to supporting industries while they get back up and running.</para>
<para>On top of having a vaccine, we must develop a sustainable way of operating in a COVID-safe way in the future. For industries like travel, events, entertainment and many in the arts, this is more than a recession; this is a near 100 per cent shutdown of their business. So we must find plans. Thank you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support the extension of JobKeeper for another six months because for many of the businesses in my electorate of Macquarie in the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury, this is the only thing keeping their heads above water. What has struck me as I travel around my electorate is the unevenness of this recession. People have shared with me their personal and business situations. Some business owners reveal, in an almost confessional way, that, in fact, business has been really good. You get the feeling that they're a bit embarrassed to say it because they know that not every business in the shopping centre they are in is experiencing the same boost.</para>
<para>In areas like mine, where fewer people are commuting for work, there are more people able to shop closer to home, buy flowers, stop for a coffee, buy a painting to decorate those Zoom-featured walls. The natural trend to shop local has certainly been encouraged. But other businesses are openly despairing such as the businesses that have traditionally relied on high levels of international tourism, either coming in or going out—tour guides on one hand, travel agents on the other. Cafes and restaurants have to turn people away because they've hit their COVID-safe limit. These businesses haven't been able to return to anything like normal levels—that's if they've got any revenue coming in at all. And then there are all the variations in between. The accommodation providers are packed at weekends but empty on weekdays, the clothing stores are finding that people aren't going out as much so they're not feeling the need to add to their wardrobes. But masks, which have next to no profit margin on them, are flying out the door. The tradies, who have loved helping people fix all those problems at home that they'd put up with until they'd spent hours and weeks at home, now can't see a pipeline of work. So while we're pleased that the government has not only brought in a wage subsidy in the form of JobKeeper, after we called for it, and that it's now extending it, which is what we've called for, the devil is going to be in the detail of how this is carried out. And the detail, we know, is going to be determined by the Treasurer.</para>
<para>We remember that the Prime Minister and Treasurer did spend a lot of time saying there was no need for a wage subsidy. Back in March, on the 24th to be precise, the Prime Minister rejected calls from Labor, from the unions, from business for a UK style wage subsidy, saying that such a system 'is never done quickly and is never done well, and that will put at great risk the sort of resources we're trying to get to people'. His preference was to send people to the unemployment queue, for employers to sack their workers and for them to line up to register for unemployment benefits. I had employees in tears at that time but I also had employers distressed at the decisions that they were being forced to make because they did not want to lose their staff.</para>
<para>Let's think about the name 'JobKeeper'. While we talk about this in the context of businesses, sole traders, small, medium and large business, let's remember that this legislation and the detail that will emerge are ultimately about keeping people in work and keeping them connected to their employer. But it's not about keeping people in jobs at any cost. I'm pleased to see that, when we called on the government to abandon its proposal to extend emergency industrial relations powers to businesses that had fully recovered, they did listen to our call.</para>
<para>When people have decent and secure jobs, they have money to spend. That goes into so many other businesses and keeps my local economy ticking over. Right now, in spite of the promised continuation of JobKeeper, businesses look to the next few months with fear. They're fearful of the lower level and what that will do to the amount of money people have to spend. The Treasurer must make sure that the workers and businesses impacted by bushfires in my region are not ignored in these JobKeeper changes. The detail needs to give bushfire-affected businesses, who have managed to hang on through the months of COVID, the confidence that they won't be penalised for having had hardly any revenue in the months of smoke and fire that they endured at the end of last year and the beginning of this year. And it's not just in my electorate; that's up and down the country. It needs to be easy for them. People who have been through bushfires have been through so many processes to get support. They've filled in form after form. They've had conversation after conversation with so many different agencies. They really can't take a lot more. What they need is a process that is easy for them to follow and one where they feel supported.</para>
<para>If you want to give my local business owners and workers the confidence that their efforts right now will not be in vain then making sure the process is easy to do, by spelling out clearly how it will work in bushfire areas, will go a long way. No-one wants to see anyone with less money in their pockets, so targeting the support to where it will have the most benefit is crucial. To date we've had some big losers: casuals with less than 12 months; the arts and entertainment workers who have slipped through the gaps; the local government workers; the foreign students, who now rely on collecting food and vegetables from Hawkesbury's Helping Hands; university workers; and the workers who have had no choice but to pull out super—self-employed people for whom that was the only option. We have to make sure that, going forward, the government really targets and nuances support for these people; it's failed to do so in the past.</para>
<para>The government must also resist the temptation to use the cover of COVID to pursue its passion for destroying universal superannuation and workers' rights. The government has a habit of saying no but then saying yes. They did it on bushfire business support. They did it on a wage subsidy. They did it on pandemic leave. They're a bit like Jim in <inline font-style="italic">The Vicar of Dibley</inline><inline font-style="italic">. </inline>They say, 'No, no, no, no, yes.' Let's hope they say yes to things like a social housing program and more support for the construction industry to give tradies a pipeline of work. In a crisis like the one we are facing, it is up to the government to step up. Subsidising wages is a start, but we need more than that. We need a plan from this government on how to create jobs in our economy not just save them.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr WEBSTER</name>
    <name.id>281688</name.id>
    <electorate>Mallee</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>COVID-19 has caused unprecedented damage to our nation's economy, with thousands of large, medium and small businesses struggling to survive due to lockdowns and border restrictions. The Commonwealth government acted quickly and decisively to mitigate the pain experienced by individuals, families and businesses across the country with a range of economic support measures. Undoubtedly, the centrepiece of the government's economic response has been the JobKeeper program, which is the single largest economic support measure in Australia's history. Now worth over $100 billion, the JobKeeper program has acted as a lifeline for over 3.5 million people and nearly a million Australian businesses.</para>
<para>Despite our continuous exemplary low number of active cases in my electorate of Mallee, restrictions have meant jobs have been lost, businesses have closed and times are tough for many. In the month of May, there were 4,200 businesses in Mallee who applied for JobKeeper. Being Victorians, many of these businesses will continue to benefit from the six month extension of JobKeeper, especially those in the tourism and hospitality industries. This is particularly welcome in our regional areas where stage 3 restrictions continue to be enforced by Premier Andrews.</para>
<para>In recent weeks I've heard from a range of businesses across Mallee who have benefited enormously from the JobKeeper payment. The recurring message in many of these stories is that JobKeeper has kept their business alive. It's kept employees in jobs. It has facilitated regeneration in an incredibly challenging environment.</para>
<para>Today I'm taking the opportunity to inform the House of some of the ways businesses in Mallee have benefited from the JobKeeper program. Tara Ridley is the owner of The Office, a wine bar in Mildura. Tara says that JobKeeper has saved her business. The Office went from being a thriving meeting place for after-work dinners and drinks in the heart of Mildura to closing its doors and receiving no income for months. When Stage 3 restrictions were relaxed in Victoria, The Office reopened with a reduced capacity of 20 people, which is a fraction of its usual patronage. It was difficult for Tara and her employees to turn people away, but they diligently followed the health guidelines from the Victorian government. With JobKeeper subsidising the wages of her employees, Tara was able to meet her other outgoing costs. It also meant that her full-time employees didn't need to look elsewhere for work. As there was no money coming through the doors for months, it would not have been possible to keep these employees on the books if it weren't for JobKeeper.</para>
<para>James Kedmenec from Irymple also spoke about his experience with JobKeeper. The Kedmenec family purchased the Irymple Hotel almost eight years ago and have worked hard to transform the business, making it one of the most popular venues in Sunraysia. As with most hospitality businesses in the region, the COVID-19 pandemic has been devastating for the pub. Over the years, the business has invested heavily into several key staff members, who have become integral to its operations. When the business was first forced to close due to stage 3 restrictions, James was concerned about losing these key employees. JobKeeper made it easy for the pub to keep staff members on the books, allowing them to rapidly restore their operations when they were allowed to open. Being an older pub, the building has undergone significant renovations over the years to remain competitive and provide a high level of service to its customers. JobKeeper also gave the Kedmenecs the confidence to make the best of a bad situation and invest in their business by installing a brand new bar.</para>
<para>The tourism industry has also suffered greatly during COVID-19 restrictions. Many of the small hotels and motels in Mallee have been hit hard due to a lack of visitors and professional clients. The Junction Motel in Maryborough, operated by Janet McDonald, is almost fully reliant on guests coming out of Australian capital cities. Janet said that, if it wasn't for JobKeeper, she would be fearful for her business' ability to survive. JobKeeper has been absolutely critical in helping Janet meet overhead costs. Janet was desperate for an extension of the JobKeeper payment when I spoke to her in July. I was glad to inform her of the extension to the program, in which she will undoubtedly take part. Janet knows that, due to the ongoing need for restrictions, the tourism industry will be one of the very last to recover from this pandemic, and she's incredibly grateful for the federal government's ongoing support.</para>
<para>I've also heard from an innovative printing and graphics business, Academy Graphics, operated by Mick Clohesy in Swan Hill. Thanks to JobKeeper, Mick has not needed to reduce hours for his employees during the pandemic. The payment has also given Mick the flexibility to modify his business model to meet demand for new products, including protective screens for businesses and COVID-19 related signage. This diversification has kept his business operating smoothly, despite the downturn.</para>
<para>JobKeeper is also being employed by a number of larger businesses in my electorate. Peter McAllister is the general manager of True Foods, a large food-manufacturing business in Maryborough. When I spoke to Peter today, he once again expressed his gratitude for the government's rapid response to the pandemic. Without JobKeeper, Peter would have been required to lay off many of his 185 staff. Instead, JobKeeper gave the business the flexibility to train staff, to increase the depth of their operation knowledge. Peter said that COVID-19 had created serious mental health challenges in his community, due to the uncertainty of employment. JobKeeper had been a vehicle for stability and hope in the lives of his employees.</para>
<para>Another outstanding story is that of the Elliott Newspaper Group, a media organisation with publications across regional Victoria. Its main publication, the <inline font-style="italic">Sunraysia Daily</inline>, has been printed in Mildura for 100 years. Managing Director Ross Lanyon told me today that he could never have predicted that his beloved local paper would cease printing on its 100th anniversary. Ross made the difficult decision to shut up shop early in the pandemic, due to the significant decreases in advertising revenue. Many of the paper's staff were stood down and the printing presses stopped churning. The JobKeeper payment meant Ross was able to keep his staff on the books and the 'Sunny Daily' quickly came back to life. Ross said that the payment has given his organisation much-needed breathing space and the ability to plan a way forward through this pandemic. It has allowed the business to be flexible and to adapt their business model by developing their digital platform. Ross told me that without JobKeeper the newspaper would not be here. Sunraysia locals would have lost a trusted source of local news at this critical time.</para>
<para>The real beauty for businesses like Academy Graphics, True Foods and the Elliott Newspaper Group is that they have said that they may not need to make use of the next tranche of the payment. Thanks to JobKeeper, these businesses have returned to a level where they can stand on their own two feet and look forward to the future. In the meantime, those businesses still facing harsh restrictions in the hospitality and tourism industries—such as The Office Wine Bar and Lounge, the Irymple Hotel and the Junction Motel—will continue to be supported through the next phase of JobKeeper.</para>
<para>This flexible and comprehensive Morrison-McCormack government response has been welcomed by businesses in my electorate, and I congratulate the Treasurer on this innovative measure. We know that the situation with COVID-19 continues to develop, and the government's comprehensive health and economic response will continue to keep pace with the virus, provide for business and support individuals and families across the country.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr MORTON</name>
    <name.id>265931</name.id>
    <electorate>Tangney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Firstly, I'd like to thank those members who have contributed to this debate. The Coronavirus Economic Response Package (Jobkeeper Payments) Amendment Bill 2020 extends financial support and provides continued operational flexibility to businesses and workers as they manage and recover from the economic effects of the coronavirus.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 to the bill extends the prescribed period of the coronavirus payment framework for the JobKeeper payment until 28 March 2021 and amends information-sharing arrangements to enable the ATO to share JobKeeper payment information with Commonwealth, state and territory government agencies to assist them in their efforts to address the impacts of coronavirus. The extension and better targeting of the JobKeeper payment for an additional six months will provide support to those businesses that remain heavily affected by the health restrictions, including as new outbreaks occur. The introduction of a tiered system rate will reduce instances where JobKeeper payments are in excess of usual income, better aligning incomes to those who work part-time hours. The two-tiered JobKeeper payment will encourage businesses and employees to adjust to the new environment, supporting a gradual transition to economic recovery while ensuring that those who most need support continue to receive it.</para>
<para>When the JobKeeper payment scheme was introduced, it was accompanied by temporary changes to the Fair Work Act 2009 to allow those employers qualifying for JobKeeper greater flexibility in operating their business so as to respond to the impacts of the coronavirus pandemic and assist their employees to remain in employment and connected to their workplaces. The government has heard from stakeholders and directly from employers that these provisions have been vital in keeping their businesses operational and keeping their employees in jobs. Survey results show that around three in four JobKeeper employers use the flexibilities in the provisions. Almost all of the employers surveyed that use the provisions said they were rated important to essential for the continued operation of their business and for employees to keep their jobs. Schedule 2 of the bill supports the continued operation of the JobKeeper scheme by extending the temporary JobKeeper provisions in part 6-4C of the Fair Work Act, except for those relating to annual leave, beyond their original end date of 28 September 2020 until 28 March 2021, in line with the extended end date of the JobKeeper scheme. From 28 September 2020, employers who are eligible for JobKeeper payments after this date will retain access to the full range of remaining flexibility measures in part 6-4C in relation to employees for whom they are claiming the payment.</para>
<para>Legacy employers, being employers who have previously received the JobKeeper wage subsidy but who do not qualify after 28 September 2020, will be able to access a modified version of the JobKeeper provisions in relation to employees for whom they previously received JobKeeper payments. To do so, legacy employers will be required to make sure they satisfy a 10-per-cent-decline-in-turnover test in the previous quarter before they can use these provisions and again for each following quarter to have the flexibilities remain in place. They will do this by obtaining a simple declaration from an eligible financial service provider, called a 10-per-cent-decline-in-turnover certificate, that relates to the specified employer and states that, in the eligible financial service provider's opinion, the employer satisfies the 10-per-cent-decline-in-turnover test for the designated quarter, applicable at a specified time.</para>
<para>This certificate is a simple and streamlined mechanism to ensure that employers are able to meet the evidentiary requirements. The certificate operates exclusively for the purpose of the Fair Work Act, and there are strong penalties for employers who knowingly give false or misleading information to an eligible financial service provider in connection with the issue of the certificate. Of course, small businesses also retain the flexibility to choose whether to instead rely on a statutory declaration that they have suffered the 10 per cent downturn. Under these changes, legacy employers will not be able to use a JobKeeper-enabling standdown direction to direct an eligible employee to work less than 60 per cent of their pre-coronavirus ordinary hours and cannot require an employee to work less than two hours in a day that they perform work.</para>
<para>The JobKeeper provisions provide greater operational flexibility for businesses in the recovery from the coronavirus pandemic than the more rigid terms and conditions under awards and enterprise agreements, and support the effective continuation of the JobKeeper wage subsidy scheme until March 2021. The measures will provide continued access to flexibilities under the temporary JobKeeper provisions at a time when businesses are still in distress or are still recovering from the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic. Ensuring the viability of businesses will help preserve Australian jobs and will assist employees to remain connected to their workplaces, resulting in minimised job losses and lower levels of unemployment. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Rankin has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [18:56]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>43</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Allen, K</name>
                  <name>Andrews, KL</name>
                  <name>Archer, BK</name>
                  <name>Bell, AM</name>
                  <name>Connelly, V</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M</name>
                  <name>Dutton, PC</name>
                  <name>Falinski, JG</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, PW</name>
                  <name>Flint, NJ (teller)</name>
                  <name>Frydenberg, JA</name>
                  <name>Gee, AR</name>
                  <name>Haines, H</name>
                  <name>Hammond, CM</name>
                  <name>Hawke, AG</name>
                  <name>Hunt, GA</name>
                  <name>Joyce, BT</name>
                  <name>Kelly, C</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J</name>
                  <name>Ley, SP</name>
                  <name>McCormack, MF</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, MI</name>
                  <name>Morrison, SJ</name>
                  <name>O'Dowd, KD</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A</name>
                  <name>Pitt, KJ</name>
                  <name>Porter, CC</name>
                  <name>Price, ML</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, RE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, SR</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, RCC</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, MS</name>
                  <name>Taylor, AJ</name>
                  <name>Tehan, DT</name>
                  <name>Tudge, AE</name>
                  <name>van Manen, AJ</name>
                  <name>Vasta, RX</name>
                  <name>Wallace, AB</name>
                  <name>Wicks, LE</name>
                  <name>Wilson, TR</name>
                  <name>Wyatt, KG</name>
                  <name>Zimmerman, T</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>31</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, AN</name>
                  <name>Aly, A</name>
                  <name>Bowen, CE</name>
                  <name>Burke, AS</name>
                  <name>Burney, LJ</name>
                  <name>Butler, MC</name>
                  <name>Butler, TM</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, JE</name>
                  <name>Clare, JD</name>
                  <name>Collins, JM</name>
                  <name>Freelander, MR (teller)</name>
                  <name>Giles, AJ</name>
                  <name>Hayes, CP</name>
                  <name>Jones, SP</name>
                  <name>Keogh, MJ</name>
                  <name>McBain, KL</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, BK</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, BPJ</name>
                  <name>Owens, JA</name>
                  <name>Payne, AE</name>
                  <name>Phillips, FE</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, TJ</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, AL</name>
                  <name>Rowland, MA</name>
                  <name>Snowdon, WE</name>
                  <name>Stanley, AM (teller)</name>
                  <name>Swanson, MJ</name>
                  <name>Templeman, SR</name>
                  <name>Watts, TG</name>
                  <name>Wells, AS</name>
                  <name>Wilson, JH</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>36</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Alexander, JG</name>
                  <name>Bird, SL</name>
                  <name>Andrews, KJ</name>
                  <name>Burns, J</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, RE</name>
                  <name>Byrne, AM</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S</name>
                  <name>Champion, ND</name>
                  <name>Chester, D</name>
                  <name>Chesters, LM</name>
                  <name>Christensen, GR</name>
                  <name>Claydon, SC</name>
                  <name>Coleman, DB</name>
                  <name>Coker, EA</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, PJ</name>
                  <name>Marles, RD</name>
                  <name>Drum, DK</name>
                  <name>Conroy, PM</name>
                  <name>Entsch, WG</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, MA</name>
                  <name>Evans, TM</name>
                  <name>McBride, EM</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, DA</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, RG</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, IR</name>
                  <name>Murphy, PJ</name>
                  <name>Hastie, AW</name>
                  <name>Elliot, MJ</name>
                  <name>Hogan, KJ</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D</name>
                  <name>Howarth, LR</name>
                  <name>Fitzgibbon, JA</name>
                  <name>Irons, SJ</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S</name>
                  <name>Laming, A</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P</name>
                  <name>Landry, ML</name>
                  <name>Gosling, LJ</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A</name>
                  <name>Liu, G</name>
                  <name>Hill, JC</name>
                  <name>Marino, NB</name>
                  <name>Husic, EN</name>
                  <name>Martin, FB</name>
                  <name>Neumann, SK</name>
                  <name>McVeigh, JJ</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G</name>
                  <name>Morton, B</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, CE</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, LS</name>
                  <name>Perrett, GD</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, T</name>
                  <name>King, MMH</name>
                  <name>Pearce, GB</name>
                  <name>Ryan, JC</name>
                  <name>Sharma, DN</name>
                  <name>Shorten, WR</name>
                  <name>Simmonds, J</name>
                  <name>Smith, DPB</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, MJ</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P</name>
                  <name>Webster, AE</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, KL</name>
                  <name>Wilson, RJ</name>
                  <name>King, CF</name>
                  <name>Wood, JP</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M</name>
                  <name>Young, T</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A</name>
                </names>
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.<br />Original question agreed to.<br />Bill read a second time.<br />Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>99</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) to (11) together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 2, items 2 to 8, page 7 (line 3) to page 8 (line 14), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Schedule 2, item 9, page 8 (line 20), omit "5A".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Schedule 2, items 10 to 22, page 8 (line 21) to page 21 (line 5), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Schedule 2, items 25 to 27, page 21 (lines 15 to 24), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Schedule 2, item 29, page 21 (line 28) to page 24 (line 16), omit the item.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Schedule 2, items 30 and 30A, page 24 (line 24 to 29), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Schedule 2, items 33 and 34, page 25 (lines 4 to 7), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Schedule 2, items 36 to 38, page 25 (line 10) to page 28 (line 2), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Schedule 2, item 47, page 31 (lines 4 and 5), omit the item, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">47 Item 9 of Schedule 1</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Omit "5,".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Schedule 2, items 49 and 50, page 31 (lines 8 to 11), omit the items, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49 Item 10 of Schedule 1</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Omit "5".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">50 Item 10 of Schedule 1</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Omit "789GJ(2)".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) Schedule 2, item 51, page 31 (line 18), omit "or 789GJD(2)".</para></quote>
<para>I'll be brief in my remarks on these amendments, because I'm mindful of the importance of our completing the bill before 7.30 tonight. As I made clear in my remarks earlier today, quite simply, we don't believe the government has made the case for the legacy companies that are covered here. We need to remember that what we are talking about is companies that the government has made an active decision that it will no longer provide financial support for via JobKeeper. The whole concept of the legacy companies is effectively to transfer the burden of support for those companies from the government to the workforce. For that reason I commend the amendments to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm pleased to speak in this consideration in detail. Firstly, I want to say that I am proud to have been one of the many people calling on the government to extend the JobKeeper payment. My area of Gilmore, on the New South Wales South Coast, has been hit by drought, by bushfires, by three disaster-declared floods and by the pandemic. There can never be a better time to have the JobKeeper, but we need amendments to it.</para>
<para>From the dive shop in Huskisson to the local cafe in Jamberoo and the homewares shop in Mogo, local business owners have told me how grateful they were to be able to keep their staff on. That's why as the September deadline for the end of JobKeeper loomed I joined with many people to call on the government to extend the payment, just like we called for a wage subsidy in the first place those many months ago. It took a while to get here, but here we are with this legislation to extend the payment to next year—what a relief. But, sadly, there is a sting in the tail for our community. While the payment has, thankfully, been extended, new rules apply and a reduced rate is available. Many businesses are going to miss out. And the government has still not fixed many of the flaws that Labor identified way back when the wage subsidy was first announced.</para>
<para>I want to talk about the reduced turnover. This turnover requirement, it is important to note, is not included in the legislation. It is set by the Treasurer and can be changed at any time. Under the new rules businesses will need to show an actual reduced income in the September and December quarters compared to the same quarter last year. The fact sheets on the Treasury website are a little vague on this. They say 'generally the corresponding quarters in 2019'. You might be wondering why this is so important, but, when you look back at the bushfires, it is extremely important. In December last year local businesses in my electorate were experiencing what was, until the pandemic, of course, the hardest hit to their income many had ever experienced, because during December and January much of my electorate was impacted by bushfire. Our tourism-resilient economy had to turn away their lifeblood the tourists. The South Coast was a no-go zone for months. A business owner in the Conjola area was one of the first to raise this with me. I went to see her and she took me on a walk through the local bushland, the severely burnt bushland, which was the drawcard of her business. It was black and bare, hauntingly beautiful but unrecognisable from what it had been. Then she showed me the flood line from February when the waters rose and pushed their recovery back even more. It was heartbreaking to see, and when you walk around in these areas with people who experienced it all you really get a sense of the injustice of it all. Perhaps the Treasurer should try it, and then maybe I wouldn't need to be here explaining this. I support the amendments.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The amendments before us today are constructive suggestions to the government to improve the JobKeeper system. As previous speakers have said, we supported JobKeeper; we called for JobKeeper. But, while I'm providing some constructive criticism and suggestions to the government, I will highlight early educators. They are not getting JobKeeper at all. It has been ripped away from them because the government said the job was done. Well, we know that in Melbourne the job is not done. We know that educators are being stood down every day as a result of this government cutting off early educators from JobKeeper. I've written to the Treasurer to ask him to please reconsider. With a stroke of a pen, he can save these early educators.</para>
<para>When you talk to the government, they say, 'There's no problem here.' Tell that to the many people that have been contacting me. I want to quote some of the many comments I have received: 'After 30 years in the industry I've been stood down without pay and told that I may receive limited hours. We have been stood down and not sure when we will reopen or what hours we will go on.' Another: 'I was stood down with no pay on Tuesday. I was waiting for government support but received none. It has been an extremely stressful time for myself and my colleagues, some of whom are single mums. We continue to care for our precious children while feeling the weight of uncertainty, stress and doubt on our financial future. How are we going to pay the bills? Most of us used our annual leave in the first lockdown. I will have to apply for Centrelink to survive. The government has let us down.' From Karly: 'I am an early years educator who has never felt so disrespected in my 20 years working in the sector. I am a longstanding casual with over 10 years at one service who has now no work or income for the next six weeks. How can the government be so blind about how important our sector is? How can the government be so blind about what is important to our economy? How can we be the only sector to lose JobKeeper?'</para>
<para>While we are talking about extending JobKeeper to many industries that desperately need it and the constructive suggestions we've put forward, one more constructive suggestion is to put early educators back on JobKeeper. They feel so disrespected after they worked through this pandemic. They turned up for work when social distancing was not able to be observed during the height of this pandemic, and still many of them turn up for work in Melbourne. But, to the many who did that, the government has said: 'Bad luck, you are now on the unemployment queue. You are no longer able to get hours; you are no longer able to make a livelihood.' I urge the government, I urge the Treasurer, as I said in my letter, to please put these educators on JobKeeper so that they can have the same security as other workers in this country.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that amendments (1) to (11) be disagreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [19:12]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>42</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Allen, K</name>
                  <name>Andrews, KJ</name>
                  <name>Archer, BK</name>
                  <name>Bell, AM</name>
                  <name>Connelly, V</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M</name>
                  <name>Dutton, PC</name>
                  <name>Falinski, JG</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, PW</name>
                  <name>Flint, NJ (teller)</name>
                  <name>Frydenberg, JA</name>
                  <name>Gee, AR</name>
                  <name>Hammond, CM</name>
                  <name>Hawke, AG</name>
                  <name>Hunt, GA</name>
                  <name>Joyce, BT</name>
                  <name>Kelly, C</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J</name>
                  <name>Ley, SP</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D</name>
                  <name>McCormack, MF</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, MI</name>
                  <name>O'Dowd, KD</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A</name>
                  <name>Pitt, KJ</name>
                  <name>Porter, CC</name>
                  <name>Price, ML</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, RE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, SR</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, RCC</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, MS</name>
                  <name>Taylor, AJ</name>
                  <name>Tehan, DT</name>
                  <name>Tudge, AE</name>
                  <name>van Manen, AJ</name>
                  <name>Vasta, RX</name>
                  <name>Wallace, AB</name>
                  <name>Wicks, LE</name>
                  <name>Wilson, TR</name>
                  <name>Wyatt, KG</name>
                  <name>Zimmerman, T</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>32</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, AN</name>
                  <name>Aly, A</name>
                  <name>Bowen, CE</name>
                  <name>Burke, AS</name>
                  <name>Burney, LJ</name>
                  <name>Butler, MC</name>
                  <name>Butler, TM</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, JE</name>
                  <name>Clare, JD</name>
                  <name>Collins, JM</name>
                  <name>Freelander, MR (teller)</name>
                  <name>Giles, AJ</name>
                  <name>Haines, H</name>
                  <name>Hayes, CP</name>
                  <name>Jones, SP</name>
                  <name>Keogh, MJ</name>
                  <name>McBain, KL</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, BK</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, BPJ</name>
                  <name>Owens, JA</name>
                  <name>Payne, AE</name>
                  <name>Phillips, FE</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, TJ</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, AL</name>
                  <name>Rowland, MA</name>
                  <name>Snowdon, WE</name>
                  <name>Stanley, AM (teller)</name>
                  <name>Swanson, MJ</name>
                  <name>Templeman, SR</name>
                  <name>Watts, TG</name>
                  <name>Wells, AS</name>
                  <name>Wilson, JH</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>35</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Alexander, JG</name>
                  <name>Bird, SL</name>
                  <name>Andrews, KL</name>
                  <name>Burns, J</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, RE</name>
                  <name>Byrne, AM</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S</name>
                  <name>Champion, ND</name>
                  <name>Chester, D</name>
                  <name>Chesters, LM</name>
                  <name>Christensen, GR</name>
                  <name>Claydon, SC</name>
                  <name>Coleman, DB</name>
                  <name>Coker, EA</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, PJ</name>
                  <name>McBride, EM</name>
                  <name>Drum, DK</name>
                  <name>Conroy, PM</name>
                  <name>Entsch, WG</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, MA</name>
                  <name>Evans, TM</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, RG</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, DA</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, IR</name>
                  <name>Neumann, SK</name>
                  <name>Hastie, AW</name>
                  <name>Elliot, MJ</name>
                  <name>Hogan, KJ</name>
                  <name>Murphy, PJ</name>
                  <name>Howarth, LR</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S</name>
                  <name>Irons, SJ</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P</name>
                  <name>Laming, A</name>
                  <name>Gosling, LJ</name>
                  <name>Landry, ML</name>
                  <name>Hill, JC</name>
                  <name>Liu, G</name>
                  <name>Husic, EN</name>
                  <name>Marino, NB</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G</name>
                  <name>Martin, FB</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, CE</name>
                  <name>McVeigh, JJ</name>
                  <name>King, MMH</name>
                  <name>Morton, B</name>
                  <name>Perrett, GD</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, LS</name>
                  <name>Ryan, JC</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, T</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P</name>
                  <name>Pearce, GB</name>
                  <name>Shorten, WR</name>
                  <name>Sharma, DN</name>
                  <name>Smith, DPB</name>
                  <name>Simmonds, J</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, MJ</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, KL</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P</name>
                  <name>King, CF</name>
                  <name>Webster, AE</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M</name>
                  <name>Wilson, RJ</name>
                  <name>Leigh, AK</name>
                  <name>Wood, JP</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A</name>
                  <name>Young, T</name>
                  <name>Marles, R</name>
                </names>
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move amendment (12) as circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(12) Schedule 2, item 22, page 13 (after line 30), after paragraph 789GJA(1)(c), insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(ca) the jobkeeper enabling stand down direction will not result in the amount payable to the employee in relation to the performance of work for the employer for a jobkeeper fortnight that is within the jobkeeper enabling stand down period that is less than the amount that would be payable to the employee if the employer were entitled to a jobkeeper payment for the employee for the fortnight; and</para></quote>
<para>I want to draw to the attention of members of the House that this is the amendment that puts in place a safety net so that we don't end up with a situation where we end up paying people more for not working than for working and where, for an employee, the result of the business that they work for doing better and recovering is that their take-home pay goes down. As I said in my speech earlier today, we suspect this anomaly has not been put there deliberately, and we're constructively putting forward one of the ways that this can be fixed</para>
<para>Effectively, what we're saying here is that—while, as was reflected in the previous amendments, our position is that we don't think the case has been made for the legacy companies at all—this is the specific instance where somebody who starts on a modest income would find themselves, without mutual agreement, potentially having their hours cut by 40 per cent. If you do those calculations for someone on average weekly earnings or on a higher income, you'll end up well above the JobKeeper rate, but, if you do those calculations for someone who's on a lower award rate—a hospitality worker or a retail worker—you'll end up with a situation where their hours can be cut to lower than the JobKeeper rate.</para>
<para>To give some quick examples of the numbers and what we're talking about—and bear in mind we're talking about people on very modest incomes—a full-time retail employee on the minimum award earns $813.60 a week, and a 40 per cent cut to their hours, without the safety net, would mean they could lose $325 a week. That takes them lower than the current JobKeeper rate and even lower than the new, lower JobKeeper rate—in fact, $111 lower every week than what they would be getting if their company were more distressed. So we end up with a circumstance where, as the company does better, the worker potentially goes backwards to the tune of more than $100. A full-time cleaner, on an award just slightly lower than for retail, earns $804.90, and a 40 per cent cut to their hours could mean they lose $330.70. This means they could earn $125 a week less than what will be the new JobKeeper rate.</para>
<para>I accept that in the course of where we are right now—this having been raised for the first time with the government this morning and the legislation having been presented to us for the first time at the beginning of the week—we're not going to be in a situation today where the government's going to vote for the amendment. I get that. What I'm saying is that after this division, before this gets to the Senate, there is time to fix it, and we should fix it. We should not have a circumstance where, as a company improves, we have allowed, for people on the lowest wages, for their personal circumstances to go backwards.</para>
<para>The examples that I've given presume that someone only works Monday to Friday. If, for example, as a retail worker you're on a Wednesday-to-Sunday roster, and the Saturday and Sunday are the days that you lose, because what's allowed is a 40 per cent cut in hours, that could amount to a cut of almost 50 per cent in your pay, again taking you down to more than $100 lower than the new JobKeeper rate.</para>
<para>There's a really simple principle that this safety net would protect, and the principle is this: if the company that you work for is doing better, you should be doing better with it. You should not be in a circumstance where somebody who's in a distressed company receiving the JobKeeper rate, who's not turning up to work at all, will get more than a person in a company that's improving who's been subjected to these new industrial relations rules, which have been put in without a safety net. So I simply urge those in the government to fix this. We are not presuming malice with this, but we are saying you've got to fix it. You really have to fix this, because we aren't just talking about how some people will take a hit; we're talking about how the people who will take the biggest hit and will fall most behind are the people who are already on the most modest incomes. The bizarre nature of that—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>241590</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order, the minister's time has expired.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The bizarre nature that that would occur because their business is improving is an anomaly that needs to be fixed.</para>
<para>There were some problems with what the government had initially announced which they have fixed, and I welcome that. I welcome that the government has fixed the original announcement that companies that were doing better than ever would be able to get access to these provisions. That's a change that the Attorney-General has made, the Leader of the House has made, and we welcome that. That's what the 10 per cent figure does. That is a good change that the government's made from its original announcement. The pleas that have been put in there through negotiations with the union movement that have led to a consultation period—that's a good improvement. What's been put in the bill that's before us that allows appeals to the industrial commission—that's a good improvement. It doesn't have to be identical to this, but, unless we find a way to insert a safety net, we will end up with anomalies. I've got to say, of all the speakers I heard support the legislation before us tonight, I never heard anyone defend the anomalies. No-one has come to the table today saying, 'We need to keep this.' So I'm simply saying to the government that the vote will go as it will go when the division is held. We get that. This will go to the Senate next week. Don't put us in a situation where this parliament has given permission for low-income workers to fall below the JobKeeper rate because the business they work for is improving.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that Labor amendment (12) be disagreed to.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [19:25]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>43</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Allen, K</name>
                  <name>Andrews, KL</name>
                  <name>Archer, BK</name>
                  <name>Bell, AM</name>
                  <name>Connelly, V</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M</name>
                  <name>Dutton, PC</name>
                  <name>Falinski, JG</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, PW</name>
                  <name>Flint, NJ (teller)</name>
                  <name>Frydenberg, JA</name>
                  <name>Gee, AR</name>
                  <name>Hammond, CM</name>
                  <name>Hawke, AG</name>
                  <name>Hunt, GA</name>
                  <name>Joyce, BT</name>
                  <name>Kelly, C</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J</name>
                  <name>Ley, SP</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D</name>
                  <name>McCormack, MF</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, MI</name>
                  <name>Morrison, SJ</name>
                  <name>O'Dowd, KD</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A</name>
                  <name>Pitt, KJ</name>
                  <name>Porter, CC</name>
                  <name>Price, ML</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, RE (teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, SR</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, RCC</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, MS</name>
                  <name>Taylor, AJ</name>
                  <name>Tehan, DT</name>
                  <name>Tudge, AE</name>
                  <name>van Manen, AJ</name>
                  <name>Vasta, RX</name>
                  <name>Wallace, AB</name>
                  <name>Wicks, LE</name>
                  <name>Wilson, TR</name>
                  <name>Wyatt, KG</name>
                  <name>Zimmerman, T</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>33</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, AN</name>
                  <name>Aly, A</name>
                  <name>Bowen, CE</name>
                  <name>Burke, AS</name>
                  <name>Burney, LJ</name>
                  <name>Butler, MC</name>
                  <name>Butler, TM</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, JE</name>
                  <name>Clare, JD</name>
                  <name>Collins, JM</name>
                  <name>Fitzgibbon, JA</name>
                  <name>Freelander, MR (teller)</name>
                  <name>Giles, AJ</name>
                  <name>Haines, H</name>
                  <name>Hayes, CP</name>
                  <name>Jones, SP</name>
                  <name>Keogh, MJ</name>
                  <name>McBain, KL</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, BK</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, BPJ</name>
                  <name>Owens, JA</name>
                  <name>Payne, AE</name>
                  <name>Phillips, FE</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, TJ</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, AL</name>
                  <name>Rowland, MA</name>
                  <name>Snowdon, WE</name>
                  <name>Stanley, AM (teller)</name>
                  <name>Swanson, MJ</name>
                  <name>Templeman, SR</name>
                  <name>Watts, TG</name>
                  <name>Wells, AS</name>
                  <name>Wilson, JH</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>35</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Alexander, JG</name>
                  <name>Bird, SL</name>
                  <name>Andrews, KJ</name>
                  <name>Burns, J</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, RE</name>
                  <name>Byrne, AM</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S</name>
                  <name>Champion, ND</name>
                  <name>Chester, D</name>
                  <name>Chesters, LM</name>
                  <name>Christensen, GR</name>
                  <name>Claydon, SC</name>
                  <name>Coleman, DB</name>
                  <name>Coker, EA</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, PJ</name>
                  <name>McBride, EM</name>
                  <name>Drum, DK</name>
                  <name>Conroy, PM</name>
                  <name>Entsch, WG</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, MA</name>
                  <name>Evans, TM</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, RG</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, DA</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, IR</name>
                  <name>Neumann, SK</name>
                  <name>Hastie, AW</name>
                  <name>Elliot, MJ</name>
                  <name>Hogan, KJ</name>
                  <name>Murphy, PJ</name>
                  <name>Howarth, LR</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S</name>
                  <name>Irons, SJ</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P</name>
                  <name>Laming, A</name>
                  <name>Gosling, LJ</name>
                  <name>Landry, ML</name>
                  <name>Hill, JC</name>
                  <name>Liu, G</name>
                  <name>Husic, EN</name>
                  <name>Marino, NB</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G</name>
                  <name>Martin, FB</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, CE</name>
                  <name>McVeigh, JJ</name>
                  <name>King, MMH</name>
                  <name>Morton, B</name>
                  <name>Perrett, GD</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, LS</name>
                  <name>Ryan, JC</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, T</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P</name>
                  <name>Pearce, GB</name>
                  <name>Shorten, WR</name>
                  <name>Sharma, DN</name>
                  <name>Smith, DPB</name>
                  <name>Simmonds, J</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, MJ</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, KL</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P</name>
                  <name>King, CF</name>
                  <name>Webster, AE</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M</name>
                  <name>Wilson, RJ</name>
                  <name>Leigh, AK</name>
                  <name>Wood, JP</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A</name>
                  <name>Young, T</name>
                  <name>Marles, R</name>
                </names>
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to. <br />Bill agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>105</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOOD</name>
    <name.id>E0F</name.id>
    <electorate>La Trobe</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>00APG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>By prior arrangement, the Manager of Opposition Business has indulgence to speak for a couple of minutes on some administrative matters.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>on indulgence—In the first instance, I note that, while it's understood that members from the major parties who aren't here because of the current circumstances would have voted with their parties, I want to put on the record that the member for Melbourne and the member for Clark both contacted me about their intention, had they been here, to vote with the opposition on the last two amendments, and to vote consistently with all of us with respect to the second and third readings of that bill. I'd also note that we now have two minutes until the adjournment debate, and, if I sit down now, we'll have a procedural problem!</para>
<para>What I think it would be appropriate to do at this point is to note that, a few days into these sittings, we have seen that a very large number of members have the capacity and the opportunity to participate in ways that might not have been possible were it not for the cooperation—and, I must say, leadership—that's been offered by the Presiding Officers in both houses. While some have wanted to argue this from the perspective of the convenience of members, what really matters is that they have had the opportunity to put the perspectives of their electorates. We ran a very real risk that a large part of Australia was not going to be represented when the House returned to sit. While that might well have been unavoidable and would have been where things ended up were it not for the decisions by the Speaker and the President, what we've ended up with, while not seamless technology—it's not quite the TV at home—has made sure that, whether it be question time, whether it be debating legislation, whether it be statements by leave—I saw the member for Isaacs made a statement by leave today on one of the committee reports—we have found ways for members of parliament to be able to participate that previously were impossible.</para>
<para>I don't think it's lost on any of us that this week is quite an historic moment for the parliament. This week, for the first time, we've used new technology—we're not just the size of a country; we are a continent—so that people from all corners of this nation have found a way of reaching into the national capital and making sure that their voices are heard, and the voice of their electorate is heard. That is a good thing, and the Presiding Officers deserve congratulations.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>105</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Sandakan Death Marches</title>
          <page.no>105</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CLARE</name>
    <name.id>HWL</name.id>
    <electorate>Blaxland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Things are tough at the moment. This may just be the toughest year that many of us live through. But I caught up with two old mates recently to help put things in perspective. Reg, who's 97, and Bert, who's an amazing 104, are part of that group of people we call 'the greatest generation', World War II veterans. While we're being asked to stay home or wear a mask, they were asked to do so much more. They fought on the Kokoda Track and in the Pacific. At this old age, they still carry with them the physical and mental scars of that time. They still have malaria; they still have nightmares. But Reg and Bert are two of the lucky ones—they made it home. Not everyone did.</para>
<para>Not many Australians know the story of what happened at Sandakan. It's not an easy story to tell. It's a horror story, gut-wrenching horror. Near the end of World War II, the Japanese walked sick and starving prisoners 250 kilometres from Sandakan to Ranau. It was a death march. Men who couldn't keep going were shot or bayonetted. There are stories of men slumping by the side of the track, shaking hands with their mates, saying goodbye, and waiting for the death squads to arrive. It's also a story of extraordinary mateship—not the sort of mateship that we know and understand. It's much more than that. In his book on Sandakan, Paul Ham says, 'Your friend in Japanese captivity is something more—a nurse, a guide, priest, gravedigger.'</para>
<para>Richie Murray and Keith Botterill were mates, best mates. Keith was a working-class kid from Katoomba, and Richie was a labourer from Hurstville. They fought together in Singapore and they survived together in Changi, and at Sandakan and along the march to Ranau. And they planned to escape together. Together they stole some rice and some biscuits for the escape. But, when the Japanese discovered a biscuit bag, they lined up everybody at the camp and threatened to kill them all. Keith whispered to Richie, 'Don't say a thing. They can't shoot us all,' but Richie did say something. He stepped forward and he took the blame. He was taken away, tied to a tree, beaten, bayonetted, and thrown in a bomb crater.</para>
<para>There were 2,508 Australian and British prisoners of war shipped to Sandakan. Only six made it back to Australia—six out of 2,508. That's a death rate of 99.8 per cent. It is the worst atrocity in Australian military history. One of the six who survived was Richie's mate Keith. I've walked the track from Sandakan to Ranau and onto the last camp a few kilometres down the road. It's an eerie place. I'm not a superstitious person, but it felt full of ghosts. It's where, two weeks after Japan surrendered, the last surviving 15 prisoners of war were executed. Tomorrow is 75 years since that terrible day, two weeks after the war had ended.</para>
<para>About 12 years ago, historian Lynette Silver and her husband, Neil, were walking around that last camp when Neil's metal detector went off. Buried under the soil, they found a pile of brass buckles and, on top of them, a button from an Australian uniform. Lynette recognised instantly what it was. It was a Scout symbol, a circle with a dot in the middle. It means finished, or gone home—a message across the void of time.</para>
<para>We promise ourselves every Anzac Day that, at the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. But how many of us do? How many of us remember them? How many of us even know this story? But we should. And tomorrow we should pause and remember these boys—these poor, tortured souls who never came home. Lest we ever forget them.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Olympic Movement</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:35</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VAN MANEN</name>
    <name.id>188315</name.id>
    <electorate>Forde</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Before I get into my contribution, I'd like to associate myself with the words from the member for Blaxland. He has walked the track with the Prime Minister, which would have been an extraordinarily moving experience. I thank him for sharing that with the House.</para>
<para>I rise to speak tonight on the incredible contribution that the Olympic Movement has made to the Australian people and society. While I do not want to give members of this place a history lesson or put them to sleep, I do want to acknowledge Edwin Flack, an accountant and Australasian champion runner, who is considered not only Australia's first Olympian but our first Olympic champion. Edwin Flack competed in the first modern Olympic Games, in Athens in 1896, where he won the 800- and 1500-metre events and a bronze medal in doubles tennis. We should be so proud of Edwin Flack's achievements, as they paved the way for Australia to make a mark on the world both on and off the sporting field.</para>
<para>Ever since that very first Olympics, Australia has sent athletes to every summer Olympic Games of the modern era, including champions such as Dawn Fraser and great Queenslanders such as Cathy Freeman, Sally Pearson, Anna Meares and, of course, Chilla Porter, the Attorney-General's father, who sadly has passed away. Chilla Porter heralded from Brisbane and competed in the historic 1956 Melbourne Olympic Games, where he took home a silver medal in one of the most dramatic high jump competitions in Olympic history.</para>
<para>The Melbourne Olympic Games were historic because they were the first to be held outside of Europe or the United States, the first to be held in the Southern Hemisphere, the first to be televised live and the first in which all athletes walked together as one at the closing ceremony. It was our nation's opportunity to showcase our talents both on and off the field and marked a coming of age, of sorts, for Australian sport. We would go on to host the Sydney Olympics and, if all goes to plan, we will host the 2032 Olympics in the city of Brisbane and the great state of Queensland.</para>
<para>I'm passionate about sports and the Olympics because I think they contribute so much to Australian society. Earlier this year, I was honoured to be joined by the member for Moreton to launch, with the AOC, the Parliamentary Friends of the Olympic Movement in Australia, which currently boasts a membership of 32 members and senators from all parts of the country and is reflective of the diversity of the Olympic Movement itself. I thank those members and senators for joining us in their support of the Olympics and I thank the member for Moreton, who agreed to co-chair the parliamentary friendship group with me.</para>
<para>The Olympic Movement has tremendous potential to boost local economies and local communities. We've seen that before, with the incredible investments made by both the public and private sector during the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games, contributing some $6 billion to $7 billion to gross domestic product and creating over 100,000 new jobs. Research has found that the direct economic productivity and volunteering benefits from sport create a total economic value to the national economy of approximately $50 billion annually. I'd also like to give a shout-out to the success of the recent Commonwealth Games held on the Gold Coast.</para>
<para>There is also great social benefit from sport and the Olympics. It captures the imagination and participation of all genders, ages, aspirations and skills, and draws representation from our multicultural and Indigenous communities. Perhaps one of the greatest legacies of the games are the countless stories and memories that have been made there.</para>
<para>I also want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the Tokyo team, who have had their hopes and dreams deferred for 12 months. They have worked tremendously hard to get to the position that they are in, and I know that the expected 480-plus-strong team will serve our nation proud in Tokyo in 2021.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petition: COVID-19: Arts and Entertainment Industry</title>
          <page.no>107</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 207, I present an e-petition that was organised by Ms Chloe Dallimore. It is the largest of the e-petitions for the year, having received some 36,141 signatures.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The petition read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">Support for Australian Arts and Entertainment Workers now</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The arts and entertainment industry has been devastated by shutdowns caused by the coronavirus crisis. It was the first sector to be hit, when gatherings of 500 people or more were banned, and is likely to be one of the last sectors to be released from restrictions. Data recently released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows fewer than half of businesses in the sector were operating by the end of March.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">After years of cuts and neglect, the government has failed to act to save the arts and entertainment sector. Although JobKeeper will help some, there are major gaps in coverage for freelancers and contractors which the government has failed to address. These gaps affect the vast majority of artists and a very significant number of technical workers. The Treasurer has the ability to fix this without legislation, and he must do so immediately.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The government must also deliver the sector a tailored fiscal relief package to ensure its ongoing viability. We need large and small companies and venues to still exist following the crisis so they can continue to employ Australian artists.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Australian artists are the keepers of Australian stories. They give so much to our country and to the Australian identity – we cannot do without them.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">We therefore ask the House to extend the JobKeeper payment to arts and entertainment sector workers who are currently ineligible; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Deliver the arts and entertainment sector a tailored and properly targeted relief package to ensure its ongoing viability.</para></quote>
<para>From 36141 citizens (EN1609)</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I opened with the words of the petition, because those are the words that appeared on the website of the House, where more than 36,000 Australians saw it and asked this parliament to act. I particularly draw members' attention to it because, only today, when I referred to so many arts and entertainment workers finding themselves ineligible for JobKeeper, the response from the minister at the table—officially titled as the Minister for Communications, Cyber Safety and the Arts—was to interject on me and say, 'That's not true.' Arts and entertainment workers know whether or not they're receiving JobKeeper, and they know that some of the permanent employees of different companies, particularly the administrative staff, who are critically important to the company—a whole lot of those individuals have been receiving JobKeeper. But if you're an artist who moves from company to company you're likely to be employed as a casual or as a freelancer and you're likely to find that the JobKeeper rules, if you were to design them in a way to deliberately exclude arts and entertainment workers, probably couldn't be designed better. I'm not pretending that the government was deliberately wanting to exclude arts and entertainment workers—they weren't. But a fence has been drawn around them in so many ways and the irony of this is that it's happened at the exact same time Australians in lockdown have relied on the creative output of our arts and entertainment workers more than ever before. There are more people than ever streaming music, streaming movies and reading books as they have gone through life in lockdown. As people go through the various mental health crises that people are facing at the moment, so many people turn to our storytellers and our artists. When we have our own crises, like the bushfires, these are the same people we go to. We say, 'Please perform for free,' and they do. They have always had our backs as Australians, and right now they need us to protect them. An announcement of a package where guidelines came out only a couple of weeks ago—the package was announced more than a hundred days after the crisis began, and we now find out none of that money will flow until probably November or December at the earliest, and that that will only be money for promoters, for productions, that maybe sometime in the new year start to hold events and find their way through to the workers. I commend the petition, and please act.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Condon, Mr Dominic Joseph</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SIMMONDS</name>
    <name.id>282983</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>While I have this opportunity tonight before the House, I wish to acknowledge the passing of a Brisbane identity and a terrific Australian—Dominic Condon. Dom, as he was known to his friends, passed away on 21 August 2020 after a courageous battle against brain cancer. He remained positive throughout. He fought with great tenacity. He beat it back. But, ultimately, it re-emerged and claimed his life. He was just 43. But more tragic than his young age is that he has had to leave behind his young boys, Callahan and Langdon. I have never had the privilege of meeting his boys, but he spoke about them to me often—about how much he enjoyed the love of cricket that they shared. I know he was more proud of them than of anything else in this world.</para>
<para>I won't pretend that I was Dom's nearest and dearest; there will be plenty who can claim the honour of knowing him better. But he was a very good mate. We moved in the same circles in Brisbane. We worked on campaigns together and we shared many enjoyable lunches and conversations over the years, including a very enjoyable one at the iconic Breakfast Creek Hotel in Brisbane. He was a commercial property agent and fund manager by trade. He was a passionate supporter of the values of the LNP. He was a true believer. For all his dedicated support, he never asked for a single thing in return; all of us in politics know that you can't say that about too many.</para>
<para>But, more important than that, I will remember Dom as a man of extraordinary kindness. He was a genuinely nice and humble guy—a true gentleman who, no matter how hard you tried, you could never convince to say a bad word about anyone. It just was not in his nature. He was always on the other end of the phone with a kind word, a compliment and a positive attitude that was infectious. There are a lot of crummy guys in the world who seem to live forever, but he was one of the good guys and he deserved more time to spend with his young family.</para>
<para>Dom will be laid to rest on 28 August at St William's Catholic Church in Grovely, in my electorate of Ryan. I can't be there, unfortunately, as I'll be here with all of you in Canberra. So, instead, I hope that this short recognition in our national parliament of his exemplary service and character can be my contribution to honouring him and his memory. My heart goes out to Christina and his boys. I know that their grief right now will be almost too much to bear.</para>
<para>Dom was one of the quiet Australians who, without fanfare, just went about his work, and in doing so lifted up his city, his community and those around him who were lucky enough to have him in their lives. His many, many friends, who, like me, were lucky enough to have him touch their lives, will miss him greatly. Rest in peace, Dom.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Shortland Electorate: Telecommunications</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONROY</name>
    <name.id>249127</name.id>
    <electorate>Shortland</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Access to mobile phone reception in our homes is something most of us take for granted. It's an essential component of life in the 21st century. However, many of my constituents do not have access to mobile phone reception in their homes. The suburb of Mount Hutton is five minutes from my electorate office. It is 95 minutes from Sydney. We are contacted regularly by constituents in Mount Hutton who have little, very poor or, in some circumstances, absolutely no mobile phone reception in their homes.</para>
<para>I particularly want to draw to the attention of the House a doctor, who has asked not to be identified, who works both at the John Hunter Hospital and for the Westpac Rescue Helicopter Service. He cannot effectively perform his work, including the vital role of being on call, because he has next to no mobile phone coverage in his home. This is a medical professional working in a public hospital, and for a rescue helicopter service, who in the middle of a global health pandemic cannot be contacted by his employer at his home.</para>
<para>He raises another point: that in the event of an emergency like a bushfire his family would not be able to receive emergency messages on their phones. This constituent had better reception in remote parts of the Northern Territory, where he previously worked. He moved back to a suburb in Lake Macquarie, about 10 kilometres from the Newcastle CBD, and he cannot use his mobile phone in his house. That is an absolute disgrace.</para>
<para>I have also been contacted by Sandra and Graham, an elderly couple in Mount Hutton. Graham had a stroke and, unfortunately, has Parkinson's disease. Living in the period of the COVID pandemic his telehealth appointments with his treating doctors have been essential. But because of the poor mobile phone coverage these appointments have been unnecessarily difficult. Sandra has said that, whilst they have been able to do verbal appointments on their landline, specialists such as Graham's neurosurgeon must observe him. The last appointment had to be conducted standing in the hallway of the house, which was the only part of the house that could get reception. Even on their landlines they've had difficulties with reception if the incoming caller is ringing on a mobile. They've even had to have phone calls on their front footpath. Yet this is 90 minutes from the Sydney CBD. Mount Hutton is one of many suburbs all throughout Shortland that have this problem. Just last week, another constituent, a small business owner in nearby Jewells, was also in touch. He too has to go outside his house to make calls. This is not good enough in the year 2020.</para>
<para>I have made repeated representations to the minister and his response is, basically, that it is the responsibility of the telcos to invest in infrastructure. So I've written to the CEOs of Telstra and Optus drawing attention to the fact that hundreds of my constituents have little or no phone coverage in Mount Hutton, and asked that they invest in much-needed infrastructure so that their paying customers can access the services they are paying for.</para>
<para>It's also worth noting that the minister has told me that suburbs in Shortland are not eligible for the government's mobile phone black spot funding program because we are a regional area and the program only funds projects in rural areas. This is absurd. We've a whole suburb that is basically a mobile black spot. There is a government program to fund mobile black spots, and the government tells my constituents, 'Bad luck, you're not eligible.' Meanwhile, they use the program to pork-barrel in rural National Party seats. It is beyond unfair; it is an insult to my constituents and every resident in Shortland and my region.</para>
<para>I cannot believe that I have to make the point to the government that access to basic services such as mobile phone reception in your home are essential in the 21st century. My constituents in Mount Hutton and in suburbs all around the electorate where there are reception issues, from Redhead in the north to Budgewoi in the south, deserve better.</para>
<para>I take this opportunity to urge Telstra and Optus to invest in the much-needed infrastructure so my constituents can use their mobile phones in their houses. I also call on the minister to enable the Mobile Black Spot Program to fund projects in regional as well as rural areas. I also draw to the attention of the House the fact that the government often does not allocate all the funding available in the different rounds of this program. There is money in this fund not being spent—money that could solve problems in my electorate right now if only it was deemed eligible. In the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, the government urgently needs to be investing in infrastructure to stimulate and grow the economy. It is a no-brainer that mobile black spot funding should be allocated to Mount Hutton and other areas with issues in Shortland. My constituents deserve better than this. I'll continue to fight for my constituents to have access to genuine and reliable mobile phone reception. They deserve this. I will fight for this every day.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Adelaide City Deal</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It was my great pleasure two weeks ago to represent the Minister for Population, Cities and Urban Infrastructure at a milestone announcement as part of our city deal in my home state of South Australia, my home city of Adelaide, at the old Royal Adelaide Hospital, which is on the boundary between my electorate of Sturt and the electorate of Adelaide. Unfortunately, the minister, for obvious reasons, wasn't able to travel to South Australia, but it was my luck to be present on his behalf representing the Morrison government at that milestone announcement, with the Premier of South Australia and the Minister for Innovation and Skills, of the market call for the new innovation centre which is to be built anew on the Royal Adelaide Hospital campus as part of our city deal there for the Lot Fourteen precinct. This will be an investment of more than a half a billion dollars across the various levels of government. It's obviously a partnership between the Commonwealth, the state and the Adelaide City Council, as all the city deals are. This milestone comes after the opening of the Space Agency on the precinct, the incubation hub for startups that's now being run by Stone & Chalk and the reinvigoration of the five heritage buildings—in fact, the fifth has just commenced this week, the Bice building. The other four are now fully operational. More than 800 people are part of small startups, innovative businesses, that have come together in an ecosystem on that site.</para>
<para>In a subsequent tour of the precinct, it was such an inspiration to see some of the new businesses that are establishing themselves there. They're not only bringing ideas to the precinct; they're sharing ideas. They're talking with other businesspeople in the startup environment about the challenges their businesses have. They're working together on innovative and collaborative projects and solutions for the future industries and the future jobs in our economy not just in South Australia but throughout Australia.</para>
<para>I mentioned that the Space Agency has been located on the precinct. Very shortly we'll have the new Mission Control Centre there. That is, again, part of the city deal funding, which will allow satellite launch and monitoring and data collection to come right onto that precinct and be shared with partners there and in the space industry sector across the country for innovative solutions and opportunities to continue to grow our economy. This is not just the future economy; this is our existing fundamental baseload economic opportunity—for example, bringing in new technologies to traditional industries, such as the agriculture sector and the mining sector, that we've had underpinning our economy in South Australia for more than a century.</para>
<para>It's a really exciting precinct. Of course, it was a health precinct; the Royal Adelaide Hospital was the major hospital for the state of South Australia since soon after European settlement. With the relocation to a new facility on the other end of the Adelaide CBD, there was a real question as to what we would do with that precinct. It's in the CBD, on North Terrace. It probably would have had a very significant value for private sector development. Maybe some would have seen the highest value of the site being simply to sell off the land and maybe have it end up as some kind of residential development. But two Liberal governments—the Commonwealth government and the state government—decided we could get a lot more out of that precinct than just selling it off for development. And that's exactly what we've achieved with this city deal partnership. It's bringing together the university sector, the defence sector, the space sector and the creative industries sector. They're all together on the one precinct where they can collaborate and develop small businesses that we hope will become big businesses. They're bringing together job creators, and that's the most exciting thing about this precinct. These are businesses with three or four people with ideas that you can see turning into a business with 300 or 400 people. Not all of them are going to be successful. Many new ideas don't succeed. Many small businesses fail but there are ones that do succeed; I think the odds are pretty high that there'll be quite a few coming out of that precinct. We're going to have a factory for exciting new entrepreneurial ventures in my home state of South Australia.</para>
<para>I commend Minister Tudge and the Morrison government for what we are doing as part of that partnership. It's very exciting for South Australia. It's very exciting for my electorate, and it gives you a lot of hope that, in these tough economic times, we are investing in the jobs of the future.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 20:00</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>110</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <fedchamb.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" style="" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" background="">
        <p class="HPS-MCJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a type="" href="Federation Chamber">Wednesday, 26 August 2020</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Llew O'Brien</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 10:00.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>111</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>JobKeeper Payment</title>
          <page.no>111</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Over the past six months the effects of COVID on businesses across Australia have been devastating. The hospitality and tourism sectors have been hard hit. This is especially true in my electorate of Mayo. I don't think there has been a business in my community that hasn't been touched by COVID. My electorate is a tourist destination, whether it be the Fleurieu Peninsula, the Adelaide Hills, the Lower Lakes and Coorong or Kangaroo Island. Many parts of our community are still challenged by the effects of bushfires, making it a double whammy for us. The government's JobKeeper package, which was implemented quickly and efficiently, was in no way perfect, and I have been raising a number of unfair ineligibility issues with the Treasurer. I am pleased that Treasury has overcome many of those hurdles faced by businesses in my electorate. Without JobKeeper I think many businesses across my electorate would have closed their doors for good. 4,604 businesses in my electorate registered for JobKeeper in the first month. I know that without that safety net a significant number of those businesses would have seen thousands of job losses. That's close to half of the businesses in the electorate. We have around 11,000 businesses in the electorate.</para>
<para>A break in parliament has given me the opportunity to travel the length and breadth of my community and visit many small businesses and hear from them how they have been able to quickly adapt because of JobKeeper. For example, the Ozone Hotel on Kangaroo Island: there were restrictions on trading, so staff put down their chef hats, picked up paint brushes and transformed an old section of the hotel, creating a modern lounge bar. They turned from kitchen staff to renovators. David Kerr from the Quarter Mile Cafe in Mount Barker was able to keep his staff employed through JobKeeper, which in turn enabled his team to produce 500 litres of soup to donate to local families doing it tough during the pandemic.</para>
<para>I am sure I was one of many members in this place who were advocating to government for a new version of JobKeeper past the end of September. I'm very pleased to see that the government will be continuing JobKeeper in a different form, JobKeeper 2.0. That will allow those businesses who are not yet on their feet to still that have that support and also provide flexibility for businesses who still have a diminished revenue, are not quite eligible for JobKeeper but still that have that flexibility with their employees, while still providing some protections for their employees.</para>
<para>So I think I speak on behalf of many businesses and employees in my electorate. I would like to acknowledge the implementation of JobKeeper, which I think has been an incredibly important and very new idea for government. We are all in uncharted waters here, and I thank government for their work here.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Stirling Electorate: Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>111</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONNELLY</name>
    <name.id>282984</name.id>
    <electorate>Stirling</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Whilst it has been some time since we have met physically in this place, I'm pleased to report that the Morrison government has continued delivering full steam ahead for the people of Stirling. Last week I joined my friend and colleague the member for Curtin for the turning of the sod of the Stephenson Avenue stage one extension. This important project will reduce congestion and help to unlock Stirling's potential as a second CBD. I am also working with the member for Curtin to champion a trackless tram in Stirling. This is a unique transport solution which will facilitate fast, efficient and green transport from the City of Perth right through to our beautiful coastline in Scarborough. The trackless tram will benefit tourists and residents alike, with additional development along Scarborough Beach Road boosting suburbs like Osborne Park, Doubleview, Innaloo and Scarborough. Where the rubber meets the road, quite literally in this case, the federal government has proven to be a big supporter. The minister for Population, Cities and Urban Infrastructure has been engaging closely with the City of Stirling, myself and the member for Curtin to analyse what federal government support can be made available to this national first project.</para>
<para>Another project I'm extremely passionate about is the Jewish Community Centre upgrade in Yokine. During 2019, I visited this centre along with our hardworking federal Treasurer. The Morrison government had already committed $300,000 for an upgrade to the centre, but we became very aware that, due to how run down it was, this was not going to be sufficient. So we fought hard to secure a $6 million commitment for an upgrade to transform the centre into a jewel in the crown for the Perth Jewish precinct and a home to a world-class Holocaust museum and William Cooper memorial. I'm pleased to announce that, since then, the state government has also matched this funding and this, along with some community fundraising which is already underway, will see a rebuild to the tune of $15 million rather than just a renovation. This will also support jobs at this important time.</para>
<para>On a smaller scale, I'm pleased to be able to visit community groups, schools and sporting organisations that have benefited from Morrison government grants. I recently spent a morning planting trees with some kids from the Glendale Primary School, who are benefitting from upgrades at the Hamersley Habitat Community Garden which were made possible under the Communities Environment Program. In summary, despite the disruptions of COVID, the Morrison government has been getting on with the job that it was elected to do: continuing to improve the lives and the livelihoods of everyone across the wonderful electorate of Stirling.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Charitable Organisations</title>
          <page.no>112</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr LEIGH</name>
    <name.id>BU8</name.id>
    <electorate>Fenner</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The charity sector has a massive impact on our society and our economy. It is eight per cent of GDP, it has 1.3 million workers—about a tenth of the national workforce—and three million volunteers. The charities sector is bigger than agriculture or manufacturing or retail, and yet the charity sector is under pressure like never before. Research from the Australian National University's Nicholas Biddle and Matthew Gray, commissioned by Volunteering Australia, found that two-thirds of volunteers were forced to cut back their hours as a result of COVID. A survey by Giving Tuesday found that nearly two-thirds of charities had a drop in volunteer activity and fundraising. Research by wealth management firm JBWere estimates that total donations will fall by seven per cent this year and 12 per cent next year. Yet the demand for charities has skyrocketed. The Wayside Chapel in Kings Cross reports that it normally gets about 10 requests a week for help and that has increased to 70 requests a week. Demand for Foodbank services went up by 50 per cent in April, while their supply lines shrank by 27 per cent. Cystic Fibrosis Australia reports that, since March, their workload has increased by 79 per cent and their revenue has dropped by a similar percentage. The Salvation Army has seen increased demand, but its Red Shield Appeal has raised just $2.6 million of its $8 million target. Kristy Muir from the Centre of Social Impact says some charities are struggling more and it's likely that some will not recover from COVID. A report from the Centre of Social Impact and Social Ventures Australia estimates that 14 per cent of charities, employing 180,000 people, could be at risk of being unviable by September next year under existing JobKeeper requirements. The Ramsey Foundation reports that the assets the typical charity has would cover less than three weeks of operations.</para>
<para>What should be done? Philanthropy Australia proposes seven actions: introducing a living legacy trust structure; encouraging legacy giving from superannuation; a national giving campaign; supporting the Social Impact Investing Taskforce recommendations; fixing fundraising, as Senator Catryna Bilyk's report recommends; cutting red tape to support community foundations; and reforming Australia's deductible gift recipients system. Social Ventures Australia recommends retaining JobSeeker at a higher level, ensuring the end of JobKeeper is a ramp and not a cliff, a charities transformation fund, and further research to help the charity sector build back. Some givers are providing additional flexibility. I commend the Snow Foundation for relaxing their restrictions on funding and dipping into their reserve. COVID-19 is a life or death situation for many people and for charities too.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Women's Health</title>
          <page.no>112</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MARTIN</name>
    <name.id>282982</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In 2018, there were 315,147 births in Australia. Having a baby is a beautiful, joyous occasion for many. Nothing is more beautiful than bringing new life into the world. I know this. I've experienced it four times, and I'm very proud to have four little people. However, sadly, for many women in Australia having a child is a traumatic experience, and many women—one in three women in Australia—have experienced a traumatic birth.</para>
<para>Birth-related trauma has ongoing, devastating impacts on women's physical and psychological health. Research from the National Core Maternity Indicators suggest that up to 20 per cent of first-time mothers suffer major, irreversible, physical birth trauma. This includes injuries such as perineal lacerations, anal-sphincter tears and pelvic-floor-muscle tears, which can lead to lifelong implications like urinary and faecal incontinence. The social and economic impacts of birth trauma are widely felt. Ongoing birth trauma impacts a woman's mental health, limits a woman's participation in the workforce, requires costly treatment, incurs medico-legal claims and impacts a mother-and-child bond. For many families it causes family breakdown and a breakdown in family functioning. It also deters women from having future pregnancies.</para>
<para>I recently met with the founder of the Australasian Birth Trauma Association, Amy Dawes; the chair of the Australian Physiotherapy Association pelvic-floor group, Catherine Willis; and the founders of Empowered Motherhood Program, former Sydney Swifts netballer, Ms Kimmy Smith, and physiotherapist Elizabeth Evans. They have been making waves by advocating for better information, treatment and support for women living with ongoing birth trauma. They've seen that many of these injuries can be prevented and treated if women are given comprehensive postnatal care and a thorough assessment.</para>
<para>Providing women with access to imaging services capable of diagnosing birth trauma, with an appropriate referral pathway, can save many mothers a lifetime of pain. However, many women cannot afford or access quality treatment from a physiotherapist or other appropriate treatments, meaning that they live with ongoing physical and psychological trauma. While pregnant women can access essential Medicare-subsidised treatment during pregnancy and labour, postnatal care for women is limited. We need to look at ways to better support birthing mothers. When we do this we support women's health, we support parents and families and we support women's participation in the workforce.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>COVID-19: Western Australia, Brand Electorate</title>
          <page.no>113</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MADELEINE KING</name>
    <name.id>102376</name.id>
    <electorate>Brand</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The last five months have been very difficult for the Australian community. The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about so much loss—the loss of jobs and livelihoods, and the loss of some freedoms that we love and look forward to regaining when this health crisis has been beaten. Most heartbreaking of all, of course, has been the loss of lives that the pandemic has caused. In the west we've not been immune to the effects of this virus, but with careful planning, assertive policies and strong leadership from the Premier, Mark McGowan, and the WA Labor government, Western Australia has been able to enjoy a relative sense of normality and security that has been elusive for other Australians. Vigilance is important, as well as maintaining our hard border. Physical distancing and hand hygiene must continue to be observed by all Western Australians so that we can keep this virus at bay and continue our lives as best as we can and as normally as we can. I've been lucky, because of the health of our state, to be able to get out into the community and speak to people directly. I welcomed home the women and men of HMAS <inline font-style="italic">Toowoomba</inline>, as they returned from their deployment to the Strait of Hormuz where they had been working on freedom-of-navigation exercises. I thank all those serving in the RAN for the work you do for our country and also for the active part that so many members of the Royal Australian Navy play in my local community.</para>
<para>I've been able to move about the electorate and hand-deliver pensioners and seniors kits around Baldivis, Waikiki, Warnbro, Safety Bay and Rockingham, and I've met with various community interest groups such as the wonderful Rockingham men's shed. I enjoyed an extensive tour of Paganoni Swamp with Leonie Stubbs, the enthusiastic and energetic coordinator of the Friends of Paganoni Swamp, a local community group that is doing a remarkable job in protecting the natural environment in Karnup. The walking trails of Paganoni Swamp have seen so many more families and groups taking walks, as people have sought local options during this COVID crisis.</para>
<para>I visited Comet Bay Primary School, Comet Bay College, Golden Bay Primary School, Safety Bay Senior High School, the Peter Carnley high school and primary school, Living Waters Lutheran College, St Bernadette's primary school, and Medina Primary School to present Australian and Indigenous flags and also copies of the national apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples. The offer to receive copies of the national apology has been taken up by so many in my community.</para>
<para>I am also very fortunate to have fantastic volunteers in my community. I recently caught up with some at the Mangles Bay Fishing Club in Point Peron. I look forward to spending a little bit of summer volunteering behind the bar at Mangles Bay. We celebrated the birthday of a fantastic community volunteer, Steph Fielding. Steph, along with her friends and my friends, Deputy Mayor Deb Hamblin, Councillor Hayley Edwards and Caroline Hume, to name a few, are an enthusiastic, amazing and inspiring group of women. I wish them well in their efforts to support more women in public service.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Space Agency</title>
          <page.no>113</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FLINT</name>
    <name.id>245550</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Morrison and Marshall Liberal governments are taking my home state of South Australia to amazing new heights. When I say this I'm not just talking about our historic $90 billion naval shipbuilding plan or our record road and rail infrastructure investment pipeline; we are literally reaching new heights with the establishment of the Australian Space Agency. Headquartered at Lot Fourteen in Adelaide and underpinned by $73 million of federal funding, the Space Agency has launched our national space industry, with the aim of creating 20,000 jobs and $12 billion of value within the decade.</para>
<para>I was delighted to tour the agency to see how their headquarters are taking shape and to meet the team that is helping to launch us into space and the space industry. It was fantastic to see where Australia's first Mission Control Centre will be situated and to hear how it will be open to the public so they can see the ground-breaking work happening right there. Mission control has been funded through a $6 million Space Infrastructure Fund grant and will be available to industry partners to execute small satellite missions, to access space data and to conduct vital research. It will be co-located with the Australian Space Discovery Centre, where students and the public will be able to visit and be inspired by the work undertaken there and encouraged to pursue a career in the space industry.</para>
<para>While touring the agency's headquarters, I met with Professor Andy Koronios, who is leading Australia's SmartSat Cooperative Research Centre, right next door to the Space Agency. The SmartSat CRC was kicked off with $55 million in federal government funding, with $167 million being contributed by many different partners, including leading universities, private sector partners and firms such as Nova Systems, BAE and Airbus through to Australian start-up companies. The work of the SmartSat CRC is already paying dividends, with the CRC's supporting partner, DEWC Systems, today revealing that next month it will launch a rocket 100 kilometres into orbit. Its payload will be a high-tech electronic warfare prototype designed to detect radar signals. Measuring only 27 centimetres long and weighing only 34 kilograms, it will be carried by the dart rocket at 1.5 kilometres per second. Importantly, this will showcase what our space industry can do. I wish to congratulate DEWC Systems Chief Executive Ian Spencer for their upcoming launch and wish them every success for next month.</para>
<para>I also wish to thank and congratulate the team at the Australian Space Agency, including the lovely Anny, who took us on a very detailed tour, and Professor Andy Koronios, at the SmartSat CRC and his team for their ongoing work. I am wearing the SmartSat CRC and Australian Space Agency badges in parliament today for them to show the sky is not the limit.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KEOGH</name>
    <name.id>249147</name.id>
    <electorate>Burt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The reintroduction of child-care fees across the country is holding back our nation's COVID recovery. A recent report from the NAB found that small and medium enterprises, SMEs, make up 99 per cent of all Australian businesses by number, employing two-thirds of all workers and producing half of all output. To put that into perspective, should each of these SMEs employ one additional person, our current unemployment crisis would be resolved. To add to those stats, nearly 40 per cent of small businesses are owned by women. As we should all be acutely aware, women continue to bear the brunt of unpaid work, particularly caring for children. For many small businesses, the only reason they could keep their heads above water in the height of the pandemic was due to free child care. As SMEs get used to the new normal of recession and uncertainty around whether or not COVID will strike again, the last thing they need is the resumption of child-care fees.</para>
<para>For so many Australians, there has never been a tougher time to be in business. For those running childcare centres, many operating as small businesses, the loss of JobKeeper payments for staff back in July was trebled by the removal of free child care. That's without mentioning the farce that were the hoops that childcare providers had to jump through to get government funding in the first place. I had one centre in my electorate who was told that they had to close because the facility they were located in had a play centre that couldn't be cleaned properly. They were then told that they wouldn't be eligible for payments because they chose to close. They didn't; they had to because of COVID. Then, to rub salt in the wound, they were told if they wanted to stay open they should've relocated their entire facility—for an undisclosed amount of time and for an unknown number of children, again, because of COVID.</para>
<para>The reintroduction of childcare fees has resulted in the withdrawal of many children from care, which means less income for the centres and job losses for the educators who work there. This spiral leads to many working parents—mostly mothers—with no choice but to reduce hours or give up work in order to look after their children, regardless of their desire to continue working. This is detrimental to women running small businesses, women working to support their families and those looking to further their careers. All in all this is bad for our community and it's certainly bad for our economy. The small business ombudsman, Kate Carnell, told the Press Club just a few weeks ago that child care is an essential service for small business, just as it is for countless Australian families. This federal Liberal government are making it harder for Australians to get back to work. The Grattan Institute has identified that increasing female workforce participation is one of the biggest economic opportunities for government, and cheaper child care would be the catalyst for delivering that. They say that this could have a multibillion dollar impact on our GDP. So why won't the government just get on with making child care more affordable? It's child's play, really.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Moore Electorate: COVID-19</title>
          <page.no>114</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOODENOUGH</name>
    <name.id>74046</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I wish to draw the attention of parliament to the many Australian citizens, permanent residents and persons holding valid visas for entry who are excluded from returning to Australia due to the current international travel restrictions. Maintaining strong border controls is absolutely necessary in the current coronavirus pandemic to protect the Australian homeland and safeguard the health of all our citizens by minimising the spread of infection. A number of constituents have contacted my office to request assistance with their applications to enter Australia for themselves or on behalf of family members in a wide range of circumstances.</para>
<para>Currently, long delays are being experienced in the process of applying for re-entry, placing our people and their families in genuine hardship, with many deserving cases having considerable merit and relating to people in dire circumstances. Some of the people stranded overseas are in countries experiencing civil unrest and with limited access to financial resources to sustain themselves for extended periods overseas. They're unable to access accommodation and essential services, placing their lives in danger. The cases include family reunions in circumstances of needing to care for family members suffering from illnesses or of providing support for parents in old age and for the purpose of marriage. Other cases relate to the employment of workers with highly specialised technical skills or expatriate Australians returning from postings overseas. The Moore electorate is home to a large proportion of residents who were born overseas or have family members based around the globe. This means international travel restrictions are having a major impact on many families in my constituency.</para>
<para>On behalf of my constituents I call upon the government to review the resource allocation available for processing the applications of Australians seeking to return home in a more timely manner and working cooperatively with the states to implement the necessary quarantine arrangements to safely facilitate the arrivals. If necessary, more inbound flights can be organised and additional quarantine hotels can be designated with around-the-clock security to ensure that the arrivals comply with the quarantine requirements. Let us do what is necessary to bring our fellow Australians home to safety as soon as possible and in an orderly manner.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Whitlam Electorate: COVID-19</title>
          <page.no>115</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEPHEN JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Rachael Woods is a 24-year-old young Australian from my electorate. She has been living and working in the United Kingdom for 18 months. She's stranded there. When the pandemic broke, she thought she had a choice. She had a good job in London, working in the hospitality industry. She could continue working and paying her way or she could, in her words, 'return back to Australia and be on the dole'. She decided to do the right thing; she thought her job was going to continue. Unfortunately, the lockdowns hit London. She is now without a job and her plane ticket home has been cancelled; she's literally stranded. She has racked up thousands and thousands of dollars in debt on her credit cards. And she's not alone. Around 18,000 Australians, as we know it, are registered and attempting to get back from abroad, with no visible or immediate means of getting here.</para>
<para>We need a plan. We need the government to come into parliament this week and explain what it is going to do to assist these 18,000 Australians, most of them young Australians, like Rachael, to find their way back home. If you have a look on the website today and try and price a ticket from London to Australia, you can be paying anything between $10,000 and $24,000 for a one-way ticket. That is prohibitive. As a part of a plan to get young Australians back home, we need the government to be working with the airlines to ensure that those tickets are priced at a rate that young Australians can afford.</para>
<para>It's not just young Australians. My electorate office has been dealing with people from as far abroad as Peru, China—all around the world. Many of them have families stranded abroad. You can imagine what the cost of a $24,000 ticket, times four or five would be; it's simply cost prohibitive. We don't just need a plan to bring the people home. If that can't be done in a short period of time, we will need to have a plan on how we will support our Australians abroad. I want to make this point: it is unrealistic for us to expect that other governments in other countries are going to be more generous to our citizens than we have been to theirs. That is unrealistic, so what's the plan to bring them home? And what's the plan to look after them until we can get them back to Australia? The Prime Minister needs to explain this today.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Harris-Gordon, Rev. Dorothy (Aunty Dorrie), COX, Mr Charles</title>
          <page.no>115</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Dorothy Harris-Gordon, 'Aunty Dorrie', was an important Aboriginal leader in my community. Indeed, she was the first Aboriginal woman ordained in the Uniting Church in Australia. Sadly, she passed away recently. Aunty Dorrie was born in 1941 and was a proud Widjabul and Bundjalung woman. She grew up on a reserve outside of Lismore and was the second of five daughters. Kathleen was the eldest, followed by Dorothy then Valerie, Martha and Caroline. Her family says that at just eight years of age, she told her family that one day she would be a chaplain. In 1963 she married the Reverend Charles Harris and, over the next few decades, Aunty Dorrie and Charles worked towards Indigenous equality, land rights and other important movements. Their Christian faith was central throughout these endeavours. Charles passed away in 1993.</para>
<para>In 1999, Aunty Dori was ordained in the Uniting Church, a wonderful moment. She served throughout our region in Goorie Good News Centre in Grafton and the Marmung Uniting Fellowship in Coraki. She also worked in prisons and hospitals. She later married Lindsay Gordon. Aunty Dorrie was a loving mother to Timothy, deceased; Phyllis, deceased; Charles; Sharon; Philip; Cheryl, deceased; John, deceased; and Charmaine. Aunty Dorrie was a leader in our community, a wonderful woman. She will be sadly missed. May she rest in peace.</para>
<para>I would like to recognise Charlie Cox. Charlie died recently and will be sadly missed by our community. Charlie loved Casino and we loved him. As the former mayor of the Richmond Valley Council, he was an important leader. He was always dedicated to helping others. He worked as a teacher for most of his adult life. When he retired from teaching, he was almost immediately elected to council and this began a 14-year career of service in local government, eight of those as mayor. Charlie always said it was the children he taught who voted him in. When he retired from teaching, he had been teaching three generations of families.</para>
<para>Charlie was heavily involved in organising upgrades to the Casino CBD, improving sewerage for Woodburn and Broadwater, cleaning the Evans Head shore and delivering the Evans Head swimming complex. He was also a key member of the Casino Men's Shed. He loved sports and was an avid Rabbitohs fan. We'll forgive you for that, Charlie. He was a life member of the Evans Head-Casino Surf Life Saving Club and he was also involved with rugby league, soccer and swimming. Karen and I extend our thoughts and prayers to his wife, Robyn, his children and children-in-law, Anthony, Dean and Tracey, and Charlie's grandchildren, Tiana, Riley and Sam. Our community has lost a true gentleman and man who was dedicated to serving our community. Rest in peace, Charlie.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>241590</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 193 the time for constituency statements has concluded.</para>
<para>Federation chamber adjourned at 10:30</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
  <answers.to.questions>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS IN WRITING</title>
        <page.no>117</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS IN WRITING</type>
      </debateinfo></debate>
  </answers.to.questions>
</hansard>